THE LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY
OF
OF THE
REGENTS
INIBUS
HBUS
இ
CLASS
, BOOK
:
MINNESOTA
Kennedy:

A TREATISE
ON THE
SUBJECT OF BAPTISM;
2
$
PRINCIPALLY DESIGNED
AS AN EXPOSURE OF
J
CAMPBELLISM.
BY MILTON JAMIESON.
"In the name of our God we will set up our
banners."-Ps. 20: 5.
LEXINGTON, KY:
PRINTED BY W. M. TODD AND W. D. SKILLMAN.
1834.
United States of America,
District of Kentucky,
SCT.
BE IT REMEMBERED, That, on the 11th day
of March, Anno Domini one thousand eight
hundred and thirty-four, Milton Jamieson, of the -
said District, hath deposited in this Office, the
title of a Book, which is in the words follow-
ing, to-wit:
"A Treatise on the subject of Baptism; princi-
pally designed as an exposure of Campbellism;
by MILTON JAMIESON. 'In the name of our
God we will set up our banners.'-Ps. 20: 5.”
The right whereof, he claims as author, in
conformity with an Act of Congress, entitled
"An act to amend the several acts respecting
Copy Rights."
JOHN H. HANNA,
Clerk of the District of Kentucky.


Western Luminary Press.
GEN
maus M-G33146-4
MAUS
TO THE READER.
moms
AEK2745-1
THE following sheets have been written at
the request of many friends of our Zion. The
present crisis calls aloud for the friends of Mes-
siah's Kingdom no longer to hold their peace,
but to speak out, upon the all-important sub-
jects discussed in this work. Who can say, we
should silently look on, while our antagonists
are wielding the sword of controversy over our
heads? Rather let it be said, "In the name of
our God we will set up our banners," nor shall
they be pulled down, though the champion of
Gath come up against the armies of the living
God.
We are aware that, in many instances, we
tread a beaten path in these pages; yet such is
the form of this work, in addition to many new
arguments not before published, that we hope it
will be found adapted to the wants of the pub-
lic.
We have been much more solicitous to avoid
error, and enrich the mind with solid truth, than
to indulge in novelty of thought and word. We
have not feared to use the language of others,
when it suited our purpose. As far as we have
1048651
:
DECLS '43
IV
TO THE READER.
had access to the works referred to, and from
which we have extracts in the following pages,
we have examined for ourselves. When we had
not access, as in the case of the ancient fa-
thers, &c. we have relied upon the correctness
of the extracts by Wesley, Pond, J. P. Camp-
bell, Watson, Cleland and others. In present-
ing this appeal to the public, we have done
what we believe to be our duty. How we shall
be treated on account of it, we are not con-
cerned to know; as we know in whom we have
believed.
MILTON JAMIESON.
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
CHAPTER I.
JOHN'S BAPTISM.
THE first baptism noticed in the New Tes-
tament, is that of John. Between this and the
christian baptism, Pedo-baptists consider there
is a very plain distinction. Baptists regard
them.as one and the same institute of Heaven.
On the decision of this point, one importaṇt
branch of the controversy turns. We there-
fore proceed to show, that John's dispensation,
his baptism, and all his services in the church,
preceded, and were preparatory for the chris-
tian dispensation. We say John's dispensa-
tion, because the period of his ministration had
its peculiarities and distinguishing features;
partaking, in some degree, of the nature of
the Jewish and christian dispensations, and
thus connecting them both in the most beauti-
ful gradation. Nothing could be more unrea-
sonable than to have administered a christian
ordinance before the christian era; and that
John's services preceded the present dispen-
sation, is very clearly taught in many passa
ges of the Holy Scriptures.

6
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
1. John himself proclaimed the near ap.
proach of the elevated and peculiarly glorious
services of the church in the present dispensa-
tion, in the following language: "Repent ye,
for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand. For
this is He that was spoken of by the Prophet
Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in
the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the
Lord, make his paths straight." This passage
most clearly teaches us that a new dispensation
was yet to usher in, and that John's ministry
was to prepare the way for its reception. The
declaration of Malachi, as alluded to by St.
Mark, is in perfect unison with the passage
just noticed. "Behold I send my messenger,
and he shall prepare the way before me."
Mal. 3: 1. Mark 1: 2. This corresponds
with John's record of himself. "I am the
voice of one crying in the wilderness, make
straight the way of the Lord." "I said, I am
not the Christ, but that I am sent before him."
John 1:33. Every reflecting mind must dis-
cern from these quotations, that John's minis-
try was designed to open the minds and prepare
the hearts of the people for the new dispensa-
tion just about to usher in. And without some
such preparation for the transcendent light,
and glorious privileges of the gospel day, the
whole Jewish church would have been in arms
against the astonishing change from Judaism
to.christianity.
2. The manner of John's preaching proves
[
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
7
most clearly, that he was not a gospel minister
according to the present dispensation. He did
not preach a crucified, risen, ascended, and in-
terceding Saviour, which is the sum and sub-
stance of the gospel of Christ.
He preached a kingdom at hand. He said,
"That he (Christ) might be made mani-
fest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing
with water.' John 1:31. "He that cometh
after me will baptize you with the Holy Ghost
and with fire."
How very different such preaching from that
which proclaims a crucified, risen, ascended
and interceding Saviour, to the Jews first, and
also to the Gentiles.
3. The character and epithets given to John
the Baptist, most clearly teach us that he never
was considered a minister of the new dispensa-
tion. How strong and expressive are the terms
used by Zacharias on this subject. "And thou
child shall be called the prophet of the High-
est, for thou shalt go before the face of the
Lord, to prepare his ways." Luke 1: 76.
This beautifully corresponds with a passage
in Matthew 11. Speaking of John, Christ
says: "What went ye out for to see? A
prophet? Yea, I say unto you, and more than
a prophet. For this is he of whom it is writ-
ten, Behold I send my messenger before thy
face, which shall prepare thy way before
thee." "Verily I say unto you, among them
that are born of women, there hath not arisen
TREATISE ON BAPTISM,
a greater than John the Baptist, notwithstand-
ing he that is least in the kingdom of Heaven
is greater than he.”
In these passages we are taught, that John
was not only a prophet in a prophetic dispen-
sation, but that he was superior to the prophets,
inasmuch as no one but himself was distin-
guished as the messenger-the forerunner of
Christ; who would point out the Saviour, and
proclaim the near approach of his kingdom,
He could, like Moses, look over to the promised
land, but was not permitted to enter it. For,
most certainly, we are here taught, that there
are privileges and prerogatives in the chris-
tian kingdom, to which John was a stranger,
privileges that angels desired to look into; af-
ter which, prophets (John as one,) "inquired
and searched diligently,-searching what, or
what manner of time the spirit of Christ which
was in them did signify, when it testified before-
hand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that
should follow:" privileges, however, that are
well known to, and gloriously realized by, the
least in the christian kingdom or church; con-
sequently, the least in this dispensation is great-
er than John. To tell them that the least in
future glory would be greater than John, would
have been telling just what all know; but to
tell them, that the least in the new dispensation
would be greater than John, was developing to
them a most glorious prospect of an uncommon
effusion of the Holy Ghost.

TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
9
4. The geographical line in which Christ,
John the Baptist, and the Disciples labored, is
sufficient to testify to us, that the long looked for
gospel day had not yet ushered in; instead of the
broad commission, "Go teach all nations”—“Go
preach the gospel to every creature”—it was,
"Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into
any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But
go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Is-
rael." Mat. 10:5, 6. Yea, Christ himself,
personally, was "A Minister of the circum-
cision for the truth of God, to confirm the prom-
ises made unto the fathers." Rom. 15: 8.
Therefore he asserts, "I am not sent but unto
the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Mat.
15: 24, John labored in the wilderness of
Judea, and says, "That he might be made
manifest to Israel, (the Jews) therefore am I
come. baptizing with water." John 1:31.
We cannot misconceive the extent of the
commission couched in these terms. No inti-
mation in all the above, that the full glory of
the gospel had ushered in.
5. The epithets given the baptism adminis-
tered by John, are to the same point. It is
called John's baptism. It is also called the
baptism of repentance.
6. The re-baptism of many of John's dis-
ciples, should forever set this controversy at
rest. In Acts 19, we have the following:
"And it came to pass, that while Apollos was
at Corinth, Paul, having passed through the
10
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
upper coasts, came to Ephesus: and finding cer-
tain disciples, he said unto them, have ye re-
ceived the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And
they said unto him, we have not so much as
heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. And,
he said unto them, unto what then were ye bap-
tized? And they said, unto John's baptism.
Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the
baptism of repentance, saying unto the people
that they should believe on him which should
come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When
they heard this, they were baptized in the name
of the Lord Jesus." Most assuredly, this pas-
sage teaches a distinction of baptisms; and
that those who were baptized unto John's bap-
tism, should be again baptized with the Chris-
tian baptism, in the name and by the authority
of Christ; with reference to the gift of the
Holy Ghost, whose purifying influence on the
heart, is most significantly represented by water
poured upon the body. Christian baptism is to
be administered but once to the same person;
but these disciples were baptized twice; once
they were baptized unto repentance, and the
other was a Christian baptism.
In Acts 18, the inspired writer, speaking of
Apollos, says: "This man was instructed in
the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the
spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things
of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of
John." (Does not this intimate there was an-
other baptism necessary to be known?) "And
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
11
he began to speak boldly in the synagogue:
whom, when Aquila and Priscilla had heard,
they took him unto them, and expounded unto
him the way of the Lord more perfectly."
May we not justly infer, that those pious per-
sons taught him the difference between John's
and the Christian baptism, and that he was
baptized accordingly?
7. It is presumable that no man will attempt
to prove from the scriptures, that John bap-
tized in the name of the Trinity; and this,
every man acquainted with the gospel, knows
full well, is essential to the Christian baptism.
This is forever settled by our Lord himself, in
the following words of the great gospel charter:
"Baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
John's disciples said: "We have not so much
as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost;"
consequently, they had not been baptized in
the name of the Holy Ghost. If he used any
ceremony whatever, it is presumable it was
this: "I baptize you unto repentance.'
.
8. In the very nature of things, the chris-
tian dispensation could not have commenced,
until the rites of the old dispensation were
abolished by the sacrifice of the Son of God.
The passover was continued until Christ in-
stituted the Lord's supper. The Temple wor-
ship was hallowed until its vail was rent asun-
der; its precepts were obligatory until he en-
tered into the sanctuary by his own blood-Its
12
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
Sabbaths demanded observance until He rose
from the dead on the first day of the week.
Then it was, that the legal or Jewish dispen-
sation gave place to a brighter and more glori-
ous dispensation, called "The Kingdom of
God."
9. Finally, if we must go to Jordan, or
Enon, to find the origin of the Baptist Church,
we find it in the Jewish, and not in the chris-
tian dispensation-its rites must therefore be
Jewish, and not christian.
From what has been said, we are safely
brought to the following conclusions.
1. That John's ministry ceased before the
christian era,
2. That his baptism and ministrations were
preparatory for the christian dispensation, and
made no part of it,
3. That the Apostles, from the time they re-
ceived their grand commission to disciple the
nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Trinity, considered it their duty to baptize the
Disciples of John, as well as others; and this
obligation John's disciples acknowledged, when
they submitted to baptism at the hands of the
Apostles.
4. That, therefore, christian baptism was
never instituted, until Christ met his Disciples
in the mountain of Galilee, after his resurrec-
tion, and commanded them to "Go teach all na-
tions, baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the IIoly Ghost,"
""
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
13
5. That neither Jesus Christ, nor any other,
could have received christian baptism in John's
day.
6. That John most assuredly lived and died
a member of the Jewish church, having never
administered any of the ordinances of the new
dispensation.
Let the foregoing arguments be weighed,
and we hope this part of the controversy is de-
cided.
CHAPTER II.
BAPTISM ADMINISTERED TO CHRIST.
Were we not to add a single word to what
we have said in the preceding chapter, with re-
gard to the baptism administered to Christ, it
must appear very evident to the attentive rea-
der, that our Baptist brethren have greatly
erred, in zealously contending that he was bap-
tized in the christian dispensation, with the
christian baptism, and as an example for
christians to follow.
However, as this is a matter of great solici-
tude with many, we will show from other im-
portant considerations, that the baptism admin-
istered to Christ, by John, will not answer to
the christian baptism.
1. When Christ gave the grand gospel com-
14
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
mission, the first authority ever given under
Heaven, to administer the christian baptism, he
couched it in terms that cannot be misunder-
stood, and terms that teach us most unques-
tionably, that no application of water what-
ever, can be considered christian,baptism, un-
less it be done in the name of the "Father, and
of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Conse-
quently, none but such a baptism, can be con-
sidered an example for christians to imitate.
Now, I think it presumable, that no man will
undertake to say, that Christ was baptized in
the name of the Father, in his own name, and
in the name of the Holy Ghost; therefore, his
was neither christian baptism, nor an example
to be followed by christians. Indeed, he has
absolutely prohibited such an imitation, by ex-
pressly commanding us to be baptized for a dif-
ferent purpose.
Does not the reception of baptism in the
name of the Trinity, imply—
1. An acknowledgement of the claims of the
Holy Trinity to our services?
2. A dedication of the subject to the service
of the Trinity? And
3. Does it not say to the world, that we are
the disciples of the divine Jesus?
Now we ask, could Jesus Christ thus ac-
knowledge his own claims to himself, or thus
be dedicated to his own service, and become his
own disciple?
4. It is very clear that christian baptism has
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
15
respect to the pardon of sin, and gift of the
Holy Ghost, in a sense which could not apply
to Christ. "Can any man forbid water, that
these should not be baptized which have re-
ceived the Holy Ghost as well as we?" Acts
10:47. "Arise and be baptized, and wash
(emblematically) away thy sins." Acts 22:
16, 5. If Jesus Christ received baptism mere-
ly as an example, why did he delay his baptism
until thirty years of age? Why not at twelve,
twenty, or twenty-five, and thus by example, as
well as precept, enforce an early dedication to
the service of God?
6. None will contend that Christ was bap-
tized unto repentance and faith, in a coming
Saviour, as was every disciple of John.
Having shown that the baptism adminis-
tered to Christ, neither answers to John's nor
the christian baptism, we will now show that
his baptism was a necessary consecration to
office, as God's High Priest:
1. He was born a Jew, circumcised, lived
and died a member of the Jewish society.
2. He was God's High Priest. Heb. 5.
3. To this office, he was "called of God as
was Aaron." Heb. 5: 4.
4. The law under which he was called to
this office, acknowledged none as High Priest
until they were thirty years of age-were
washed, or baptized with water, and anointed
with holy oil.
"And Aaron and his sons thou shalt bring un-
16
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
to the door of the tabernacle of the congrega-
tion, and shalt wash them with water." Ex.
29:4. Take Aaron and his sons with him,
and the garments, and the anointing oil”-
"And Moses brought Aaron and his sons and
washed them with water"-"And he poured
of the anointing oil upon Aaron's head, and
anointed him, to sanctify him.” Lev. 8:2, 6,
12. "From thirty years old and upwards," &c.
Num. 4:3.
The above legal requisitions are fully an-
swered in the case of Christ's consecration:
1. Christ was washed or baptized at thirty
years of age. "And Jesus himself (at the
time of his baptism,) began to be about thirty
years of age. Luke 3: 23.
2. Immediately after his baptism, he was
anointed with the Holy Ghost, who was typi-
cally represented by holy oil. "Thy God hath
anointed thee with the holy oil of gladness
above thy fellows." Heb. 1:9. “That word,
I say, ye know, which was published through-
out all Judea, and began from Galilee, after
the baptism which John preached, how God
anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy
Ghost and with power." Acts 10: 37, 38.
3. Christ himself has settled the design of
his baptism. On an occasion when he had
been exercising his authority,-regulating the
service of the Temple, and correcting miscon-
duct amongst its officers--the priests and ru-
lers came to him, and demanded "By what au-

TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
17
thority doest thou these things; and who gave
thee this authority?" Matt. 21: 23. They
knew that to the tribe of Levi, this service had
been divinely committed, and therefore without
special authority derived from the head of the
church, that no one of another tribe had a right
to interfere.
Christ, therefore, immediately suggested that
his authority was indisputable, being "Called
of God (to the priesthood) as was Aaron."
This we have in the following question: "The
baptism of John, whence was it? from Heaven
or of men?" As much as to say, was John a
priest of the Aaronic order? had he a right to
inaugurate into the priest's office? If so, did
not my baptism by him, confer on me divine
authority? This reply seems to have settled
the opposition, being so understood.
4. When we consider that our Lord was cir-
cumcised-kept the passover--the feast of Ta-
bernacles-the Jewish Sabbath, &c. all in obe-
dience to the righteousness of the law, we need
not wonder that, when he was about to take
the office to which he was "Called, as was
Aaron,” he should have demanded a legal con-
secration to that office, at the hands of John,
"to fulfill all righteousness." Before we close,
we will notice two objections to our arguments,
which seem to be relied on by the opposition.
1. "Priests were washed before the door of
the Tabernacle, and not at Jordan.” Let it be
observed, that the Jewish ceremonials were
B
18
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
about to pass away, and, that Jesus Christ was
not the Priest of the Jews only, but of the
whole earth. Consequently, his inauguration
should have taken place in view of the wide
world, with only the broad canopy of Heaven
for a covering.
2. The second objection frequently urged
is: "Christ was not a Priest until after he as-
cended to IHeaven." So says Alexander Camp-
bell. Are we then to understand, that to be a
"Priest after the order of Melchisedec," is to be
made priest in eternity? And "to be called (to
office,) as was Aaron," is to be "called" after
death? St. Paul says: "For every high priest
taken from among men is ordained for men in
things pertaining to God, that he MAY OFFER
both gifts and sacrifices for sins." Agreeably
to this, a priest is "ordained" that he may offer
both gifts and sacrifices for sins; and not "or-
dained" after he has offered his "gifts and sa-
crifices." Heb. 5: 1. It was absolutely ne-
cessary, Christ should be made our great High
Priest, in order to offer the great sacrifice upon
the cross, for the sins of our race.
Heb. 7:
This is the doctrine of St. Paul.
26, 27. "For such an high priest became us,
who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separated
from sinners and made higher than the heavens;
who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to
offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then
for the people's: for this he did once, (possess-
ing the full prerogative of high priest) when
TREATISE ON BAPTISM,
19
he offered up himself." Here it appears that
Christ was not such a priest as needed to offer
a daily sacrifice, but he was such a priest as-
needed to offer "once," which he did "when he
offered up himself." Does not this teach us
that he was priest before he offered himself
upon the cross, and was "ordained" in view of
this great offering?
He was not ordained priest to a daily sacri-
fice, according to the law, because such a
priesthood was already established, but to "of
fer up himself" for sin, and remain our great
high priest forever. Hence it is said, "For if
he were on earth, he should not be a priest,
seeing there are priests that offer gifts accord-
ing to the law." Heb. 8: 4. This shows that
it would have been inconsistent with his priest-
hood, to have remained on earth, seeing he was
ordained priest to offer up himself as the great
sacrifice typically represented in all former dis-
pensations. The same is clearly taught in
Heb. 9. 24–28. Also, 5: 4—14.
9. It now only remains for us to show the
mode in which the priests were baptized, or
washed, in order to determine the mode in
which Christ was baptized. This is striking-
ly exhibited in Num. 8: 6, 7. "Take the Le-
vites from among the children of Israel, and
cleanse them. And thus shalt thou do unto
them, to cleanse them: sprinkle water of puri-
fying upon them," &c. Also in Ex. 29: 4—
"And Aaron and his sons thou shalt bring unto
20
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
the door of the tabernacle of the congregation,
and shalt wash them with water." This cor:
responds with the language of John; "I bap-
tize you with (instead of under) water." Al-
though they were at, or in Jordan, the act of
baptism was WITH and not under; Christ
may have washed his feet and hands in Jordan,
in obedience to the command in Ex. 30: 19;
yet, in the consecration to office, by the hands
of John, he was evidently "sprinkled.”
CHAPTER III.
THE DESIGN OF CHIRISTIAN BAPTISM.
Having considered, in the preceding chap-
ters, the design of John's baptism, and also
the baptism administered to Christ, the chris-
tian baptism will now properly come under our
notice.
By christian baptism, we understand the ap-
plication of water, to a proper subject, by an
authorized minister, in the name of the "Fa-
ther, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
That this definition of christian baptism is au-
thorized by the word of God, must clearly ap-
pear, from the language of Christ Jesus. In
the origin of the institution, he clearly and dis-
tinctly marks its features; he authorizes gos-
pel ministers, and such only, to use his great

TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
21
name in the administration of this ordinance;
nor is he less clear in regard to the extent of
its application. He teaches the heralds of his
gospel, that he claims the nations of the earth
as the "purchase of his blood and the travail
of his spotless soul;" and that every individual
composing the nations, men, women, and chil-
dren, should be discipled, baptized, and taught
the precepts of Heaven. Who can understand
the grand commission otherwise?—"Go teach
(or disciple) all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things
whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I
am with you always, even unto the end of the
world." Here we have the enlarged field and
appropriate features of the gospel ministry.
Unlike that of John, it is without limits as to
time or place. In its institutions and glorious
operations, all former dispensations are extin-
guished. The purpose of God in their estab-
lishment being now accomplished, they retire,
(John's with the rest,) before the more luminous
blaze of the Gospel. Christian baptism is en-
joined upon all who are the subjects of salva-
tion according to this gospel.
As this ordinance is enjoined on the disciples
of Christ universally, with them at least, it
should be considered a matter of great impor-
tance, to know its signification and use in the
church of God. To this subject we, therefore,
particularly invite the attention of the reader,
22
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
There are few subjects in theology, in regard
to which, men differ more widely than this.
Some of the leading opinions of others, it will
be proper to consider, before we offer our own.
1. The first to which we invite attention, is
this: That baptism is a saving, regenerating
ordinance, by which sin is really washed from
the human soul; the only way of access to the
blood of Christ, and gift of the Holy Ghost:
from which the baptized arise, as innocent, as
clean, and as unspotted as an angel. (See de-
bate with M'Callà, given by Campbell, p. 137.)~
This opinion is the most dangerous, the most
mischievous, and fraught with the most ruinous
consequences, of any with which we are ac-
quainted. Many, we fear, who adopt it, will
rest short of the "spirit of adoption,” and “re-
newing of the Holy Spirit," without which,
into God's kingdom they cannot enter. Every
Bible reader knows well, that in the Apostolic
age, some had "a form of godliness, but denied
the power," others a "name to live while they
were (spiritually) dead."
The sentiment we here oppose, is chiefly
predicated upon the following passages: "Arise
and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, call-
ing on the name of the Lord." Acts 22: 16.
"Repent and be baptized every one of you in
the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of
sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy
Ghost." Acts 2:38. If these passages were
to be received in a literal and unqualified sense,
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
23
there would be some plausibility in the views
of our opponents. They might then say with
truth, that every baptized person is, (from that
fact,) a child of God, washed from sin, and
made partaker of the Holy Ghost. But such
an interpretation is in opposition to universal.
experience, common sense, and the word of
God. The case of Simon of Samaria is to all
intents and purposes, a refutation of this idea.
Inspiration says, he "believed and was bap-
tized," inmediately after which, Peter thus
addressed him: "Thy money perish with thee,
because thou hast thought that the gift of God
may be purchased with money. Thou hast
neither part nor lot in this matter; for thy heart
is not right in the sight of God: For I perceive
that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in
the bond of iniquity." If water baptism wash-
es away sin, is the infallible way to the gift of
the Holy Ghost, and renders its subjects "as
innocent, as clean, as unspotted as angels,"
why was it deficient in this case? Alas, how
many thousands who have been baptized are
in a similar condition!"In the gall of bitter-
ness and bond of iniquity," while they pro-
claim themselves "as innocent, as clean, as
unspotted as the angels of Heaven." Equally
erroneous is the idea, that water baptism is the
only way of access to the blood of Christ and
gift of the Holy Ghost. How plainly is this
contradicted by the language of Peter-"Can
any man forbid water that these should not be
24
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost
as well as we?" Acts 10: 47. Here we have
an account of disciples who had access to the
blood of Christ, having received the gift of the
Holy Ghost, previous to receiving water bap-
tism.
Our opponents may try to avoid the force of
such plain declarations of fact, by a thousand
stratagems, which, however, are only calcula-
ted to exhibit the weakness of a bad cause.
It is certainly needless to offer any other rea-
son, why we are not to understand the passages
Acts 2:38, 22: 16, in an unqualified sense.
A man may with equal propriety, contend
for the literal meaning of "this is my body;"
"this is my blood." Mat. 26: 26. "Except
ye eat of the flesh of the Son of man, and
drink his blood, ye have no life in you." John
6: 62. Although the bread and wine are
called the "body” and “blood” of Christ, none
but a Romanist will contend for a literal inter-
pretation; all contended for, in all the protest-
ant world, is, that the bread and wine emble-
matically represent the body and blood of
Christ. Why not submit to a similar inter-
pretation of the language of Ananias-"Arise
and be baptized, and wash away thy sins?"
To take this text in a literal and unqualified
sense, is to ascribe to water baptism EFFECTS
which can only be produced by the thing it
represents, namely, the baptism of the Spirit.
Again: Peter said, "Repent and be bap-
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
25
tized every one of you, in the name of Jesus
Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall
receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." It is as-
serted that every baptized person is, from that
fact, fitted for Heaven. Suppose we were to
make a similar unqualified use of the follow-
ing—“Ask, and it shall be given you; seek,
and ye shall find”__"Whosoever shall call on
the name of the Lord shall be saved"—and
say, every man who ever asked or sought a
preparation for Heaven, obtained it, and all
who ever "called on the name of the Lord"
shall infallibly "be saved;" we would then
come in contact with other parts of the book
that beautifully qualify and show the true
meaning of these passages; such as, “Ye ask,
and receive not, because ye ask amiss." James.
"For many, I say unto you, will seek to enter
in and shall not be able." Luke 13: 24. This
may suffice, as this subject will be taken up in
another part of this book.
►
2. There is another opinion with regard to
the signification of baptism, which we think
equally inconsistent with the word of God;
this is, that baptism was instituted to repre-
sent the death, burial and resurrection of
Christ. Nothing can be more absurd than to
suppose that God instituted two rites in the
church, as different as baptism and the Lord's
supper, to signify the same thing. Every man
knows the Lord's supper is a memorial of the
death of Christ;For as often as ye eat this
26
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the
Lord's death till he come. "" 1 Cor. 11:26.
It would be altogether superfluous to have bap-
tism "shew" the same thing.
The opinion we here oppose is predicated
on Rom. 6: 3, 4, and a parallel passage in
Galatians. As these passages are investiga-
ted in another. part of this book, the reader
will there find a developement of the absurdity
of the sentiment. Immersionists very gener-
ally seem to think baptism is nearly every thing
that belongs to religion. One says "When we
are put beneath the wave, it represents the
death and burial of Christ; when we are taken
up, it represents the resurrection of Christ, in
doing which, we have a good conscience."
Another says "Baptism by immersion, repre-
sents that abyss of divine justice into which
Christ was plunged, in consequence of his un-
dertaking for our sins. It represents likewise,
the death of Christ, his burial, and deep hu-
miliation while in the grave; coming out of
the water, gives us the semblance of his resur-
rection, or victory over death and the grave,
Baptism signifies those benefits believers ob-
tain in Christ, both present and future. Among
the present, the principle is fellowship in the
death, burial and resurrection of Christ, and
the consequence of it, viz: the mortification
and burying of the old man, and the raising of
the new, by the spirit of Christ; even in such
a manner, that it can neither stand in judgment
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
27
+
to condemn us, nor exercise dominion over our
bodies, that we should obey it in the lusts there-
of; the former appertain to justification, the
latter to sanctification, &c. But further bless-
ings are signified by baptism; for as in baptism
we are immersed in, and directly taken out of
the water in safety, so it shall be with respect
to the affections of this life; we shall not be
overwhelmed by them, but at last shall be de-
livered from them and translated into everlast-
ing joys. We may learn from our baptism,
that after being buried in water, we directly
rise out of it: so in the last day, we shall be
raised out of our graves." Another, to sum up
all in few words, says, "immersion is the gos-
pel in water.' Such is the superstition and
nonsense that seems to go hand in hand with
immersion: to all which we would just say,
"if the light that is in thee be darkness, how
great is that darkness!"
รร
How much more rational and scriptural is
the opinion of Pedo-baptists.
1. Water baptism is the visible sign of the
baptism of the Holy Ghost. That water bap-
tism is significant of spiritual baptism, we will
make evident from several important consider-
ations.
1. The application of water to the body,
and that of the spirit to the soul, are both called
by the same name, "Baptism." The one is
outward, the other inward-one visible, the
other invisible. From that which is visible,
28
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
the attention is directed to that which is invisi-
ble.-
2. The application of water, and that of
the spirit, are both called "seals.” "Who
hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of
the Spirit in our hearts." 2 Cor. 1: 22.
"And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, where-
by ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.'
Eph. 4: 30. "Saying, hurt not the earth,
neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have
sealed the servants of our God in the fore-
heads." Rev. 7: 3.
22
Dr. Benson and Bishop Newton teach "that
this expression sealing in the forehead, is used
in allusion to the ancient custom of marking
servants on their foreheads, to distinguish what
they were, and to whom they belonged; and
that, as among christians, baptism was con-
sidered as the seal of the covenant between
God and believers, so the sealing here spoken
of, signifies the admitting them into the visible
church of Christ by baptism." (Benson's
Com.) According to Dr. Watts, "water seals
the blessing now, that once was sealed with
blood."
3. Water baptism is expressly used to rep-
resent the cleansing influence realized by the
baptism of the Holy Ghost. "Arise and be
baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on
the name of the Lord." Acts 22: 16. That
water baptism does not actually wash away
sin, but only symbolically represents the wash-
TREATISE ON BAPTISM、
29
ing away of sin, is demonstrable from the fol-
lowing: "The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth
us from all sin." 1 John 1: 7. "How much
more shall the blood of Christ purge your con→
science from dead works to serve the living
God?" Heb. 9: 14. "Unto him that loved
us, and washed us from our sins in his own
blood." Rev. 1: 5. So it seems we are
"cleansed," "purged" and "washed" from "all
sin," by the "blood of Christ,” and from none
by water. But the question is, when does this
take place? Unquestionably, when we are
made God's "elect children through sanctifi-
cation of the Spirit (not water) unto obedience
and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ."
1 Peter 1: 2. So in Titus 5: 5—“Saved by
the washing of regeneration, (not water) and
renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on
us (not plunged us into) abundantly, through
Jesus Christ our Lord." "For by one SPIRIT
(not water) are we all baptized into one body,
whether we be Jews or Gentiles," &c. 1 Cor.
12: 13. Then, and not till then, are our sins
washed away by the "blood of Christ" "through
the eternal spirit.” Hence, it is said "Unto
HIM (not unto water) that loved us and washed
us from our sins in his OWN BLOOD,” (not
in water.)
Many baptized with water, are still in their
sins, (ike Simon Magus,) as must be acknowl-
edged by every man. But when baptized by
the Spirit, our sins are actually washed away
30
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
in every case, as none can deny. This then,
is the thing to be represented by water bap-
tism: "Arise, be baptized, and wash (not ac-
tually but symbolically) away thy sins."
4. "Can any man forbid water that these
should not be baptized, who have received the
Holy Ghost as well as we?" Acts 10: 47.
Upon their having "received the Holy Ghost,"
Peter predicates the plea for water baptism.
Because they had the thing signified, none
should "forbid" the sign. When this impor-
tant event transpired, Peter said "Then re-
membered I the word of the Lord, how that
he said, John indeed baptized with water, but
ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.'
Acts 11: 16. The Apostle not only connects.
the two things together by the same name, and
in the same verse, but also in a way to show
clearly that one represents the other.
""
5. Water baptism is used as an initiatory
rite. "Go disciple all nations, baptizing them;"
that is, introduce them as scholars into my
school by baptism, that you may teach them all
that is contained in the science of salvation.
This fact goes to strengthen the idea, that
water baptism is the sign or symbol of spir-
itual baptism.
Water baptism unites us to the visible church
as professors of christianity. Thousands, like
Simon Magus, have been initiated into the visi-
ble church by baptism, who were still destitute
of true christianity.
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
31
Spiritual baptism makes us members in
the highest and most important sense; that is,
it constitutes à living, spiritual membership.
"That which is born of the spirit is spirit"-
"To be spiritually minded is life and peace".
"For by one spirit are we all baptized into one
body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles"—"If
any man have not the spirit of Christ he is
none of his”—“The spirit itself beareth wit-
ness with our spirit, that we are the children.
of God." This is the true state of the case in
regard to membership in the most important
sense; whilst, concerning such as have been
initiated into the visible church merely by
water baptism, without the spirit, it is said
they are "carnal," are still in the "gall of
bitterness and bond of iniquity," having a
name to live while they were (spiritually)
dead; and others, it is said, had "a form of
godliness, but denied the power."
6. Water baptism is used as a means of
grace and pledge of the faithfulness of God, to
his promises; ever keeping in view the fact,
that it always is significant of spiritual bap
tism.
7. There are but two sacraments in the
church, namely: Baptism and the Lord's sup-
per. The Lord's supper represents the "body"
and blood of Christ, as the meritorious grounds
of salvation from sin. Baptism represents the
act or baptism of the divine spirit, which ap-
plies the merits of Christ to the washing away
32.
TREATISE ON BAPTISM,
of sin. One great abuse of the sacrament of
the Lord's supper, complained of by the Apos-
tle, was, the Corinthians received it without
reference to the thing signified by it. "Not
discerning the Lord's body." 1 Cor. 11: 29.
So one great abuse of the sacrament of bap-
tism, is the administration and reception of it,
without reference to the thing signified, name-
ly: the baptism of the Spirit.
8. Several other considerations may throw
light on this subject.
1. The action of water is cleansing, purify-
ing, &c.; so is that of the Spirit.
2. Water is calculated to refresh and com-
fort; so is the application of the Spirit.
3. It quenches thirst; so does the Spirit.
4. We are sealed with water; so with the
Spirit.
5. We are baptized "WITH" (not under or
into) "water;" so are we baptized "WITH"
(not under or into) the Spirit.
6. The Spirit is "poured out," the "blood
sprinkled" (pouring and sprinkling are fre-
quently used synonymously)--the water poured
or sprinkled: "And there are three that bear
witness in earth, the Spirit and the water, and
the blood, and these three agree in one.”
(Mode of application.) 1 John 5: 8. The .
reader now has the three leading opinions, in
regard to the signification and use of water
baptism.
1. That it regenerates us, washes away all

TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
33
our sins and renders us as innocent, as clean,
as unspotted as an angel.
2. That it represents the death, burial and
resurrection of Christ. All of which, so far
as is necessary, is represented by the sacred
supper.
3. That it is the visible sign or symbol of
the baptism of the Holy Ghost; and as such,
is used-
1. As an initiatory rite.
2. As a means of grace.
3. As a pledge or seal of the faithfulness of
God to his promises.
CHAPTER IV.
INFANT BAPTISM.
Having directed the attention of the reader
to the signification and use of christian bap-
tism, we will now consider the proper subjects
to whom this ordinance should be administered.
Baptists and Pedo-baptists universally agree
that believing adults are proper subjects of
baptism; consequently, by both, adult baptism
is equally enforced and practiced. But the
right of infants to baptism, is the great matter
of controversy between us. Have they, or
have they not, a right to this ordinance? Did
Jesus Christ authorize his ministers to baptize
C
34
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
them, or did he not? We unhesitatingly affirm
that children have a right, by Christ's authori-
ty, to baptism; and we feel assured, our posi-
tion is as immovcable as the truth of God. "To
the law, and to the testimony," for the decision.
1. The terms employed by Jesus Christ, in
the great gospel commission, authorize infant
baptism. "Go ye therefore, and disciple all
nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;
teaching them to observe all things whatsoever
I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you
always, even unto the end of the world."
Mat. 28: 19, 20. In quoting this passage, we
use the term "disciple" instead of "teach," as
both parties acknowledge it the correct read-
ing. Mr. Campbell says, "this is unquestion-
ably the correct reading." Debate with M'Cal-
la, p. 113. The term "disciple," it is general-
ly agreed, is a school term, and hence the Apos-
tles correctly understood their mission to au-
thorize their making scholars of all nations.
Here then, our Lord presents us with the idea
of a christian school, in which the NATIONS
of the earth are to be educated. This view of
the subject, to which our Saviour's words natu-
rally lead us, exhibits á grandeur of design
worthy of Him whose name and nature is
"love." That attention to the religious educa-
tion of the rising offspring, which had but par-
tially been developed in a former dispensation,
was now to be unfolded and enforced among
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
35
the nations of the earth universally. Disci-
ple, or scholar, does not necessarily imply pre-
sent or previous learning, but learning in de
sign, for which the person is entered into the
school. Consequently, the terms used in the
gospel commission, will apply to infants as
well as adults. How fair then, is the the con-
clusion, that every individual of all na-
tions is regarded in the commission; men,
women and children?
99
How beautifully does this idea correspond.
with the extensive provisions of the gospel for
the happiness, of a lost world? "For God so
loved the world, that he gave his only begotten
Son, that whosoever believeth in him should
not perish, but have everlasting life." John
3: 16, "But we sec Jesus, who was made a
little lower than the angels for the suffering of
death, crowned with glory and honor; that he,
by the grace of God, should taste death for
every man. Heb. 2: 9. "Who gave him-
self a ransom for all to be testified in due
time." 1 Tim. 2: 6. Now, as Jesus Christ
by his sufferings and death, purchased the sal-
vation of every human being, and claims them
as his own, without distinction as to age or sex,
nothing is more rational than to suppose, that
in authorizing his Apostles to proclaim the
wonders of his grace, and administer the sign
of his faithfulness, He would regard alike all
ages and sexes. In doing this, He exhibits a
claim as extensive as the merits of his death.
串
​36
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
99
He considers the world His, and commands it
to be discipled, baptized and taught according-
ly. Had Christ said-Go ye therefore, disci-
ple all NATIONS, CIRCUMCISING THEM
in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost; or had he said go proclaim throughout
the world that I died for "ALL NATIONS,"
it is presumable none would have thought it
regarded adults only. Are we to understand
that the language "ALL NATIONS" is to
be understood in a more limited sense, when
connected with baptism, than when connected
with circumcision or the death of Christ?
Certainly not.
But it is objected that "faith is required in
order to baptism--and infants cannot believe:"
"He that believeth and is baptized, shall be
saved; but he that believeth not, shall be
damned." Mark 16: 16. To meet the objec-
tion fairly, and understand this passage cor-
rectly, we ask, of whom is faith required in
order to baptism? Of those, evidently, who
are capable of understanding the nature of the
requisition. This command, or any other com-
mand, coming from a just God, must be under-
stood as relating to those only, who are capa--
ble of complying with it. So that the fact,
stated correctly, is this: Those who are capa-
ble of believing, are required to believe, in or-
der to baptism. A similar requisition was
made under the former dispensation. Faith in
the true God, a renunciation of idolatry, and
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
37
·
Į
►
submission to heaven's institutes, were required
in order to circumcision, and admission into the
society of God's people. Hence, says Paul,
"For I testify again to every man that is cir-
cumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole
law." Gal. 5: 3. The requisition of faith,
then, in order to baptism, has nothing new in
it but this: that the faith required, is to be
adapted to the circumstances of the christian
dispensation; whereas, the faith required be-
fore, was to be adapted to a different dispensa-
tion. Thus faith is of equal importance un-
der both dispensations. How then, can the
requisition of faith prove that baptism is to be
more limited than circumcision? We would
ask, if the same mode of interpretation, that
debars infants from baptism, for want of faith,
will not equally debar them from salvation for
want of faith? Faith is required in order to
salvation, as much, certainly, as in order to
baptism. And this requisition furnishes as
much reason for excluding infants from salva-
tion as from baptism. But as all christians
agree, that the requisition of faith in order to
salvation, cannot be applied to children, so, to
be consistent, they must agree that the requi-
sition of faith in order to baptism, cannot be
applied to children, The requisition most evi-
dently has as much to do with salvation as
with baptism. The two cases then are exact-
ly alike. Christ requires men to believe in
order to be saved; but does not exclude infants
>
38
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
from salvation for want of faith: so he requires
faith of adults in order to baptism; but does
not exclude infants from baptism for want of
faith. Thus, so far as the requisition of faith
is concerned, there is no more propriety in ex-
cluding infants from baptism, than from salva-
tion. The requisition of faith, which is in-
tended only for adults, proves nothing one way
or the other as to children. The question of
their being baptized, or saved, must be deter-
mined on other grounds. We ask not whether
they believe; for this they cannot do; but,
whether there are other reasons for baptizing
them, and other reasons for thinking they may
be saved? The same principle is brought to
view by the Apostle. "This we commanded,
that if any would not work, neither should he
cat." 2 Thes. 3: 10. None can justly ap-
ply this rule to children, and yet it is justly' as
applicable as the requisition of faith. From
Abraham to the advent of the Messiah, the re-
quisitions of faith and obedience were as neces-
sary to circumcision as they are now to bap-
tism; and yet children were circumcised; why
then, may they not be baptized under similar
requisitions? We have briefly considered the
most plausible argument advanced against in-
fant baptism, and one probably relied upon
more than any other. Yet, it is an argument
perfectly futile and inapplicable, and which re-
quires a mode of scriptural interpretation,
fraught with the most dreadful consequences,
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
89
in regard to infant subsistence and salvation.
2. The circumstances of the Apostles con-
sidered, they must have understood their com-
mission to authorize infant baptism. It should
always be recollected, that the Apostles of
Christ were neither Greeks nor Romans, but
Jews by birth and education, and had derived
their opinions and usages from the Jewish scrip-
tures. They were emphatically the children
of Abrahám, and always looked upon parents
and children as equally interested in God's
gracious covenant, and alike under obligations.
to receive the sign (circumcision) of their re-
lationship to God and his people. Yea, they
were the willing servants of one who was him-
self a Jew, and the King of the Jews. They
had not only learned that children with their
parents were equally in the Abrahamic cove-
nant, but that they were to share in the glori-
ous consequences of Messiah's advent into
the world. They had looked upon parents and
children entering the society of God's people
together, by the same religious rite (circum-
cision) under a covenant, whose conditions
were performed by faith in a coming Saviour.
And now that he had come, and introduced an
economy (under the same covenant) that ex-
hibited a spirit of more expansive benevolence
than the former; an economy that was to be
heard throughout all the nations of the earth,
reverberating "Repent and be baptized every
one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for
40
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the
gift of the Holy Ghost: For the promise
(made to Abraham) is unto you, and to your
CHILDREN, and to all that are afar off, even
as many as the Lord our God shall call."
Was it possible for men in such circumstances
to have understood their mission as extending
to adults only? Every circumstance of the
case forbids the idea. Before they could so
have understood it, they must have erased from
their minds, all the impressions which had been
made upon them, by the word and providence
of God,
3. The practice of the Apostles in the exe-
cution of their mission, most certainly estab-
lishes infant baptism. If it were universally
agreed, in the apostolic age, (as we presume it
was,) that children should be baptized, there
could be no necessity in the history of apos-
tolic labors, to make a positive declaration of
the fact, that children had been baptized by
them. The fact might have existed without
over appearing as a matter of record, as is
the case frequently in the present day: for in-
stance, in the history of Methodist missions.
It is presumable we will not find a positive dec-
laration that they had baptized infant children,
although it is a very common occurrence in
their ministerial services. We may occasion-
ally find some allusions to the practice of in-
fant baptism, in our missionary reports, and
this is all that we look for. So in the history
TREATISE ON BAPTISM,
41
of apostolic labors, all we could expect, would
be a passing reference, or allusion, to the prac
tice of infant baptism, An allusion to infant
baptism, by mention of family or household
baptism, may be as satisfactory as a positive
assertion of the Apostles, There are three ca-
ses of this description in the New Testament,
to which we invite attention.
99
1, The case of Lydia and her household;
Acts 16; 14, 15; "And a certain woman
named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city
of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us:
whose heart the Lord opened, that she attend
unto the things which were spoken of Paul,
And when she was baptized, and her house-
hold, she besought us, saying, If ye have
judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come in-
to my house and abide there; and she con-
strained us. This is the plain narrative of
the conversion of an individual-her baptism,
and the baptism of her family, It is impossi-
ble to recognize more than one adult believer;
and she was the only responsible agent in the
family. In this narrative, she only, is repre-
sented as transacting the temporal and spiritual
business of the family, SHE was the seller of
purple, WHO worshipped God; SHE heard
Paul, WHOSE heart the Lord opened; SHE
attended to the things spoken of Paul; SHE be-
sought him, saying, "if ye have judged ME to
be faithful, come into MY HOUSE;” SIIE
constrained him; SHE was baptized, and her
42
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
HOUSEHOLD. The expressions used incon-
testibly evince that Lydia was the only adult
in the family. No other had any agency in
the sale of purple, the tenure of property, the
worship of God, or kind attentions to the Apos-
tles. Men may equivocate and strive to evade
the force of this positive precedent for infant
baptism, but it will forever be impossible to
diminish its force, unless the truth of God be
adulterated by translators, to suit the creed of
every one, who is galled by the simple, artless
truth of the gospel. Lydia and her household
were as certainly baptized, as that Abraham
and his were circumcised.
2. The case of the jailer and his family;
Acts 16: "And he took them the same hour of
the night, and washed their stripes, and was
baptized, HE and ALL IIIS straightway."
In this passage and its connection, we have con-
cisely noted the repentance and conversion of
the jailer; HIS enquiring with trembling,
"what must I DO to be saved:" HIS reception
of Christ on gospel principles; HIS kindness
to the Apostles. "IIE washed their stripes, and
was baptized, HE and ALL HIS straightway."
Here we have brought to view an adult agent,
acting at the head of his family, bowing in
submission to the requirements of God. His
baptism is named as following his repentance,
&c. &c.; and at the same time, the baptism
of his family is mentioned in these very sig-
nificant terms, “ALL HIS;" that is, all that
TREATISE ON BAPTISM,
43
•
properly belongs to him. No mention of re-
pentance, or enquiry into the way of salva-
tion, in regard to any but the jailer himself.
The family baptism is mentioned without any
restriction in regard to those things.
In the New Testament record of adult bap-
tism, we invariably have some mention of their
repentance, faith, or return to God. But in
the record of family baptisms, there is nothing
said of these; all comes to pass on the respon-
sibility of the head or owner of the family.
3. The case of the household of Stephanas;
1 Cor. 1: 16; "I baptized the HOUSEHOLD
of Stephanas." How astonishingly does this
language differ from the following: "They
were baptized, both MEN AND WOMEN." Acts
8:12. Why is there such a manifest differ-
ence in the phraseology of the scriptures, when
they speak of baptism? It is impossible to
give any other good reason than this: one pas-
sage regards the baptism of a family of chil
dren, and the other regards adults only.
Hence, we perceive that the inspired writers
in mentioning (without restriction in regard to
faith or repentance,) the baptism of several
persons and their HOUSEHOLDS, do most
clearly make family baptisms a noticeable cir-
cumstance in the history of their mission.
Such a thing would be very´singular in a his-
tory of Baptist missions, but just what might
be expected among Pedo-baptists.
Having now briefly considered the terms
44
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
employed in the gospel commission, the circum-
stances under which the Apostles received it,
and their practice in the execution of their
mission, we appeal to the unprejudiced to say,
if we do not follow the plain, common sense
meaning of the word of life, in the practice of
infant and HOUSEHOLD baptism,
- CHAPTER V.
INFANT BAPTISM CONTINUED,
Baptists and Pedo-baptists generally agree,
1st. That every person entitled to membership
in the church of Christ, ought to be admitted to
membership by baptism. 2. That infant chil-
dren were entitled to membership in the church
of Israel, to the advent of the Messiah, These
points therefore, we consider perfectly settled,
and need not be proved by us, Our Baptist
friends consider the christian church essential-
ly different from that which existed previous
to the coming of Christ in the flesh-that the
old church was destroyed-its covenant abol-
ished, and an entirely new church established
at the coming of Christ. Therefore, they de-
ny to infants baptism; the initiating rite into
the christian church; although they admit
they were constituted members of the church
of Israel. The following plain questions will
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
45
1
clearly exhibit the ground of controversy be-
tween us and the Baptists on this subject:
1. Is the christian church essentially the
same church of which infant children were
constituted members previous to the coming of
Christ?
2. Are infant children still entitled to mem-
bership in the present dispensation? We take
the affirmative and our opponents the negative
of these questions. If we succeed in estab-
lishing the continuance of the church, the un-
altered right of infants to membership in God's
church in the different dispensations, infant
baptism must stand unshaken by its most pow-
erful adversaries. To avoid the force of the
argument drawn from the ecclesiastical identi-
ty of the church of God, in the different dis-
pensations, our opponents have said much to
depreciate the character of the Jewish church,
to represent her as almost any thing else but
the church of God, instituted for religious pur-
poses. Nothing but a bad cause can require
such an attempt to undervalue God's holy in-
stitution. But to proceed to the question:
1. Is the christian church essentially the
same church, (in a different dispensation) of
which infant children constituted members pre-
vious to the coming of Christ? The following
parable is to the point: "There was a certain
householder which planted a vineyard, and
hedged it round about, and digged a wine press
in it, and built a tower, and let it out to hus-
46
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
bandmen, and went into a far country: and
when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent
his servants to the husbandmen, that they might
receive the fruits of it. And the husbandmen
took his servants, and beat one, and killed an-
other, and stoned another. Again he sent other
servants more than the first, and they did unto
them likewise. But last of all, he sent unto
them his son, saying, they will reverence my
son. But when the husbandmen saw the son,
they said among themselves, this is the heir;
come, let us kill him and seize on his inheri-
tance. And they caught him, and cast him
out of the vineyard, and slew him. When the
Lord, therefore, of the vineyard cometh, what
will he do unto those husbandmen? They say
unto him, he will miserably destroy those
wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto
other husbandmen, which shall render him the
fruits in their seasons." "Therefore, I say un-
to you, the kingdom of God shall be taken from
you (Jews) and given to a nation bringing forth
the fruits thereof." Mat. 21: 43. This para-
ble is expressly said to have been spoken in
"the temple" to "the chief priests and elders of
the people," (of the Jews,) and that "when the
chief priests and Pharisees had heard his para-
bles, they perceived that he spoke of them."
Consequently, it will be hard to misunderstand
the proper application of this parable. Here
the "vineyard" represents the church-the
"householder" the owner of the church, &c.
•
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
47
""
By this parable, therefore, we are taught that,
after the crucifixion or death of the Son of God,
Jehovah “will let out his vineyard unto other
husbandmen (than the Jews,) which (Gentiles)
shall render him the fruits in their season.
Ver, 41. Here we have no intimation that
God would tear up root and branch, and thus
destroy the old vineyard and plant a new one,
to be cultivated among the Gentiles; but that
the very same vineyard, formerly cultivated by
the Jews, is to be cultivated in this dispensa-
tion by the Gentiles, who shall render "the
fruits in their seasons," How unequivocally
is this idea established by the Saviour himself
in the application of this parable. "The king-
dom of God shall be taken from you, and given
to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."
This passage most clearly exhibits a transfer of
the very same kingdom (or church) which ex-
isted among the Jews, over to the Gentiles.
Before this transfer of the grants and privileges
of the church, from Jews to Gentiles, infants
were entitled to membership; and the man lives
not on earth, that can prove their right was
taken from them, either by the transfer, or the
circumstance of the grants and privileges of
the church being carried forward into a more
perfect dispensation. Although the forms and
administration of God's kingdom may differ at
different periods, in the march of heavenly
light, through different dispensations, yet it is
substantially the same kingdom. This is the
48
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
doctrine of Rom. 11: 17, 24. "And if some
of the branches be broken off, and thou, being
a wild olive-tree, wert grafted in among them,
and with them partakest of the root and fatness
of the olive-tree, &c. Well, because of unbe-
lief they (the Jews) were broken off, and thou
(Gentiles) standest by faith; and they (Jews)
also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be
grafted in; for God is able to graft them IN
AGAIN. For if thou (Gentiles) wert cut out
of the olive tree, which is wild by nature, and
wert grafted contrary to nature into a good
olive-tree, how much more shall these, (Jews)
which be the natural branches, be grafted into
THEIR OWN OLIVE-TREE?”
The olive-tree most evidently here repre-
sents the visible church of God. From this
the unbelieving Jews, the "natural branches
were broken off." Into the very same "olive-
tree" the Gentiles were grafted; and into the
same "olive-tree" the Jews will be grafted
"again" "if they abide not in unbelief." Yes,
"AGAIN" they will "be GRAFTED INTO
THEIR OWN olive-tree." Words cannot
more strongly express the identity of the visi-
ble church in the different dispensations. Ob-
serve, the Jews are to be grafted in AGAIN in-
to their OWN OLIVE-TREE, from which
they were broken off, and into which Gentiles
were grafted. Can any man believe the essen-
tial identity of a tree, or church is destroyed,
merely because some of the branches are bro-
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
49
ken off? Or that it becomes essentially a dif
ferent tree or church, merely because branches
not natural to it are grafted in? Again-must
not the church remain essentially the same,
through the christian dispensation, that it for-
merly was among the Jews, in order that the
Jews may "again" be "grafted into their own
olive-tree." Infants were entitled to member-
ship in the church formerly among the Jews,
the very church into which Gentiles were in-
serted; and unless they continue to enjoy the
covenant grants and privileges of the same
church, it will be impossible ever to restore the
Jews to their "OWN OLIVE-TREE AGAIN."
In this Chapter, St. Paul, to an absolute cer-
tainty, teaches the sameness of the church, and
establishes infant membership in the church.
If so, they must be admitted by baptism. John
the Baptist, speaking of Christ and the church,
said, "He will thoroughly purge his floor"
(the church:) not destroy it, and lay a new one.
Another consideration of great importance in
this controversy is this: The covenant that
God made with Abraham is still the covenant
of the church. This covenant embraced pa-
rents and children, without 'respect to age.
Circumcision, which was annexed to this cove-
nant as a sign and seal of the righteousness of
faith, was extended to infants as well as adults.
This covenant is recorded in Gen. 12, but
more fully developed in the 17th chapter. It
was several times mentioned to Abraham and
D
50
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
his posterity, which some have mistaken for
different covenants; but when properly exam-
ined it will evidently appear the same covenant.
The terms employed in this covenant are such,
as to encourage a belief, that its blessings are
to be realized in every dispensation. "And
I will establish my covenant between me and
thee, and thy seed after thee, in their genera-
tions, for an EVERLASTING COVÉŇANT,
to be a God unto thee, and thy seed after thee."
Gen. 17:7. Because God promised temporal
blessings to Abraham and his posterity, which
are recorded in connection with this covenant,
some have thought nothing spiritual belonged
to it. But St. Paul differs from our opponents
on this subject. "Know ye therefore, that
they which are of faith, the same are the chil-
dren of Abraham." And the scripture, fore-
seeing that God would justify the heathen
through faith, preached before the gospel unto
Abraham, saying, "in thee shall all nations be
blessed." Gal. 3: 7, 8. Gen. 11. Our op-
ponents think the great blessings of the Abra-
hamic covenant were national distinction-
the earthly Canaan, &c. Is it possible for
them to believe that "all nations" were to "be
blessed" everlastingly, with the civil privileges
and national distinction of the Jewish people-
that "all nations” were (through Abraham) to in-
herit the earthly Canaan? Most certainly not.
It is an "everlasting covenant;" its blessings
are to extend to "all nations." Consequently,
TREATISE ON BAPTISM..
51.
this dispensation is to diffuse those covenant
blessings to the nations of the earth universal-
ly. In this glorious dispensation the nations
are to be discipled and taught their interest in
the grand covenant of grace. In this ever-
lasting covenant," God promises to be "a God
unto Abraham and his seed." Now, until
Abraham ceases to have a "seed" on earth, it
is impossible for this covenant to be abolished,
or vanish away.. Has Abraham ceased to
have a seed? Let inspiration decide. "If ye
be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and
heirs according to the promise." Gal. 3: 39.
This passage clearly proves that the promise
was not confined, to the natural seed of Abra-
ham; so does the following: "Know ye there-
fore, that they which are of faith, (no matter
of what nation,) the same are the children of
Abraham: “So, then, they which be of faith,
(Jews or Gentiles) are blessed with faithful
Abraham." Gal. 3: 9. "Therefore, it is of
faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the
promise [to Abraham] might be sure to all the
seed; not to that only which is of the law, but
to that also which is of the faith of Abraham,
who is the father of us all." Rom. 4: 16.
We might multiply quotations clearly prov-
ing that the spiritual seed of Abraham, in all
nations and in all ages, were embraced in the
Abrahamic covenant, but these may suffice.
Our opponents think that the covenant for
which we contend, was abolished by the com-
*
32
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
ing of Christ, and the introduction of a new
dispensation. In favor of this idea they offer
Heb. 8:13. "In that he saith, a new cove-
nant, he hath made the first old. Now that
which decayeth and waxeth old, is ready to
vanish away." If our readers will only take
the pains to read the chapter, they will very
plainly perceive that the Apostle, in this place,
alludes to the SINAI COVENANT, which he
says was made when the Lord "took them by
the hand to lead them out of the land of
Egypt." Ver. 9.
He contrasts the Sinai covenant and the
"new dispensation," which he calls "a new
covenant." Not new in regard to its sub-
stance, but the manner of its administration.
That the covenant here called new, is, in sub-
stance, the same made with Abraham, is evi-
dent from the 10th verse, where it is expressly
said, "I will be to them a God, and they shall
be to me a people." This is the language
used in the Abrahamic covenant, and conse-
quently must convey the same idea. That
the covenant of Sinai-the sacrifices and ser-
vices-emblems and figures of the Jewish.
ritual, waxed old and vanished away at the
coming of Christ, we all agree; because they
were "a shadow of good things to come," i. e.
typical of Christ, &c. But we deny that
either the giving or taking away the law or
Jewish ritual, abolished the covenant made
with Abraham. The giving of the law and,
!
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
53
introduction of the Mosaic dispensation, had
no tendency to destroy the Abrahamic cove-
nant, according to St. Paul, Gal. 3: 17; “And
this I say, that the covenant that was con-
firmed before of God in Christ, the law which
was four hundred and thirty years after, can-
not disannul, that it should make the promise of
none effect."
From this we may learn that the forms of
religion may change in different dispensations,
yet the covenant made with the father of the
faithful is unaltered, and carried through
all, as an “EVERLASTING COVENANT.”
This truth is clearly established by St. Peter.
"Ye are the children of the prophets, and of
the covenant which God made with our fathers,
saying unto Abraham, and in thy seed shall all
the kindreds of the earth be blessed." Acts
3:25. Here we are represented as being em-
braced in the arms of a covenant that our op-
ponents suppose has waxed old and vanished
away. St. Peter is correct and our opponents
wrong. Once more; "For when God made
promise to Abraham, because he could swear
by no greater, he swear by himself, saying,
surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiply-
ing I will multiply thee. Wherein God, wil-
ling more abundantly to show unto the heirs of
promise the immutability of his counsel, con-
firmed it by an oath. That by two immutable
things, in which it was impossible for God to
lie, we (professing christians) might have a
54
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
strong consolation, who have (in the present
dispensation) fled for refuge to lay hold upon
the hope set before us" (christians.) We-can-
not miss the meaning of this passage. The
confirmation of this covenant with an oath, af-
fords strong consolation to. christians in this
day, because it is the covenant in which chris-
tians stand in this dispensation. This conclu-
sion is inevitable.
•
It is admitted that infants were constituted
-members of the church of God in a former dis-
pensation;-embraced in the arms of the "ever-
lasting covenant." If then, the christian church
and covenant be essentially the same that for-
merly embraced infants, are they not still en-
titled to membership? and do they not still
stand in the same covenant that formerly con-
nected them as members of God's visible
church? Circumcision, the sign and seal an-
nexed to the "everlasting covenant," was ex-
tended to children as well as parents. Cir-
cumcision was a form of the seal of the cove-
nant, adapted to the typical dispensations of
blood and slaughter, that preceded the pre-
sent. Although the form of the seal is
changed to baptism, suited to the present
dispensation, yet it is the same in substance,
and seals the same essential and glorious
truth, "I will be to them a God, and they
shall be to me a people." Heb. 8: 10. Gen.
17. As we have unquestionably proved, that
the covenant formerly sealed with circum-
1
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
55
cision, was no other than the gospel covenant
in which christians stand, we would rationally
look for the same seal in its original form. (cir-
cumcision) or in a different form better adapted
to the present dispensation. And when we
take into view the time in which baptism was
instituted, the circumstances under which it
was instituted, the nature and design of this
ordinance, we are bound to believe that bap-
tism is substituted in the, room of circum-
cision, and answers the same end under this
dispensation, that circumcision did under the
former. It may not be improper here, to add a
few remarks on this subject. Circumcision
was an essential prerequisite to a regular
standing in the church formerly. Baptism is
now considered an essential prerequisite to a
regular standing in the church in the present
dispensation. Circumcision. was emblemati-
cal of the circumcision of the heart, or the.
new birth. "Circumcision is of the heart, in
the spirit, and not in the letter." Rom. 2: 29.
Baptism is emblematical of the baptism of the
Holy Ghost, or the new birth. Acts 1:5, 2:
38, 11: 16.
"That the primitive fathers (says Mr. Pond)
believed and taught the substitution of baptism
in the room of circumcision, will be abundant-
ly evident from the following quotations:"
Justin Martyr."We have not received this
carnal circumcision, but the spiritual circum-
cision, and we have received it by baptism.
58
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
·
It is allowed to all persons"-infants and
adults "to receive it in the same way." Cy-
prian says, "Christ has given us baptism, the
spiritual circumcision." Austin.-"We may
make an estimate how much baptism avails in-
fants, by the circumcision which God's people
formerly received." Justin wrote within about
40, Cyprian within 150, and Austin within
270 years of the Apostles' age."
We will now consider one passage of scrip-
ture, which should forever settle the question.
"Repent and be baptized every one of you, in
the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of
sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy
Ghost: for the promise (to Abraham) is unto
you, and to your children, and to all that are
afar off, even as many as the Lord our God
shall call." Acts 2: 38, 39, In this place the
Apostle urges his hearers to be baptized in con-
sideration of their relation to the Abrahamic
covenant, or promise. This promise was ori-
ginally connected with circumcision as its con-
firmative seal. It is now connected with bap-
tism as its confirmative seal. This promise,
and its seal, formerly extended to infants: does
it not now equally extend to them? This must
be admitted, unless some person can show, from
the statute book of heaven, the warrant for ex-
cluding them. This, we assert, cannot be
done. Infant baptism, therefore, is based upon
the high authority of Heaven, and cannot be
gainsayed. Strange as it may appear to a Bi-
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
57
ble reader, some have thought there never was,
properly and strictly speaking, a church in the
world until Christ came in the flesh. This
question is settled by inspiration. "This is he
(Moses) that was in the church in the wilder-
ness, with the Angel which spake to him in
Mount Sinai." Acts 7: 38. But, was the
"church" spiritual in that day? St. Paul may
settle this. "Our fathers were all baptized un-
to Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and did all
eat the same SPIRITUAL meat, and did all
drink the same SPIRITUAL drink: for they
drank of the spiritual Rock that followed them,
and that Rock was CHRIST." 1 Cor. 10,
1,4. Had they the gospel in that day? St.
Paul says, "Unto them was the gospel preach-
ed, as well as unto us." Heb. 4: 2: "Yea,
Moses esteemed the reproach of Christ greater
riches than the treasures of Egypt, choosing
rather to suffer affliction with the people of
God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a
Christ says, "Abraham rejoiced to
see my day; and he saw it and was glad."
John 8: 5, 6.
season."
Have we not conclusive evidence in these
passages, that God had a spiritual church in
the wilderness, established upon the Rock of
Ages? How beautiful then is the address of
Paul to christians: "YE are built upon the
FOUNDATION of the APOSTLES and
PROPHETS, Jesus Christ himself being the
chief corner stone." Eph. 2: 20. Jesus
58
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
*
Christ, the same yesterday, to-day, and for-
ever, is the immoveable foundation of the
church; he sustains the great .spiritual build-
ing in every dispensation; he has not only left
the law unrepealed that first gave infants an
interest in his gracious covenant, and sealed
them as his, but has absolutely enforced their
title to his kingdom, and the seal of his faith-
fulness as a God to them. "Who shall lay any
thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God
that justifieth: who is he that condemneth?"
Rom. 8:33, 34. From the foregoing, we ar-
rive at the following legitimate and inevitable
conclusions:
¹. 1st. That the christian church, (in her es-
sential properties or characteristics,) is the same
church of which infant children were constitu-
ted members, previously to the coming of Christ
in the flesh. 2d. That infant membership has
not been repealed or abolished, but enforced
under the present dispensation. 3d. That in
the present dispensation, baptism is substituted
in the room of circumcision as the sign and
seal of the covenant. 4th. Therefore, infant
children being entitled to membership-inter-
ested in the covenant of the church-should be
sealed by baptism in this dispensation. We
think these conclusions fairly drawn.
Two things we take for granted: 1st. The
harmony of the scriptures. 2d. If we clear-
ly establish any doctrine to be of divine au-
thority, every thing said against it, however
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
59
plausible, is erroneous. Therefore, we have
omitted what some may think important on
both sides of this controversy.
CHAPTER VI.
UTILITY OF INFANT BAPTISM.
The enquiry is often put by the opposers of
infant baptism, "What good can possibly re-
sult from the practice, seeing infants know
nothing, at the time of their baptism?" This
question is much like asking, "What is the
Almighty that we should serve him? And
what profit shall we have if we pray unto
him?" For the main enquiry is to know
whether infant baptism is of divine appoint-
ment; whether it is a scriptural ¡equisition;
and if it is found to be so, on a candlid exami-
nation of the Bible, we arc to obey it, and not
bring in our objections because we cannot see
why it should be enjoined, or wherein is its
utility? We think we have fairly shown, by
numerous proofs, that infant baptism is a di-
vine appointment of positive obligation.
We are at no loss to point out some of the
practical benefits of this rite: we shall avail
ourselves of the following extracts from Doct.
Woods' lectures on infant baptism, and hope
the able and encouraging view presented, on
00
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
the utility of the institution, will not be with-
out its influence on many parents:
"The utility of positive institutions consists,
generally, in the moral influence they exert up-
on us, in their adaptedness to promote good af-
fections, and to excite us to the diligent per-
formance of duty. Now there is no institu-
tion of religion, which is more evidently suited
to have a salutary influence, than this. When
we consecrate a child to God in baptism, we
have our eyes turned directly to that glorious
being, to whom we and our offspring belong, and
we are made to feel the perfect reasonableness
of such a consecration. We look to God's ho-
ly and merciful economy, of which baptism
is the appointed token, and are impressed with
the divine condescension and goodness manifes-
ted in it, and the invaluable blessings resulting
from it. The transaction is public, and on
this account is likely to excite in us a more
constant recollection of the sacred obligations
which bind us as parents, and greater dili-
gence in performing the duties we owe to our
children." "We are not to look at the mere
baptism of the little child, and confine our
thoughts to the act itself, or to the present ef-
fect of it upon the child. We must view this
transaction in all its relations and consequen-
ces. We must consider that the child is a
rational, immortal being, just entered on his
probationary state; that his eternal happiness
depends on the formation of a virtuous and
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
61
holy character; and that his character de-
pends, in a great measure, on the circum-
stances in which he is placed, and the moral
causes which act upon him, in the first
periods of his existence. We must then
consider that the child, who is baptized in
a manner correspondent with the spirit of
the institution, is, at the very commence-
ment of its being, brought into circumstances
highly auspicious; that he is placed under a
divine economy, which secures to him the af
fections and prayers of parents and other chris-
tians, and which distils upon childhood and
youth the dews of divine grace. He is plac-
ed in a school, where he is to receive faithful
instruction and discipline, and to be trained up
for the service of Christ. The child, who is
offered up in baptism by devout parents and a
devout church, is placed in these circumstan-
ces, and is entitled to these privileges; the sub-
stance of which is a faithful christian educa-
tion, accompanied with the divine blessing.--
All this is signified by baptism. The design
of the transaction evidently is, to produce a
moral effect upon parents and children; upon
parents directly, and upon children as a con-
sequcnce."
"It would avail little to say, in the way of
objection, that parents would be under all these
obligations, and would have sufficient motives
to faithfulness, without such an ordinance as
baptism. The obvious design of baptism is, to
62
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
cause these obligations to be felt more deeply
and constantly, and to give greater efficacy to
these motives. The influence of public rites
and observances has been acknowledged in all
ages, both in civil and religious concerns. In
our own country, and in other countries, they
are kept up, in order to perpetuate the princi-
ples of civil government. Among the Israel-
ites, they were established for the purpose
of giving to one generation after another, a
knowledge, and a lively impression, of the prin-
ciples and laws of their religion. The human
mind is so constituted, that it is very doubtful,.
whether the truths of religion could be incul-
cated and impressed with the necessary EFFI-
CACY Without the help of public rites and ob-
servances.. The utility of the Lord's supper,
which is generally acknowledged to be great,
rests on the very same principle, as that which
gives importance to infant baptism. Thus it'
was also with the utility of the passover and
circumcision. And we may as well say, that
the principles of religion might have been ef-
fectually taught, and impressed, and transmit-
ted from one generation to another among the
posterity of Abraham, without the passover, or
circumcision, or any of their sacred rites; and
that the principles of the christian religion might
be effectually taught and impressed, and its
motives rendered sufficiently powerful, without
the Lord's supper;—we might say this with
just as much propriety, as that the influence of
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
63%
such a rite, as infant baptism, is unnecessary,
and that parents will be as likely to feel their
obligations and attend to their duties without it
as with it. The experience of the whole world
is in favor of visible signs and tokens, of pub-.
lic rites and observances. The human mind
requires them, as a means of inculcating moral
and religious truth. To undervalue them would
be a discredit to our understanding; and to neg-
lect them, an injury to our inoral feelings.".
"But suffer me here to say, that the utility of
infant baptism cannot be measured, by the in-
fluence which it has actually exerted upon the
generality of christians. For what sacred in-
stitution, and what divine truth, has not fallen
short of the influence which it ought to have
upon the conduct of nien? The question is,.
what effect is infant baptism designed and
adapted to produce? What has been its in-
fluence upon those parents, whose minds have
been in the same state; whose parental affec-
tion has been most highly sanctified, and whose
piety, most active? And what will be its in-
fluence, when the great body of christians
shall come to be fully awake to the interests of
religion, and shall make it the constant object
of their solicitude, and labors, and prayers,.
that their offspring, from one generation to an-
other, may become children of God, and heirs
of the kingdom of Heaven? The value of
this sacred rite, taken in connection with the
divine economy, of which it is the sign, and
64
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
with the obligation of parents and churches,
which it is intended to enforce, cannot be per-
fectly known, before the present low state of re-
ligious feeling among christians shall give place
to a more elevated piety, and to a more con-
stant and faithful exertion to promote the wel-
fare of the rising generation. In my appre-
hension, it is chiefly to be attributed to the
unfaithfulness of parents and churches, and
their failing to act according to the spirit of
this divine ordinance, that it has so far fallen
into disrepute, and that any can feel themselves
justified in saying, it is of no use.”
"How is it that Pagan idolatry, Jewish infi-
delity, and the violent superstition of Moham-
med, are continued in the world, and transmit-
ted from one generation to another? What is
it, which leads us to expect that, according to
the common course of events, the children of
Pagans will be Pagans, and that the children.
of Mahometans will be Mahometans, and that
the children of Jews, Jews? It is the general
principle, established by God himself, that the
character of children is formed by parental in-
fluence. And is not this as true in regard to
christians, as in regard to any other class of
men? In ordinary cases the children of faith-
ful christian parents will be christians; and they
will become so by means of the influence which
their parents exert upon them, in their early
education. Such is the divine economy; that
children are placed under it, is signified by
TREATISE ON BAPTISM,
65
་
baptism. And the application of baptism to
children is a suitable expression of the piety
of parents, and of their love to the souls of
their offspring, and is a powerful means of ex-
citing them to recollect and feel their obliga-
tions, and to be active and persevering in the
performance of parental duties. And let me
add, that when the piety and diligence of par-
ents shall rise to a proper height, and they shall
address themselves to the duties which they
owe to their children, with united zeal and
prayer, the true import of infant baptism will
be more fully understood, and its utility ac-
knowledged with more fervent gratitude to
God."
In a word, 1st. It initiates them into the
church of Christ. A person may be a mem-
ber of the universal church of Christ, when
not a member of any particular society or
church. For instance, a man who is born of
God-receives baptism-joins the Methodist
church—afterwards, withdraws his member-
ship to join the Presbyterian church; he is
most evidently a member of the universal
church of Christ, after withdrawing from the
Methodist, and before he is an acknowledged
member of the Presbyterian church. So bap-
tism itself, makes a man a member of no par-
ticular church or society, but the general church
of Christ. He has, after baptism, a right to
select his particular society or church. So
baptized infants are members of the general
E
66
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
church of Christ, and left to select in adult
age their particular society of God's people.
Who dare say there is no benefit in being
members of the church of Christ? 2d. It is
a sign of the cleansing power of the spirit.
Children are not naturally pure. If they die
in infancy, they are purified by the eternal spi-
rit, and the blood of sprinkling. This, God
commands shall be signified by baptism, which
is a demonstration of the corruption of human
nature, and that infants are the subjects of sal-
vation according to the gospel.
3d. It is a means of grace and of present
blessings to children. Christ once blessed in-
fants. Mark 10: 16. This was a real bless-
ing; consequently, children are capable of
present blessings. Baptism may be the me
dium of a similar real blessing to children:
and we know that God's blessing is invariably
connected with obedience to his commands.
4th. It is a seal or pledge from Heaven, of
the same federal character of circumcision-
giving a particular interest in all Jehovah's
covenant promises: "I will be a God to thee
and thy seed." It "seals" the blessings now
that once were sealed with blood.
5th. In many ordinary cases it secures the
salvation of many who live to maturity, by ex-
citing parents to the diligent performance of
duty, and children to perform the obligations
imposed upon them. "Train up a child in the
way he should go, and when he is old he will
TREATISE ON BAPTISŃÏ.
67
not depart from it." Prov. 22: 6. "And ye
fathers, provoke not your children to wrath;
but bring them up in the nurture and admoni-
tion of the Lord." Eph. 6:4. "Choose life,
that both thou and thy seed may live." Deut.
30:19.
The children of Pagans are Pagans-the
children of Mahometans are Mahometans, and
those of Jews are Jews, from the influence of
education. Hence, said Christ, "Go disciple
all NATIONS, baptizing them:" baptizing
whom? "ALL NATIONS.” Ah! and are
there no children among "all nations?" If
there are, they are to be baptized and educated
in the school of Christ; for the church is the
school in which the nations are to receive a
christian education; that they may be chris-
tians and not Jews, Mahometans, not infidels.
Mr. Watson has written wisely on this sub-
ject. (Hear a quotation-Institutes, p. 440.)
"To the infant child, it is a visible reception in-
to the same covenant and church-a pledge of
acceptance through Christ-the bestowment of
a title to all the grace of the covenant, as cir-
cumstances may require, and as the mind of
the child may be capable, or made capable, of
receiving it; and as it may be sought in future
life by prayer, when the period of reason and
moral choice shall arrive. It conveys also the
present "blessing" of Christ, of which we are
assured, by his taking children in his arms and
blessing them; which blessing cannot be mere-
68
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
ly nominal, but must be substantial and effica-
cious. It secures, too, the gift of the Holy Spi-
rit in those secret spiritual influences, by which
the actual regeneration of those children who
die in infancy is effected; and which are a seed
of life in those who are spared, to prepare them
for instruction in the word of God, as they are
taught by parental care, to incline their will
and affections, to good, and to begin and main-
tain in them the war against inward and out-
ward evil, so that they may be divinely assist-
ed, as reason strengthens, to make their calling
and election sure. In a word, it is both as to
infants and to adults, the sign and pledge of
that inward grace, which, although modified in
its operations by the difference of their circum-
stances, has respect to, and flows from a cov-
enant relation to each of the three persons in
whose one name they are baptized,—accept-
ance by the Father, -union with Christ as the
head of his mystical body, the church,-and
"the communion of the Holy Ghost." To these
advantages must be added the respect which
God bears to the believing act of the parents,
and their solemn prayers on the occasion; in
both which the child is interested, as well as
in that solemn engagement of the parents which
the rite necessarily implies, to bring up their
child in the nurture and admonition of the
Lord.
To the parents it is a benefit also. It as-
sures them that God will not only be their God,
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
69
but "the God of their seed after them;" it thus
gives them, as the Israelites of old, the right to
covenant with God for their little ones, and it
is a consoling pledge that their dying infant
offspring shall be saved; since he who says,
"suffer little children to come unto me," has
added, "for of such is the kingdom of heaven."
They are reminded by it also of the necessity
of acquainting themselves with God's coven-
ant, that they may diligently teach it to their
children; and that as they have covenanted
with God for their children, they are bound
thereby to enforce their covenant conditions
upon them as they come to years,—by exam-
ple, as well as by education; by prayer, as
well as by profession of the name of Christ,"
CHAPTER VII.
IIISTORY OF INFANT BAPTISM.
It is often said, "the testimony of history is
against infant baptism."
To prove this assertion untrue, we shall pro-
duce a few witnesses among many.
1. JUSTIN MARTYR, who wrote about
forty years after the apostles: says, "several
persons among us of sixty or seventy years
old, of both sexes, were discipled to Christ in
or from their CHILDHOOD. As no unbap-
70
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
tized persons were considered "disciples,"
these were baptized "in childhood."
Seventy years reckoned back, will reach in-
to the midst of the apostles' time, consequent-
ly, infants were baptized in the days of the
apostles.
2. HERMAS, who lived in the time of St.
Paul, and is mentioned by Paul. Rom. 16: 14.
After representing infants, as members of the
church, he says: "The baptism of water is ne-
cessary to ALL." By "all" he certainly means
all persons or all church members. In either
case, infants are included, and this is another
testimony for infant baptism among the apos-
tles. Dr. Wall's Hist. Inf. Bap. Chap. 1; al-
so Pond's Treatise on Bap. p. 96, also 126...
3. ORIGIN, who was born in the eighty-fifth
year after the apostles, says, "The church had
from the apostles an ORDER TO GIVE BAP-
TISM TO INFANTS.". See his commentary
on the epistle to the Romans, fifth book. In
his homily on Luke 14, he says, "By the sac-
rament of baptism, the pollutions of our birth
are put off, and therefore infants are baptiz-
ed." There is one circumstance that makes
Origin a more competent witness, than most
other authors of that age. He was himself of
a family that had been. christian for a long
time. His father was a martyr for Christ, in
the persecution under Severus, in the year 102.
And Eusebius (in his history, book 6, ch. 19,)
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
$1
assures us that his forefathers had been chris-
tians for several generations.
Now, since Origin was born in the eighty-
fifth year after the apostles, his grandfather or
at least his great-grandfather, (both of whom
according to Eusebius were christians,) must
have lived in the time of the apostles. And as
he could not be ignorant whether he himself
was baptized in infancy, so he had no farther
than his own family to go, to enquire what was
practiced in the time of the apostles.
Besides, he was a very learned man, and
could not be ignorant of the practice of the
churches, and in most of which he had also
travelled, for as he was born and bred at Al-
exandria; so it appears out of Eusebius' histor
ry, b. 6, that he had lived in Greece, and at
Rome, and in Capadocia and Arabia, and spent
the main part of his life in Syria and Pales-
tine.
▸
4. About one hundred and fifty years after
the death of St. John the apostle, there was an
assembly of sixty-six bishops, who spake of
infant baptism, as a known, established, and
uncontested practice. One Fidus questioned
the propriety of baptizing infants before they
were eight days old, and proposed his scruples
to the assembly. They addressed him as fol-
lows:
"Cyprian, and the rest of the bishops, who
were present at the council, sixty-six in num
ber, to Fidus our brother, greeting-
72
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
"We read your letter, most dear brother; but
as to the case of infants-whereas you judge,
that they must not be baptized within two or
three days after they are born; and the rule of
circumcision is to be observed, so that none
should be baptized and sanctified before the
eighth day after he is born; we were all in our
assembly of the CONTRARY OPINION-
wherefore, dearly beloved, it is our opinion,
that from baptism none ought to be prohibited
by us which, as it is to be observed and follow-
ed with respect to ALL; so especially with re-
spect to INFANTS and those that are but just
born." Cyp. Eps. 59.
From this piece of history it appears, that
both the person who moved the doubt, and all
the persons who resolved it, unanimously agreed
in this, that infants were to be baptized, and
that it was a settled custom of the church to
baptize them. If the assembly had been bap-
tists, they would have answered: Children
should neither be baptized on the eighth, nor
any other day, till they are of age to judge for
themselves. But none of these bishops were
of this sentiment. They all looked upon it as
a thing uncontested, that infants were to be
baptized. If we look from this time to the
space that had elapsed from the apostles' time,
which was but one hundred and fifty years,
we must conclude, that it was easy then to
know the practice of christians in the apostles'
days, for some of these bishops may be thought
-
73
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
to be at this time, sixty or seventy years old
themselves, which reaches almost half the
space: and at that time, when they were in-
fants, there must have been several alive, that
were born in the apostles' age. And such
could not be ignorant whether infants were
baptized in that age, when they themselves
were some of those infants. So it seems, there
was not an opposer of infant baptism in all
the Church of God at that early period.
5. CLEMENTINE CONSTITUTIOUs, a work of
high antiquity, extant almost in the earliest
ages of the christian church, says, "Baptize
your infants, and bring them up in the nurture
and admonition of God. See Towgood on Inf
Bap. p. 36.
6. Jerome, who wrote about two hundred
and fifty years after the apostles, says, "If in-
fants be not baptized, the sin of omitting their
baptism, is laid to the parents' charge." See
Reed's Apol. p. 277.
7. GREGORY NAZIANZEN, who wrote about
two hundred and sixty years after the apostles,
says, "Infants should be baptized to consecrate
them to Christ in their infancy." Lathrop's
Dise, on Bap. p. 70.
8. AMBROSE, who wrote about two hundred
and seventy four years after the apostles:
"The baptism of infants was the PRÁC-
TICE of the APOSTLES, and has EVER
BEEN in the church till this time." Lathrop's
Dise. Bap. p. 70,
74
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
9. CHRYSOSTOM, who wrote about two hun
dred and seventy years after the apostles, says:
"Persons may be baptized either in their in-
fancy, in middle age, or in old age." Reed's
Apol. p. 277.
10. AUGUSTINE or AUSTIN, who wrote about
two hundred and eighty years after the apos-
tles, says,
"Infant Baptism, the whole church practices:
it was not instituted by COUNCILS, but was
ever in use.--I have never read or heard of
any christian, whether Catholic or Sectary,
who held otherwise." Wall's Hist. of Inf. Bap.
pp. 187, 302.
Infant baptism had not been enacted by any
council but had been in use from the beginning
of christianity. They had but three hundred
years to look back to the times of the apostles.
They had never heard of an opposer of infant
baptism. Consequently Augustine, who was
the "Great Luminary" of his age, (according
to Milner) had never heard of a Baptist in sen-
timent, on this subject,
About this time he had his famous controver-
sy with Pelagius, in which both parties admit-
ted that infant baptism was practiced by the
apostles.
11. PELAGIUS says, "I never heard of ANY,
not even the most impious heretic, who denied
baptism to infants."
12. CELESTIUS says, "As for infants, I al-
ways said they stand in need of baptism, and
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
75
ought to be baptized." Both these men lived
in the time of Augustine, and were the founders
and promoters of the famous Pelagian heresy.
Wall's Hist. Bap. p. 63.
From the above testimony of History we
are fairly brought to the following conclusions.
1. That infant baptism was practiced in the
church of Christ from the apostles.
2. That for the first four hundred years, it
never was considered an unscriptural or an un-
apostolical practice. And as far as the testi-
mony of history can show, we confidently as-
sert there was not a Baptist or Campbellite in
sentiment in the universe. Nor is the case of
Turtullian an exception, as he only advised the
delay of infant baptism in some cases. It will
hardly be contended by any man acquainted
with History, that infant baptism was opposed
for the next six or seven hundred years. Alex-
ander Campbell says, "During the long dark
night of Catholic ascendency, the standing or-
der of every day, for MORE THAN A
THOUSAND YEARS, was, to bring the
whole world into the church by the potency of
infant dedication. All infants were christened
in the very act of receiving their names." Mil-
lennial Harbinger Vol. 4. No. 9. p. 467.
The Waldenses (of the 12th century,)´ are
claimed by the Baptists, because a small party
sprang up among them, who opposed infant bap-
tism. Upon the same principle they should
claim the Presbyterians, because the New
76
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
3
Lights (who sprang up among them,) oppose
infant baptism.
The great Mr. Baxter, says, "I am fully sat-
isfied that Mr. Tombs cannot show me any So-
ciety, (I think, not one man,) that ever opened
their mouths against the baptism of infants, till
about two hundred years ago. Mr. Baxter
died, December 8, 1691,
Infant baptism is called by its enemies a
"Relict of Popery." We have proved this to
be absolutely false; And besides, all those
Baptist writers, who pronounce that infant bap-
tism originated in the second century, confess
its falsehood,
That infant baptism was not "enjoined until
the council at Carthage,” is another assertion
we have proved to be untrue; as that council
acted upon the acknowledged prevalence of in-
fant baptism. In this investigation we have
been unable to find a single Baptist urging his
peculiarities for the first eleven or twelve hun-
dred years-unless the absurdities of Tertul-
lian (at the close of the second century,) he
claimed, as Baptist peculiarities.
Let not opposers of infant baptism suppose
that their mere assertions, and the "concessions
of Pedo-baptists," as they choose to call them,
unsupported by facts, can make the church of
God believe, "the testimony of history is against
infant baptism;" while such a body of evidence,
from the first characters of the church, pro-
pounce to the contrary. See Watson's Inst,
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
1717
Art. Bap.; Pond's Trea. on Bap.; Wall's Hist.
of Inf. Bap.; Extr. by Wesley on Inf. Bap.;
Jno. P. Campbell, &c. &c.
CHAPTER VIIL
THE MODE OF BAPTISM.
It will generally be admitted that the whole
controversy respecting the mode of baptism,
rests very materially on the meaning of the
word that denotes the ordinance. The ques-
tion is, does it exclusively signify immersion.
Baptists say it does; Pedo-baptists say it
does not. This, then, is the question to be
settled. We ask not whether the word be ap-
plicable in a case of immersion. But is it ap-
plicable in no other mode of applying water?
Does it signify immersion exclusively? Al-
though we rely upon the word of God for the
decision of this important question, yet from
Mr. Campbell's frequent exhibition of human
authorities in a garbled form, in order to make
false impressions upon the public mind, it is
but just to disabuse the public, by offering a
few of those authorities here; more especially
as Mr. Campbell and many of his disciples tell
us that all the antiquity, all the learned, an-
cient and modern, &c. &c. are against Pedo-
baptists on this subject, and prove it by giving

778
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
the sayings of his human authorities about as
honestly as he has the sayings of Jesus Christ
and his apostles, in his deformed Testament.
How easy is it to make an author speak a lan-
guage he never intended, by leaving out par-
ticular clauses and qualify sentences. Those
learned Pedo-baptists, whose "concessions” are
so frequently exhibited by Mr. Campbell and
his followers, to bolster up Campbellism, had
reasons perfectly satisfactory to them, for the
practice of infant baptism, and baptism by
pouring or sprinkling. If they had not, they
were hypocrites and unworthy of confidence;
if they had, why abuse those who have gone
to their reward, by misrepresenting their views?
And that many of them had satisfactory rea-
sons for their practice, we know to an absolute
certainty, as they have given them in suffi-
cient detail. And in regard to others, why call
a man a Pedo-baptist when he has believed
himself into any thing else but a Pedo-baptist?
But to the question. Does the word signify
IMMERSION EXCLUSIVELY?
1. ALSTIDIUS says, "The term baptism sig-
nifies both immersion and SPRINKLING.”
Encyclop. Lib. 25, Sec. 3.
2. ZELENUS says, "Baptism signifies dip-
ping and also SPRINKLING." Reed's Apol.
pp. 112, 114.
3. J. WICKLIFF says, "It matters not wheth-
er persons are dipped once, or three times, or
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
79
A
whether water were POURED upon their
heads."
4. BEZA says, "They are rightly baptized
who are baptized by SPRINKLING.”
5. WHITAKER says, "The word signifies
not only dip, but also to TINGE or WET.”
6. MASTRICHT says, "Baptism signifies
WASHING, either by SPRINKLING or dip-
ping." For the above authorities, see Reed's
Apol. pp. 112, 114; also, Pond's Treatise,
P. 24.
7. LIGHTFOOT says, "The application of
water is of the essence of baptism; but the ap-
plication of it in this or that MANNER,
speaks but a circumstance." Hore Hebraice
in Math. 3.
8. DR. FEATLY says, "Christ no where re-
quireth dipping but only baptizing; which
word Hesychius, Stevanus, Scapula and Bu-
deus, those great masters of the Greek tongue,
make good by very many instances out of the
classic writers, importeth no more than ABLU-
TION or WASHING." Contra Anabaptist
in P. Clark's Candid Reasons, &c. p. 130.
9. DOMINICUS says, "In baptism there is
something essential, as the WASHING; and
something accidental, namely, the washing in
this or the other MANNER." Distinct. 3,
Quest. 1, Art. 7.
10. WITSIUS Says, "We are not to imagine
that immersion is so necessary to baptism, that
it cannot be duly performed by POURING
80
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
water all over, or by ASPERSION." Econ.
Fedar. Vol. 3, p. 392.
ง
11. CALVIN "Whether the person bap-
tized be wholly immersed, and whether thrice.
or once, or whether water be only POURED
or SPRINKLED upon him, is of no impor- .
tance." Inst's. Vol. 3, p. 343-edit. N. Haven.
12. DR. OWEN.-"Baptism is any kind of
washing, whether by dipping or SPRINK-
LING." In Heb. 9: 10.
C
13. FLAVEL. "The word baptize, signify-
ing as well to WASH as to plunge; a person
may be truly baptized that is not plunged."
Works, Vol. 11, p. 432.
14. DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE.-"To bap-
tize is to SPRINKLE or WASH one's body
sacramentally." Edit. 1661, Art. Bap. Def. 3.
See also Brown's and Calmet's Dict. of Bible,
in art. baptism.
15. GLAS.-"Immersion cannot be called
baptism, any otherwise than as it is a mode of
WASHING with water." Diss. on Inf. Bap.
p. 25.
16. AINSWORTH.-"To baptize is to WASH
any one in the sacred baptismal font, or to
SPRINKLE (inspergere) ON HIM the conse-
crated waters." English Latin Dict. in art.
Bap. See also Cole's Lat. Dict. and Schrev-
elii Lexicon Greco-Latinum, in art. baptism.
16. DOCT. SCOTT.-"Some contend that bap-
tism always signifies immersion; and learned
men who have regarded Jewish traditions more
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
81
than either the language of scripture or the
Greek Idiom, are very decided in this respect.
But the use of the words baptize and baptism
in the NEW TESTAMENT, CANNOT AC-
CORD with this EXCLUSIVE interpreta-
tion." Comment in Mat. 3: 6. See Pond's
Treatise on the mode and subjects of christian
baptism, pp. 24, 25, 26.
18. ADAM CLARK, on Mark 16, at the close.
"To say that SPRINKLING OR ASPER-
-SION is no gospel baptism, is as incorrect as
to say immersion is none."
To assert that infant baptism is unscriptu
ral, is as rash and reprehensible as any of the
rest. Note-Acts 16: 32.
"It is therefore pretty evident, that we have
in this chapter very presumptive proofs—
1. That baptism was administered WITH-
OUT IMMERSION, as in the case of the
JAILOR and his FAMILY; and,
2. That children were also received into
the church in this way."
Acts 19:5.-"In my view, it is an awful
thing to iterate baptism, when it had been be-
fore essentially performed: by "essentially per-
formed," I mean administered by SPRINK-
LING, WASHING, or plunging, by or in
water, the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit
being invoked at the time. Whoever has had
this, has the essence of baptism, as far as that
can be conferred by man; and it matters not at
what period of his life he has had it; it is a

P
82
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
•
substantial baptism, and by it the person has
been fully consecrated to the holy and blessed
Trinity; and there should not be an iteration
of this consecration on any account whatever.
It is totally CONTRARY to the canon of
LAW; it is CONTRARY to the decisions of
the best DIVINES; it is contrary to the prac-
tice of the purest ages of the church of God;
it is contrary to the NEW TESTAMENT,
and tends to bring this sacred ordinance into
disrepute."
•
19. WESLEY'S extracts say, "With regard
to the mode of baptizing, I would only add,
Christ no where, as far as I can find, requires
dipping, but ONLY BAPTIZING: which
word, many most eminent for learning and
piety have declared signifies to POUR on, or
SPRINKLE, as well as to dip." See Method-
ist Doctrinal Tracts, published 1825. Tract
12, p. 36. Here Mr. Wesley and-his author
says, "Christ no where requires dipping, but
only baptizing." Wesley's notes, Mat. 3: 6.
Of John's disciples he says, "Such prodigi-
ous numbers could hardly be baptized by im-
merging their whole bodies under water: nor
can we think they were provided with change
of raiment for it, which was scarcely practica-
ble for such vast multitudes. And yet they
could not be immerged naked with modesty,
nor in their wearing apparel with safety. It
seems, therefore, that they stood in ranks on
the edge of the river, and that John passing
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
83%
along before them, cast water upon their heads
or faces, by which means he might baptize
many thousands in a day. And this way most
naturally signified Christ's baptizing them
WITH the Holy Ghost and WITH fire, which
John spoke of, as prefigured by his baptizing
WITH water, and which was eminently ful--
filled when the Holy Ghost SAT UPON the
disciples in the appearance of tongues, or of
flames of fire." His notes on Acts 8: 38.
The case of the Eunuch. "And they both
went down-out of the chariot. It does not
follow that he was baptized by immersion.
The text neither affirms nor INTIMATES any
thing concerning it." These evidently would
have been the places for Mr. Wesley to have
displayed his fondness for immersion if he had
any; the reverse is, however, clearly exhibi-
ted. But did he not say that immersion was
"the ancient apostolic mode?" We answer
positively, No. Well, what does he say on
Rom. 6: 4, and Col. 2: 12, "Buried with him
by baptism?" He says, "Alluding to the an-
cient (not the christian baptism just instituted,
the apostle could not allude to it as ancient,
but to Jewish bathings) manner of baptizing
by immersion:" Rom. "The ancient (Jew-
ish) manner of baptizing by immersion is as
manifestly alluded to here, as the other man-
ner (of course Campbellites will say Jewish)-
of baptizing by sprinkling or pouring water:
is. Heb. 10:22.


84
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
"Having our hearts SPRINKLED from an
´evil conscience." Did Mr. Wesley mean that
sprinkling and immersion were both the an-
cient apostolic mode? Certainly not.
Dr. A. Clark refers to Num. 19: 18, 19, 20
for these "ancient modes" of baptism "And
a clean person shall take hyssop, and dip it in
the water, and sprinkle upon the unclean on
the third day, and on the seventh day: and on
the seventh day he shall purify himself, and
wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water,
and shall be clean at even." Multitudes of
quotations might be given from Clarke and
Wesley to demonstrate that they would have
been the last men that ever lived, who would
have said one word to bolster up a system so
unclean and ruinous as Campbellism.
20. Doct. WATTS says, "The Greek word
baptizo, signifies to WASH any thing properly
by water coming over it: now there are sever-
al ways of such washing, viz: SPRINK-
LING water on it in a small quantity, POUR-
ING water on it in a larger quantity, or dip-
ping it under water, either in part or in whole."
Besides, pouring or sprinkling more naturally
represents most of the spiritual blessings sig-
nified by baptism, viz: the sprinkling the
blood of Christ on the conscience, or the pour-
ing out of the spirit on the person baptized, or
sprinkling him with clean water, as an emblem
of the influence of the spirit; all which are the
things signified in baptism as different repre-

TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
85
sentations of the cleansing away of the guilt
or defilement of sin thereby." Wesley's Ex--
tracts, pp: 36, 37.
21.DR. DODDRIDGE, (one of Mr. Camp-
bell's authorities for his Testament) says, "In
this diminutive and derivative form, it (bap-
tize) may signify any method of WASH-
ING." Again: "Our being cleansed from
sin seems the thing principally intended, (by
baptism) which may be well represented by
POURING on water: and as this more natu-
rally represents the pouring out of the spirit,
the sprinkling us with it, the sprinkling of the
blood of Jesus, it may answer as valuable pur-
poses as that mode which more expressly rep-
resents à death and resurrection." Dod. Lec..
Vol. 2, p. 376.
•
22. Dr. Cleland on this subject, says, “To.
balance this (Mr. Campbell's reliance on Si-
mon, the Jesuit, a Roman Catholic critic,) we
will introduce St. Thomas Aquinas, commonly
called "the Angelical Doctor," one of the most
learned and ingenious Romanists that ever
lived. In 1255 he speaks thus: Baptism may
be given not only by immersion, but also by
effusion of water or SPRINKLING with it."
Erasmus, another of the most learned men of
that denomination, and indeed of the age in
which he lived, affirms, "that in his time
was the custom to SPRINKLE infants in Hol-
land and to dip them in England." Calvin
and Beza are also introduced by our author in
.86
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
รา
support of his theory. Their words, however,
are garbled and their sentiments suppressed.
Calvin is made to declare, "the very word
baptizing signifies to dip; and it is certain
that the rite of dipping was observed of the
ancient church." This is not the whole of
Calvin's sentiments on the subject, for he says,
"but whether the person who is baptized be
wholly immersed, and whether three times or
once, or whether water be only POURED OR
SPRINKLED upon him, is of no importance.
Inst. Vol. 3, p. 343. Beza is treated after the
same manner. Our author (Mr. Campbell)
quotes him thus: "the word baptismós signifies
to dye by dipping or washing, and differs from
the word dunai, signifying to drown," .&c.
But the real sentiment of this old Presbyterian
is thus expressed by himself: "They are right-
ly baptized who are baptized by sprinkling.'
Leigh, another learned English Presbyterian,
and one of Mr. Campbell's "Pedo-baptists of
illustrious name," appealed to for support, says,
"baptism is such a kind of washing as is by
plunging, and yet it is taken more largely for
any kind of WASHING, even where there is
no DIPPING at all." Dr. Lightfoot, a most
eminent divine, an Episcopalian Doctor, and
one of the most eminent men in rabbinical
learning England ever produced, says, "the ap-
plication of water is of the essence of bap-
tism; but the application of it in this or that
manner, speaks but a circumstance," And
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
87
Dr. Featley, another Pedo-baptist of illustri-
ous name, and of the same school with Light-
foot, unrivalled in his extensive knowledge of
school divinity and eloquence as a preacher,
'says, "Christ no where requireth dipping, but
only baptizing; which Hesychius, Stephanus,
Scapula, and Buddeus, those great masters of
the Greek tongue, make good, by very many
instances out of the classic writers, importeth -
no more than ablution or WASHING."
I could add a host of such testimony as this,
but it is unnecessary. Indeed, we might call
in witnesses from the other side were it neces-
sary. The learned author of "Letters ad-
dressed to Bishop Hoadly," in defence of Bap-
tist principles, expressly concedes, that bapto
"signifies to sprinkle," and that it "is not used
in the Septuagint in any one place, where the
*frequent ceremony of washing the whole body
"occurs." And a living writer of Edinburg,
Alexander Carson, on the same side, expressly
admits that "bapto signifies to dye by SPRINK-
LING, as properly as by dipping, though origi-
nally it was confined to the latter." Such ad-
missions are not common with Baptist writers,
nor do I lay much stress on them in this dis-
cussion. And had A. Campbell possessed the
candor of Abm. Booth, from whose list of 80
Pedo-baptists and 11 Quakers he can find men
"of illustrious name" at pleasure, he would
also tell the world, as Booth did, who desired
his reader to observe that no inconsiderable

88
TREATISE ON BAPTISM..
part of these learned authors have asserted?
that the word baptism signifies pouring or
sprinkling, as well as inmersion.'
" See Cle-
land's Periodical, No. 1, pp. 38, 39. Hear an-
other extract: "For instance, Alexander Camp-
bell quotes Doct. Owen as saying, that no
honest man who understands the Greek tongue
can deny the word to signify to dip;"" whereas
the Doctor's words are "no honest man who
understands the Greek tongue can deny the
word to signify to WASH as well as to dip."
Dr. Owen, who was confessedly a great critic
and an erudite scholar, says, in the same place,
that Hesychius, Julius, Pollux, Phavorinus and
Eustachius, critics of high reputation, render
the word "TO WASH"that Scapuela and
Stephanas render it by lavo or ablue, which..
Latin words signify to wash also; and that Sui-..
das renders it by madefacio, lavo, abluo, pur-
go, mundo, all of which signify to wash by
other means than by immersion. This same
A. Campbell, the great Baptist Champion of
the present day, makes Calvin, Beza, Mas-
tricht and Leigh, say that baptizo signifies to.
dip. They have said so; but they say like-
wise that it signifies to SPRINKLE. Calvin
says, "whether the person baptized be wholly
immersed, and whether thrice or once, or
whether water be only poured or sprinkled up-.
on him is of no importance." Beza says,
"they are rightly baptized who are baptized by
sprinkling." Mastricht says, "baptism signi
TREATISE ON BAPTISM..
89.
fies washing, either by sprinkling or dipping."
Leigh says, "baptism is such a kind of wash-
ing as is by plunging; and yet it is taken more
largely for any kind of washing, even where
there is no dipping at all" These authorities
can be given if called in question. To the
abore list may be added other Pedo-baptist
writers of great literary eminence; such as
Craddock, Casaubon, Pool, Grotius, Guise,
Brown, Scott and Schleusner, with a number
more, justly celebrated for biblical erudition,..
who, if allowed to speak their own language,
never thought of giving an exclusive interpre-
tation to the word' baptize, as though it meant
to dip or immerse only. See Pedo-baptist, No...
1, Vol. 1, pp. 37, 38. Mr. Pond gives the fol-
lowing note on p. 26 of his treatise on baptism:
"The following authors I find also referred fo.
as testifying that immersion is not essential to
baptism:-Luther, Vossius, Zanchius, Hesy-.
chius, Buddeus, Stephanus, Scapula, Passor,
Martin, &c. See also Hopkins' Sys. Divin.
Vol. 2, p. 304, &c. &c. Again, "Origen,
speaking to the Pharisees, of the wood on the
altar, over which water was profusely poured
at the command of Elijah (see 2 Kings 18: 23)..
expressly says that this wood was baptized.
This term, then, was used by Origen, one of
the earliest christian fathers, to signify pour- ·
ing. Eusebius mentions a fountain near the
church at Tyre, where the people washed, pre-
viqus to their entering the temple. This wash--
-
1.90
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
•
ing, he observes, "resembled baptism." See
appen. to Doct. Watt's Hist. Ecc. Lib. 10,
chap. 4. "It was a common expression of
the ancient fathers, concerning the martyrs
who had shed their blood in bearing witness.to
the christian faith, that they were baptized with
their blood." (Hemmenway, in Reed's Apolo-
gy, p. 165.) Were they actually immersed in
their own blood? or were their bodies merely
“tinged or wetted with it?" We leave it with
the candid reader to say. Pond's Tr. Bap.
pp. 29, 30. “The word itself, as it has been
often shown, proves nothing. The verb, with
its derivatives, signifies to dip the hand into a
dish; Mat. 26: 23; to stain a vesture with
blood; Rev. 19:13 to wet the body with
dew; Dan. 4: 33; to paint or smear the face
with colours; to stain the hand-by pressing a
substance; to be overwhelmed in the waters as
a sunken ship; to be drowned by falling into
water; to sink, in the neuter sense; to immerse
totally; to plunge up to the neck; to be im-
mersed up to the middle; to be drunken with
wine; to be dyed, tinged, and imbued; to wash
by effusion of water; to POUR water upon
the hands, or any other part of the body; to
SPRINKLE, A word then, of such large ap-
plication affords as good proof for SPRINK-
LING, or partial dipping, or washing WITH
water, as for immersion in it." Watson's Inst.
*p. 442.
We have now before us numerous other au-
TREATISE ON BAPTISM,
91
thorities which we could adduce, to establish
the fact that, the word does not exclusively
mean immersion. After these developements,
what confidence can the public have in the as-
sertions "all the wise, all the learned, &c. &c.
are against the Pedo-baptists on this subject?"
From the above exhibition, all honest men
must admit that whilst immersionists can prove
that baptism means immersion, Pedo-baptists
can equally prove, it means pouring or sprink-
ling. Consequently, if immersionists from this
authority-have a right to say it means immer-
sion and nothing else;-immersion exclusively,
Pedo-baptists have an equal right to say it
means pouring or sprinkling, and nothing
else; pouring or sprinkling exclusively.
And here we would remark, that in all the
above, where immersion is admitted to be bap-
tism-in a religious sense, it is understood to
be an immersion administered by a gospel min-
ister to a proper subject, in the name of the
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Such an im-
mersion is essentially different from the Camp-
bellite immersion;-as, according to their own
showing, there is no gospel ministry among
them. And one solemn truth which they eve-
ry where proclaim, (mixed with a great many
errors) is, "That they are neither called nor
sent to preach the gospel." This truth being
universally believed, we unhesitatingly affirm
that their immersion is null and void, to all in-
Ments and purposes: and, to use the words of
92
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
the Rev. Peter Acres, "the Campbellite im-.
mersion is not worth a groat." $
CHAPTER IX.
MODE OF BAPTISM CONTINUED.
Having fairly proved (in the preceding
chapter) by the very best human authority that
pouring or sprinkling is baptism in the proper
sense of the word: We will now proceed to
prove by the infallible, and inspired word of
God, that the word means pouring or sprink-
ling, as used by Christ and his apostles. And
while the best critics, and scholars of the Bap-
tist party, with their Lexicons in their hands,
declare the word baptizo means to immerse;
and the best, critics and scholars of the Pedo-
paptist party affirm, it means to sprinkle or pour,
we will produce authority that cannot be gain-
said by either party. We will make those bap-
tisms wherein Jehovalı himself was the admin-
istrator, the standard; namely the baptism of
the Israelites in the Red Sea; and the baptism
of the Holy Ghost administered to the disci-
ples. In these cases the Lord himself was the
administrator. If these were cases of immer-
sion, then to be baptized is to be immersed..
But if they were cases of pouring or sprink-
ling, then the question must be settled, and,
*
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
93
pouring or sprinkling is the proper mode of
baptism, the God of Heaven himself setting the
· example.
*
1. The case of the Israelites. St. Paul gives
the name of baptism to this case thus, "More-
over, brethren, I would not that ye should be
ignorant, how that all our fathers were under
the cloud, and all passed through the Sea: And
were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and
in the sea." 1 Cor. 10: 1, 2. Now the ques-
tion to be settled is, were the Israelites immcrs-
ed in-dipped into-plunged under water-or
was the baptismal water poured upon them in
this case? This matter is capable of the clear-
est demonstration. Hear Moses relate the
facts. "And the children of Israel went into
the midst of the Sea upon the DRY GROUND;
and the waters were a wall unto them on their
right hand and on their left.-And the waters
returned, and covered the chariots, and the
horsemen, and all the hosts of Pharoah that
came into the sea after them: there remained
not so much as one of them. But the children
of Israel walked on DRY LAND in the midst
of the sea.” Exod. 14: 22, 28, 29. On “DRY
GROUND," "DRY LAND," and yet Camp-
bell's translation makes St. Paul say “immers-
ed, into Moses," &c. This was truly a novel
thing if Campbell's translation be true, a dry
shod immersion--a dipping, a plunging under
water, on "DRY GROUND”—“DRY LAND,”
---Strange indeed: It is well known that there
94
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
1
is not an immersionist in all the land, that will
admit that any thing less, than to be dipped,.
or plunged completely under water is immer-
sion or baptism--and that such a thing could
happen on "dry ground," every man of com-
mon sense knows well, is out of the question.
St. Paul who says they "were all baptized unto-
Moses, &c. says also, "By faith they passed-
through the Red Sea as by dry land: which
the Egyptians essaying to do were drowned."
Heb. 11:29.
Here it must be clearly seen, that the waters
of the sea were to the Israelites "a wall, on
their right hand and on their left." And as
St. Paul says, "they passed through the sea as-
by dry land." How was it possible to be dip-
ped or immersed in such a passage--ɔn “dry
land-dry ground?" Of the Egyptians it is
said, "the waters COVERED the chariots-and-
the horsemen, and all the hosts of Pharaoh,
there remained not so much as one of them."
They were indisputably immersed, because
they had literally "much water" instead of
"many waters," which could not be said of the.
Israelites on dry ground. But some say, they
were "completely surrounded or shut in, with
the walls of water and cloud; which resem-
bled immersion." St. Paul says they were
"baptized" and not, they had a resemblance of
baptism. Besides, there is nothing, in all the
circumstances which has the least resemblance
to immersion. They were not dipped down
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
95
into the cloud-but the cloud passed over them
-they were not plunged into the walls of wa-
ter, for they were on the "right hand and on the
left"They were not completely surrounded
-for behind and before them, there was no wa-
ter to the shore. And besides all this, a wild-
er conceit, never entered the crazy brain of
a bedlamite, than that, six hundred thousand
men, besides women and children, receiveď
water baptism, without one drop of water touch-
ing them. And worse still, that they were im-
mersed, on "dry land" without touching one
drop of water. This is truly changing sides,
and making out with less water to immerse six
hundred thousand, than Pedo-baptists require
to sprinkle one infant.
A witness in a court of justice would cut an
odd figure, testifying that he saw six hundred.
thousand men, besides women and children,
“IMMERSED on DRY GROUND," and
worse still to add, that the thing happened
without their touching a drop of water.
Having now shown that the Israelites were
not immersed; it only remains to show how
they were "baptized;" for St. Paul says they
"were baptized." Let the Psalmist be heard
in his striking description of the Israelites' pas-
sage through the Red Sea, and the matter is
settled, "The waters saw thee, O God, the wa-
ters saw thee; they were afraid: the depths
also were troubled. The clouds POURED
out water the skies sent out a sound: thine ar-
*96
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
B
rows also went abroad. The voice of thy thun-
der was in the heaven: the lightnings lightened
the world: the earth trembled and shook. Thy
way is in the sea, and thy path in the great
waters, and thy footsteps are not known. Thou
loadest thy people like a flock by the hand of
Moses and Aaron." Ps. 77: 16—20%.
Here we have the unequivocal and inspired
word of God for it, that the "cloud poured out
water," and thus, according to St. Paul, they
were baptized on dry ground-thus after the
removal of the waters of the sea, the ground
it seems, was only wet by the very act of bap-
tismy

+
Here then we have the baptism of the Israel-.
ites. According to St. Paul, they were "bap-
tized" "as on dry land." Moses says, "dry
ground, dry land." The Psalmist says the
"clouds poured out water,” Hence the Lord
of Heaven himself administered water baptism
to thousands of men, women and children, by
pouring water from the clouds of Heaven.
Consequently, when St. Paul. said they were
"baptized," he meant they were wet or wash-
ed, by water falling from the clouds of Heaven,
and not plunged or immersed into water. And
when Campbell's watery testament makes St.
Paul-say they were "immersed," it makes out
an absolute falshood; which was never uttered
by St. Paul, and which is the clearest demon-
stration, that there is an essential difference be-
tween the "New Testament of our Lord and
·
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
97
Saviour Jesus Christ," and this water machine
of Alexander Campbell, commonly called
Campbell's Testament.
2. We now procced to notice the baptism of
the Holy Ghost, in order to determine the mean-
ing of the word when thus applied. Is this
performed by pouring or immersion? Are men
dipped into the Ioly Ghost? Or is it "pour-
ed out" upon them? Let this be determined,
and we shall then have the standard scriptural
use of the term baptism.
John the Baptist first gives the name Bap-
tism, to the application of the Spirit. (He gives
the same name, in the same verse to the appli-
cation of water.) "I indeed baptize you with
water-He (Christ) shall baptize you with the
Holy Ghost, and with fire." Math. 3: 11.
Jesus Christ mentions the same baptism of the
Holy Ghost thus, "For John truly baptized
with water, but ye shall be baptized with
the Holy Ghost not many days hence." Acts
1:5. These predictions were frequently ful-
filled at Pentecost. The event is thus des-
cribed: "And when the day of Pentecost was
fully come, they were all with one accord in
one place. And suddenly there caine a sound
from Heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind,
and it (the sound) filled all the house where
they were sitting; and there appeared unto
them cloven tongues, like as of fire, and it (the
baptismal fire) SAT UPON each of them:
and they were all filled with (not dipped into)
G
98
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
the Holy Ghost," &c. Acts 2: 1-4. To
the astonished multitude Peter said, "This is
that which was spoken by the prophet Joel:
And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith
God, I will POUR OUT of my spirit upon all
flesh and your sons and your daughters shall
prophecy, and your young men shall see visions,
and your old men dream dreams: And ON
my servants and ON my hand maidens I will
POUR OUT in those days of my Spirit," &c.
Verses 16.-18. Again, he says, "Therefore,
being by the right hand of God exalted, and
having received of the Father the promise of
the Holy Ghost, he hath SHED FORTH this,
which ye now see and hear." Acts 2: 33.
St. Peter on another occasion, giving an ac-
count of the baptism of the Holy Ghost among
the Gentiles, says, "And as I began to speak,
the Holy Ghost FELL ON them (not dipped
into it) as ON us (Jews) at the beginning.
Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how
that he said, John indeed baptized WITH wa-
ter, but ye shall be baptized WITH the Holy
Ghost." Acts 11: 15, 16. Here it is capable
of the clearest demonstration, that when the
God of Heaven administered the baptism of
the Holy Ghost, it was "POURED OUT,"
“SHED FORTH,” “FELL ON them" and
"on the servants," &c.-"was poured out," &c.
Here then, we have the mode of the baptism
of the Holy Ghost.
To see the force of these passages in regard
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
99
So.
to the meaning of the word, let us substitute
water for the Spirit, and then read thus: "Bap-
tized WITH water;" the water was "POURED
OUT"--"SHED FORTH”—“FELL ON
them," and "on the servants," &c.-"the wa-
ter was poured out,' Is there a man, one sin-
gle remote from idiotism, that could dream of
an immersion in these cases? It would seem
However, there are some daring disciples
that can triumph over all scripture facts and
illustrations, by their superior learning. A
case in point. I was not long since informed,
that one of those learned disciples, (who seems
to have studied Greek in Campbell's Millennial
Harbinger,) convinced a lady she ought to be
immersed, because the "Greek word translated
baptize, is GUMFOOSELEN, and should in
every case be translated immerse, as it means
nothing but dip under or immerse." Such
profound erudition among those learned disci-
ples, who have such an extensive acquaintance
with king James,-his translators' translation,
and the original, must be truly dangerous!
Think the Pedo-baptist world had better not
surrender?
But to proceed. A passage from Dr. Cleland
will show to an absolute certainty, that Mr.
Campbell's sectarian Testament, with all its de-
formity, has not been able to triumph over the
truth on this subject. Hear the passage:
"We begin with the prediction of John, in
Mat. 3: 11. We shall use the words of the
100
TREATISE ON BAPTISM:
water.
new version itself. "I indeed immerse you in
He (Christ) will immerse you in
the Holy Spirit and fire." Now for the history
of the completion of this prophetic declaration.
This we shall find, not only as to the fact that
Christ did indeed baptize his disciples with the
Holy Spirit, but also as to the mode of its per-
formance. In Acts 1: 5, we learn that the
event predicted is just at hand: "For indeed
John immersed in water, but ye shall be im-
mersed in the Holy Spirit within these few
days." We find the completion of these few
days in Acts 2: "And when the day of Pen-
tecost was completely arrived, they were all,
with unanimous affection, in the same place."
Now for the fulfilment-the immersion in the
Holy Spirit and in fire. "And on a sudden
there was a sound from Heaven, as of a rush-
ing violent wind; and it (the sound) filled all
the house where they were sitting: And there
appeared to them separated tongues as of fire,
and rested upon each of them; and they were
filled with the Holy Spirit." Do you ask now,
"how were the disciples immersed in the Holy
Spirit?" The answer will read most "beauti-
fully," the Holy Spirit "RESTED UPON
each of them""where they were SIT-
TING!" While sitting in an erect posture,
they were immersed in the Holy Spirit!! But
let us complete our research. The effect pro-
duced, drew the following declaration from
Peter in his address on the occasion: "This
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
101
•
Jesus, God raised up. .. and having re-
ceived the promise of the Holy Spirit from the
Father, he has SHED FORTH this, which ye
now see and hear." Here is the mode of the
Spirit's baptism-"shed forth"-according to
this famous translation itself, which we quote
on this subject exclusively. Let us trace it a
little further: "While Peter was speaking
these words, (Acts 10: 44,) the Holy Spirit
FELL UPON all that were hearing the word,
and they of the circumcision . : . . were aston-
ished, that the gift of the Holy Spirit was
POURED OUT upon the Gentiles also."
Peter, in a subsequent address, at Jerusalem,
vindicating his conduct in the case of Corneli-
us, "opened to them the matter in order," and
relates the facts thus: "And as I began to
speak, the Holy Spirit FELL UPON them,
even as upon us at the beginning," i. e. on Pen-
tecost; "And I remembered the word of the
Lord, how he said, John indeed immersed in
water, but you shall be immersed in the Holy
Spirit," Now, gentle reader, summon all your
acumen and all your candor here; and, being
rid of all partiality, and all prejudice and pre-
possession towards any sect or denomination,
independently declare your judgment respect-
ing the mode of the Spirit's baptism. Was it
by immersion? as this new translation de-
clares, or was it (in the "modernized” style of
the same book) "shed forth"-"poured out,"
and "fell upon”—"rested upon" each of the
102..
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
disciples, in an erect posture, in "the house
where they were sitting?" It is a fact that
none of the disciples of Christ, mentioned in
the Acts of the Apostles, ever received the Ho-
ly Spirit but by effusion. But if baptism ne-
cessarily and exclusively means immersion,
and John baptized by immersion, then it can-
not be true that Jesus did baptize his disciples
with the Holy Spirit. Here, then, is the di-
lemma: allow the baptism of the Holy Spirit
and of fire was a descent UPON, and not an
immersion, or plunging INTO, and therefore
is not in this passage used for immersion; or
deny that Jesus ever did baptize with the Holy
Spirit. The author of the reformed Testa-
ment, which reads so exactly, and even beauti
fully, is welcome to the choice of either horn
of the dilemma.
I wish it to be particularly noted, that they
on whom the Spirit was poured out, are most
explicitly affirmed to have been baptized with
the Spirit. There is no getting over this.
The baptisma, baptism, is effected by the
ekhusis, effusion, and not by immersion. It
will never be affirmed that the verb ekhuo, I
pour out, shed, &c. signifies to immerse; and
yet the Apostle Peter declares ekhusis to have
been the accomplishment of the promise, cap-
tisthesisthe, ye shall be baptized with the Ho-
ly Ghost. Acts 1: 5. How the promise of
the Holy Spirit's baptism is accomplished, may
be seen in chap. 2:33-"he hath shed forth,
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
103
exehee, this which ye now see and hear;"-So
likewise, in chap. 10: 45-"on the Gentiles
was poured out, ekkehutai, the gift of the Ho-
ly Ghost."
This is the same as to "be baptized
with the Holy Ghost." Comp. chap. 11: 15,
16. So in Titus 3:6, the Holy Spirit's bap-
tism which he (exekeen) shed on us abundant-
ly," is very plainly effected, not by immersion,
but by effusion. I beseech the reader to keep
this point steadily in view, for I consider it ve-
ry important.
1
Our Reformer, in justification of himself for
doing "always" what Doctors Campbell and
Macknight did only "sometimes," namely,
translating baptisma, &c. immersion, says:
"We love uniformity when no violence is of
fered to the sense." We will try him by this
rule in one instance more. I allude to the
Apostle Paul's baptism, stated more fully in
the 4th No. of these essays; not then with this
famous translation under our eye, but now with
reference to it exclusively. It says that Paul
"arose and was immersed." The word for
arose is anastas, literally and correctly, stand
ing again; or, as in other places in his superi-
or translation, standing up, stood up, having
stood up. See the following instances: "Then
the High Priest standing up (anastas) in the
midst, interrogated Jesus." In these days
Peter rising up (anastas) in the midst of the
disciples, spoke," &c.-"And Agabus stood
up (anastas) and signified by the spirit," &e.-
104
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
"Then Paul stood up (anastas) and waiving
his hand, said," &c. Now, guided by this
"lovely uniformity," Alexander Campbell's
translation of Saul's baptism ought to read
thus: "And he recovered his sight and stood
up (anastas) and was immersed." But how
could he be immersed standing up? The idea
of an immersion of a person standing, is truly
absurd enough; but not as much so as that of
twelve men being immersed or plunged in the
Holy Ghost, SITTING. A more crazy con-
ceit never entered a crazy brain. But, (it is
rejoined,) admitting the word anastas means
standing up, was not this necessary in order to
Paul's moving off to some stream, or pool, or
tank, to be immersed? Surely, it may be said,
he must have got up before he walked. That
is true; but in this case it will not apply; be-
cause the verb, anistemi, of which anastas is
the participle, has no locomotive character.
In plain speech, it is a standing not a walking
verb. Take the following instance: When
Christ said to Matthew "follow me," he inime-
diately "arose and followed him,”—anastas,
ekoloutheesen auto. Here anastas put Mat-
thew on his feet, and could do no more; it could
not make him walk. It was therefore necessa-
ry to employ another verb, ekoloutheesen, to
remove him. There is no such assistance,
however, employed in Paul's case. He sim-
ply arose, on the spot, and thus, standing up,
was baptized. This case we think conclusive.
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
105
It is not necessary, therefore, to pursue it fur-
ther. Periodical No. 1, pp. 42, 43, 44.
Now, from the facts exhibited, the God of
Heaven being the example as administrator of
baptism-Jesus Christ, Joel the Prophet, John
the Baptist, Peter the Apostle, and Paul the
great Apostle of the Gentiles, deciding the
meaning of the word baptism, and its most
proper and scriptural application, it means
pouring or sprinkling, and not immersion.
A further investigation of the mode of bap-
tism, by an examination of the most important
cases of christian baptism recorded in the New
Testament, will, we have no doubt, establish
the fact that there never was an individual im-
mersed by an apostle of Jesus Christ.
CHAPTER X.
BAPTISM OF THE EUNUCH.
Acts VIII.
Many consider the baptism of the Eunuch a
very clear case of immersion; the contrary of
which we shall now prove.
The circumstances of this case are related
in Acts 8: 26-39. We are here told that
Philip "Heard him (the Eunuch) read the
Prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou
what thou readest? And he said, How can 1,
106
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
except some man guide me," &c. The place
of the scripture which he read was this: "He
was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a
lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not
his mouth," &c. The Eunuch asked Philip
"of whom speaketh the prophet this? of him-
self, or of some other man?" Verse 34. The
Eunuch asked an explanation of the prophecy
he was reading; Philip perfectly understood
him, and the next verse says, "began at the
same scripture and preached to him Jesus."
As the Messiah was the subject of prophecy in
this part of the Book of Isaiah, he no doubt de-
veloped the prophecy concerning Christ-its
accomplishment in his humiliation, and also
the triumphs of his kingdom. When "He
shall see his seed,-prolong his days and the
pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand."
Let the reader carefully note, that this-prophecy
concerning Jesus Christ, read by the Eunuch,
commences at the 13th verse of the 52d chap.
and ends with the 53d chap.* [It should not
be forgotten that the seriptures were not divided
into chapters and verses for hundreds of years
after the baptism of the Eunuch. They were
only divided by the nature of the subject.]
*The celebrated Mr. Benson in his note on
Isaiah 52: 13, says, "This is the beginning of a
new prophecy, continued from hence to the end
of the next chapter, which, as has been justly
observed by many, both ancient and modern in-
terpreters, should have begun here."
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
107
The question is, "Of whom speaketh the
prophet this? (the matter of prophecy) of
himself, or of some other man?" "He began
at the same scripture (not at the same chapter
or verse, as they were divided into chapters in
the year 1240, and into verses 1445,) and
preached to him Jesus." The plain sense is,
he explained the prophecy concerning Christ
Jesus.* Under Philip's development of this
prophecy, the Eunuch received sufficient in-
struction on the subject of baptism, to ask for
and receive it.
Now, the important question is, what part of
this prophecy led Philip to unfold the subject of
baptism; and the Eunuch to ask for, and re-
ceive it? Let the careful reader turn to this
remarkable prophecy, bearing in mind that
Jesus Christ claims, the NATIONS of the
earth, as the purchase of his blood, and has
commanded that they shall be discipled, bap-
tized, &c. Turn, I say, to this prophecy, and
there read this glorious proclamation: "So
shall he sprinkle many nations" &c. Isaiah
*Our friend Campbell and his disciples will
possibly agree with us that Philip explained the
prophecy; as a shorter text would have made
him a textuary, and it would have taken him
"too long to have gone through the book, ex-
plaining only one or two verses in a discourse.”
This, according to those greal men, would have
been inconsistent with the character of a reli-
gious teacher.
108
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
52: 15. How strikingly does this harmonize
with "Go disciple all nations, baptizing them,
&c." Here the subject of baptism was fairly
before the Eunuch in the very commencement
of the passage explained by Philip. Upon
this passage, "So shall he (Christ) sprinkle
many nations," and that in Ezekiel. 36: 25,
"Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you,"
&c. it is presumable the Jews predicated the
idea that Christ would baptize his subjects
when he came as the Messiah: hence their
question to John the Baptist, "Why baptizest
thou then if thou be not the Christ," &c.
John 1. If he were the Christ, they expected
him to baptize (according to the above predic-
tions.) Now, as the Eunuch was undoubtedly
baptized according to the prophecy he read,
and from which Philip preached to him his
first lessons (probably) on the subject of bap-
tism. He was most certainly baptized by
sprinkling. But, "they went down both into
the water, both Philip and the Eunuch, and he
baptized him." Yes, they went into the water;
this was one thing; and he baptized (or sprin-
kled) him; this was another thing altogether.
Whether they went literally into, or merely to,
the water, as inany learned critics contend, is
a circumstance, we conceive, of no great im-
portance in this case, as it was just as easy to
have baptized him by sprinkling in the water
as on dry land: and as they were travelling in
the desert, of course they would be under the
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
109
necessity of going to the water "together."
This prediction, "So shall he sprinkle mány
nations," &c. most evidently must receive its
accomplishment in the baptism of the "na²
tions," agreeably to the great commission;
"Go disciple all nations, baptizing them," &c.
We conclude, from every circumstance of the,
case, that the Eunuch was baptized by sprink-
ling, and not by immersion; as this is specifi-
cally the mode taught him by the prophecy,
from which he learned he ought to be baptized.
Consequently, to "Sprinkle the nations,"
"To sprinkle clean water upon them," is to
baptize them according to the word of inspira-
tion. Let it not be forgotten that the nations
to be baptized, are composed of men, women
and children.
CHAPTER XI.
THE BAPTISM OF PAUL.
"How was this man baptized?” We an-
swer, and can prove, that he was baptized in a
private house, and in an erect posture. To the
law, and to the testimony. Let us go to Da-
mascus-into the street which is called straight,
and enquire in the house of Judas for one
called "Saul of Tarsus." Acts 9:11. Ana-
nias, who baptized him, is there seen "coming
110
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
in." Ver. 12. Yes, by the command of the
Lord, he "entered into the house." Ver. 17.
Not a word said, or even hinted, respecting him
and Saul going out. But on the spot-in the
very place where Ananias found him-there it
was, that "he received sight forthwith, and
arose, and was baptized." Ver. 18. This ac-
count is short, but plain, and sufficiently satis-
factory to any candid, unbiassed mind. If we
may not positively say how this man was bap-
tized, we may most assuredly say how he was
not baptized; it was not, it could not have
been by immersion. But we are not bound to
prove a negative. The burden of proof lies
on the other side-on those who affirm that he
was baptized in that mode. Such proof has
not, and we are bold to say can never be pro-
duced. We proceed to prove our position from
evidence that can neither be questioned or con-
troverted-from the very language used by the
Holy Ghost in ver. 18: "He arose (anastas)
and was baptized." The Greek participle
anastas, partaking at once the qualities of the
noun and verb, will settle this matter beyond
doubt, or cavil. The literal and plain render-
ing of anastas ebaptisthe, is, having stood up,
he was baptized. Dr. Parkhurst, who was ho
yesterday critic, says the word signifies, "To
stand again, to rise from a sitting or recumbent
posture." A few examples will clearly show
that this rendering is just. "He (Jesus) went
into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
111
10:26,
stood up (anaste) to read."-"But Jesus took
him by the hand and lifted him up, and he
arose," (anaste) or it should be, "he stood
up.""And there stood up (anastas) one of
them named Agabus," &c.—“But Peter took
him up, saying, stand up," (anastethi.) Luke
4: 16. Mark 9: 27, Acts 10: 26, 11: 28.
The inquisitive critical reader may further
consult Mat, 9: 9; Mark 1: 35, 2: 14, and
also in the chapter where Paul's baptism is re-
corded, he will find this word six other times
used to denote an erect posture, viz: v. 6, 11,
34, 39, 40. But we have reserved one pas-
sage which settles the matter, completely and
fully, the transactors themselves being judges;
it is Mark 14: 60: "And the high priest stood
up (anastas) in the midst and asked Jesus,"
&c. Here the identical word, anastas, is used
by the Holy Ghost, to express the posture of
the high priest, when he "stood up," and the
translators have so rendered it in the verse just
cited. Now, let us read, compare and con-
clude. Mark 14: 60-"And the high priest,
(anastas) stood up in the midst, and asked
Jesus," &c. Acts 9: 18-"And (Saul) anas-
tas, stood up, and was baptized." Now, put
all these things together, and the amount of the
whole is this:--"On a certain day, in the city
of Damascus, on a street of that city called
Straight," and in the house of Judas "there
was a man called Saul of Tarsus, who was
three days without sight, and neither did eat
112
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
nor drink;" "that a certain disciple at Damas
cus," by the command of the Lord Jesus Christ,
the great head of the church, "entered into the
house," and there, "in the house of Judas,"
putting his hands on Saul, "he received his
sight forthwith, and stood up, (anastas) and
was baptized." Here the plain, simple nar-
rative, the unvarnished detail of circumstan-
ces, both the original and translation, the Greek
and English, the posture of the body in having
been upright-all go to settle the question as to
the mode of baptism;-it could not have been
dipping, or plunging the body into the water
all over.
".
The humble believer, therefore, who has
stood up, and received baptism like Paul, in
the midst of a solemn congregation, in the
church, or in the house of a friend, need never
be ashamed, or alarmed, should he hear his
baptism censured and condemned a thousand
times, and himself proscribed as not belonging
to Christ's visible kingdom: for if Paul was
baptized, really and truly, so is he. And the
honest minister who officiates in baptism, like
Ananias, when he baptized his converts; male
and female standing up, or in an erect posture,
need never be confounded when he has such an
eminent gospel example before him as the case
of Ananias baptizing in the house of Judas,
and in an erect posture, such a man as Saul of
Tarsus, afterwards the great Apostle of the
Gentiles." Pedo-baptist, No. 1 v. 1 pp. 11, 12.
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
113
CHAPTER XII.
MODE OF BAPTISM CONTINUED.
In this chapter we will briefly present to the
consideration of the reader three different ca-
ses of baptism mentioned in the holy scrip-
tures:
1. The first of these cases is that of the
three thousand who were baptized on the day
of Pentecost. Let it be remembered that it
was the third hour of the day, or nine o'clock
in the morning, when the multitudes came run-
ning together, to see and hear the occurrence
which had taken place among the disciples;
that after this, Peter and the other Apostles
spent a considerable time in preaching to them,
before any were baptized; and that the day
must have been far spent, before the work of
baptizing could possibly have been commenced.
We cannot, therefore, suppose that more than
one half of the day was employed in baptiz-
ing these three thousand persons. Add to this
that we have no evidence that any were em-
ployed in baptizing on this occasion, except the
twelve Apostles. Here, then, were three thou-
sand persons to be baptized by twelve men, in
the space of six hours; that is two hundred
and fifty to each administrator. This would
be less than one and a half minutes to each
subject. Now, is it possible, unless they were
H
114
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
specially assisted by a miraculous influence,
that twelve men could have immersed this mul-
titude in so short a time? We think not;-and
as there is no intimation of any thing miracu-
lous in this part of the transactions of that
day, we conclude that it is altogether improba-
ble that all these persons were immersed. Be-
sides, to have immersed so many in so short a
time, would have required many places where
there was an abundance of water, which could
not have been so readily obtained in Jerusa-
lem, especially in that season of the year, when
the springs in that country were generally very
low. Add to this, that there is no intimation
of their going out in search of such places, or
of any change of apparel; both of which
would have been necessary, and from the cir-
cumstances of the case, could not have been
provided until the very time they were needed.
These facts being admitted, and they cannot be
readily contradicted, there is every reason to
think that the apostles baptized by effusion or
sprinkling, and not by immersion.
The second case to which we shall direct
your attention, is that of Cornelius and his
friends, who were baptized by the Apostle Pe-
ter, as is recorded in Acts 10. In respect to
this case, it is worthy of remark, that Corne-
lius "had called together his kinsmen and near
friends," who, probably, were numerous, and,
when added to the family of Cornelius, com-
posed a considerable congregation. These per-
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
115
sons were all Gentiles, and entirely unac-
quainted with the nature of the instructions
which they were to receive, until they heard
them from the lips of the apostle; they could
not, therefore, be prepared with suitable chan-
ges of apparel for the purpose of being im-
mersed. As soon as Peter came to the house
of Cornelius, he was introduced to this assem-
bly, and began to address them in the name of
Jesus Christ. While he was thus addressing
them, the Holy Ghost fell upon them; the evi-
dence of which was indubitable; insomuch,
that the Jewish christians who had accompa-
nied Peter, and who were present, though they
"were astonished," could not gainsay it. Then
Peter, addressing himself to those Jewish-chris-
tians, said, "Can any man forbid water that
these should not be baptized, which have re-
ceived the Holy Ghost as well as we." It is
natural to understand these words to mean, can
any man forbid water from being brought in
here? for it was in the house of Cornelius, in
the presence of that assembly, at the very time
of these transactions, that Peter made this in-
quiry. We cannot, therefore, without a very
forced and unnatural construction of his words,
and that in defiance of the circumstances in
which they were uttered, understand him to in-
quire, can any man forbid our going out to
some pond, river, or fountain of water, to bap-
tize these Gentiles? The subsequent verses
represent, that the baptism of these persons.
.
116
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
took place immediately in the place where they
were then assembled. Peter commanded them
to be baptized, which being immediately done,
the religious services were closed; and then
these Gentile christians entreated him to tarry
with them a few days. All the circumstances
of the case, therefore, seem to say, that water
was brought into the house of Cornelius, into
the very apartment where they were assem-
bled, and that these persons were baptized im-
mediately on the spot; and, consequently, that
they were baptized by effusion, or sprinkling,
and not by immersion. And it would certainly
be a matter of some surprise, on the presump-
tion that they were immersed, that no mention
is made of looking or enquiring for a suitable
place, for the purpose of baptizing this compa--
ny, and that there is nothing said concerning a
change of dress. There is a strong presump-
tion, therefore, in this case also, in favor of
baptism by effusion or sprinkling.
The third and last case which we shall pre-
sent to your consideration, is that of the Phil-
ippian Jailer and his family, recorded in Acts
16. This jailer had thrust Paul and Silas into
a dungeon, and made their feet fast in the
stocks. In this situation these apostles prayed
and sung praises to God. While they were
thus glorifying their Heavenly Father, he in-
terposed in their behalf. Instantly the bolts
and bars gave way, and the prison doors flew
open. The jailer discovering that the prison
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
117
▾
doors were open, and supposing that the prison-
ers were all gone, and that he would be held
accountable for their absence, attempted to
take his own life. This was prevented, by his
being informed by Paul, that the prisoners were
all safe. Then the jailer called for a light,
hastened into the prison rooms, and finding
every thing as Paul had declared to him, was
led to reflect on his own lost and sinful condi-
tion; when he came and prostrated himself be-
fore these persecuted servants of Jesus Christ,
anxiously inquiring what he must do to be
saved? The same hour of the night he took
Paul and Silas out of the "inner prison,
washed their stripes, and was baptized, he and
all his family immediately. It is a rational
conclusion, from the circumstances here re-
corded, that the jailer's residence was under
the prison roof; that though he took the apos-
tles out of the inner prison or dungeon, he did
not take them beyond the confines of the prison
walls; that he and his family were baptized
in the outer prison; and, therefore, that they
were baptized by efusion or sprinkling.

►
""
The reader will particularly observe—
1. They were “cast into prison; verse 23.
2. "Thrust into the INNER PRISON;"
verse 24.
3. When the doors flew open, the jailer
"sprang in (of course to the INNER PRISON)
and fell down before Paul and Silas;" ver. 29,
4. "And brought them out" (of the inner
118
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
prison) to the outer prison, just where they
were first lodged by the magistrates; verse 30.
5. Here in the outer prison their stripes
were washed, and they administered baptism,
at midnight.
6. The jailer brought them "into his house;"
verse 34; which was another apartment con-
nected with the prison, and under the prison
roof; for in this very apartment Paul consid-
ered himself in prison; for it was here he
learned that the magistrates sent to "let these
men go;" verse 35. To which Paul replied-
"They have beaten us openly uncondemned,
being Romans, and have cast us into prison;
and now do they thrust us out privily? Nay,
verily; but let them come themselves, and
fetch us out;" verse 37. This would have
been downright hypocrisy-if they had slipped
out the night before, to some pond or river, and
then back again to the prison, and then make
their persecutors believe they would not leave
the prison until taken out "publicly." Such
a scene was never acted by an apostle of Jesus
Christ; and it must be a very bad cause that
requires such hypocrisy to support it.
In reviewing the circumstances already no-
ticed, it is worthy of remark, that there is no
mention made in the New Testament of going
to any pond, river, stream, or fountain of wa-
ter, for the sole purpose of baptizing, except it
be in the case of Philip and the Eunuch, and
they were travelling on the highway; it was
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
119
in the Eunuch's carriage where Philip preached
to him, in which no water could be had, and he
was baptized at the first water to which they
could have access. Even this exception, there-
fore, will not at all affect the conclusion at
which we wish to arrive. As it respects other
cases, John the Baptist preached and baptized
at the same places, viz: at Jordan and Enon,
near to Salem. The apostles, on the day of
Pentecost, appear to have baptized at the place
of their public assembly, as there is no men-
tion made of their going elsewhere for this pur-
pose. Cornelius and his friends were, proba-
bly, baptized in his house, where Peter preach-
ed to them. The jailer and his family were
baptized under the prison roof, being the place
where the apostles taught him the way of sal-
vation through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
To these examples there is nothing of a con-
trary nature to oppose, as far as scripture evi-
dence is concerned; and, therefore, as far as
we can derive information from the New Tes-
tament to direct our practice, we conclude, that
the time and place of public worship is the
proper time and place to administer christian
baptism.
120
TREATISE ON BAPTISM,
CHAPTER XIII.
HISTORY OF THE MODE OF BAPTISM.
It is sometimes contended "that baptism was
universally performed by immersion for the
first 1300 years." This assertion we have
proven to be essentially incorrect, as we have
shown that pouring or sprinkling, and not im-
mersion, was practised by the apostles of Je-
sus Christ in the first century. We admit
that immersion was practised in the second
century, and so were many other superstitious:
appendages to baptism,-immersion three
times, anointing with oil, signing with the
sign of the cross, imposition of hands, exor-
cism, eating milk and honey, putting on of
white garments, all connected with baptism,
and first mentioned by Turtullian; the inven-
tion of men like himself, who were superstitious
to a degree worthy of the darkest ages.
1. Neither TURTULLIAN nor CYPRIAN de-
nied the validity of baptism by pouring or
sprinkling, and even practised it among the
sick, nor did they immerse them if they after-
ward recovered health.--Cyp. Epis. 69. Here
then, we have immersion and effusion in the
second century.
2. IRENEUS, in 67 years of the apostolic
age, mentions a sect of christians who baptized
by effusion -Advers, Herses Lib. 1, c. 39.
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
121
3. "NOVATIAN became a christian about one
hundred years after the apostles, and was bap-
tized by EFFUSION or SPRINKLING.”-
Wall's Hist. Inf. Bap. pp. 353, 357. This,
then, was in the close of the second or begin-
ning of the third century.
4, "Sprinkling was" practised "in Africa in.
the third century."-ROBERTSON's History of
baptism, p. 402.
5. "CONSTANTINE the great, who died in the
fourth century (337) being clothed with a white-
garment, and laid upon his bed, was baptized
in a solemn manner by Eusebius, Bishop of
Nicomedia."-Dupin's His. Ecc. vol. 11, p. 84.
Also, Miller's Hist. of Prop. of Chris. vol. 1,
p. 392.
6. GENNADIUS of Marseilles, in the fifth
century, says, that baptism was administered
in the Gallic church in his time, indifferently,
by immersion or by SPRINKLING.-Wat-
son's Inst. p. 441.
7. DR. WALL says, "In the fifth century,
baptism was administered in France indiffer-
ently, by immersion and ASPERSION.".
His. of Inf. Bap. p. 357.
8. "POURING was anciently the establish-
ed mode of administering baptism in the Neth-
erlands."-Pond on Inf. Bap. p. 48.
9. The author of letters to Bishop Hoadly,
(a learned Baptist,) admits that "for thirteen
hundred years successively after the apostles,
SPRINKLING was permitted upon extraor-

122
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
dinary occasions."-Plain Act, &c. p. 16.
Here a learned and professed Baptist seems
clearly to concede all that is necessary in re-
gard to the testimony of history in favor of
sprinkling.
►
10. W. STRABO, who flourished in the ninth
century, considered pouring a valid mode of
baptism.De. Rebus. Ecc. chap. 26.
11. MR. ROBINSON, also a learned Baptist,
admits that, "before the reformation, SPRINK-
LING was held VALID in cases of necessi-
ty."-Hist. of Baptists, p. 116.
12. DR. REED says, "We do know that dip-
ping and SPRINKLING were both practised
in the second century; and each practice hath
been continued from that period to the present
time."
12. "ESTIUS, referring to times long before
the year thirteen hundred, witnesseth that
pouring had been much in use."---Clark's
Scrip. Ground of Inf. Bap. pp. 128, 129.
13. "In the thirteenth century THOMAS
AQUINAS says, "that baptism may be given,
not only by immersion, but also by effusion of
water or sprinkling with it." And ERASMUS
affirms, that in his time, it was the custom to
SPRINKLE infants in Holland, and to dip
them in England. Of these two modes, one
only was primitive and apostolic. Which that
was, we shall not just now consider. At pre-
sent it is only necessary to observe, that im-
mersion is not the only mode which can plead
TREATISE ON BAPTISM,
123
antiquity in its favor; and that as the supersti-
tion of antiquity appears to have gone most in
favor of baptism by immersion, this is a cir-
cumstance which affords a strong presumption,
that it was one of those additions to the ancient
rite, which superstition originated. This may
be made out almost to a moral certainty, with-
out referring at all to the argument from scrip-
ture.
·
The "ancient christians," the "primitive.
christians," as they are called by the advocates.
of immersion, that is, christians of about the
age of Tertullian and Cyprian, and a little
downward,-whose practice of immersion is
used as an argument to prove that mode only
to have had apostolic sanction,-baptized the
candidates NAKED. Thus WALL in his His-
tory of Baptism: "The ancient christians,
when they were baptized by immersion, were
all baptized NAKED, whether they were men,
WOMEN or children. They thought it better
represented the putting off of the old man, and
also the NAKEDNESS of Christ on the cross;
moreover, as baptism is a washing, they judg-
ed it should be the washing of the body, not of
the clothes." This is an instance of the man-
ner in which they affected to improve the em-
blematical character of the ordinance. Robin-
son (an able Baptist writer) also, in his History
of Baptism, states the same thing: "Let it be
observed, that the primitive christians BAPTI-
ZED NAKED.
There is no ancient historical
124
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
fact better authenticated than this." They,
however, says WALL, "took great care for pre-
serving the modesty of any woman who was
to be baptized. None but women came near
her till her body was in the water; then the
priest came, and putting her head also under
water, he departed and left her to the WO-
MEN." Now, if antiquity be pleaded as a
proof that immersion was the really primitive
mode of baptizing, it must be pleaded in favour
of the gross and offensive circumstance of
baptizing NAKED; which was considered of
as much importance as the other: and then we
may safely leave it for any one to say, wheth-
er he really believes that the three thousand
persons mentioned in the acts of the apostles
were baptized NAKED; and whether, when
St. Paul baptized LYDIA, she was put into the
water NAKED by her women, and that the
apostle then hastened "to put her head under
water also, using the form of baptism, and re-
tired, leaving her to the women" to take her
away to dress. Immersion, with all its appen-
dages, dipping three times, NAKEDNESS,
unction, the eating of milk and honey, exor-
cism, &c. bears manifest marks of that disposi
tion to improve upon God's ordinances, for
which even the close of the second century was
remarkable, and which laid the foundation of
that general corruption which so speedily fol-
lowed." See Watson's Institutes pp. 441, 442.
From these authorities it seems evident that
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
125
pouring and sprinkling have been practised in
every age; by the APOSTLES in the first
century, and churches of God ever since; the
assertions of immersionists to the contrary not-
withstanding.
CHAPTER XIV.
BURIED BY
BAPTISM.
Rom. vi: 2, 3, 4.
"How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any
longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of
us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were bap-
tized into his death? Therefore, we are buried
with him by baptism into death; that like as
Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory
of the Father, even so we also should walk in
newness of life."
Our Baptist brethren think they are here
taught the design and mode of water baptism;
whereas we think, it has nothing to do with
either. The baptism of the Holy Spirit, with
its glorious EFFECTS upon the human soul is
undoubtedly the subject matter of these verses.
To support the views of the Baptists, it should
have read, "Know ye not that so many of us as
were immersed into water, (not into Christ)
were immersed into his water, (not his death.)
Therefore we are immersed with him by im-
mersion into water, (not into death,) that like
126
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
as Christ was raised up from the dead by the
glory of the Father, even so we also should be
lifted up out of the water and walk on dry land,
(not in newness of life.) And to support Camp-
bellism it should have added at every point "for
the remission of sins."
Then as they go in for the literal meaning
of the Book, the matter would be settled. But
as it is the passage is against them.
A little greater liberty with this text, than
Mr. Campbell has already taken, will possibly
bolster up Campbellism in a future edition of
his Testament.
This baptism is the very same that is men-
tioned by St. Paul, 1 Cor. 12: 13. "For by
one Spirit, (not one water) are we all baptized
into one body, into Christ, (not into water)
whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we
be bond or free.”
In
The death, burial and resurrection, mention-
cd in the text, must be understood in a moral,
or spiritual point of view, or we must suppose
St. Paul was a very incoherent reasoner.
the context, he was endeavouring to reconcile
the converted Jews, to the Gentile converts,
and gives them to understand, that, although
the sin and degradation of the Gentiles was
very great; yet God's abounding grace was
more than equal to their degeneracy, there-
fore, they might be saved.. And lest the con-
verted Gentiles should abuse this doctrine of
grace, he guards it by asking the question,
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
127
(verse 1.) "Shall we continue in sin that grace
may abound??" He answered "God forbid,
how shall we, that are dead to sin live any lon-
ger therein?" He then proceeds to show, that
it would be inconsistent with their character,
and obligations to God, to live in sin; as by the
spirit of God, they "were baptized INTO JE-
SUS CHRIST:" (not into water,) were "bap-
tized into his death;" (not into water,) were
"buried with him by baptism into death;” (not
into water,) that like as Christ was raised up
from the dead by the glory of the Father, even
so, we also (having exprienced the "power of
his resurrection, and the fellowship of his suf-
ferings, being made conformable to his death,"
Phil. 3: 10,) "should walk in newness of life."
Yea, that they should "reckon" themselves
"dead indeed unto SIN; but alive unto God,"
(verse 11.) All this perfectly corresponds with
the passage quoted from the first letter to the
Corinthians. For BY one SPIRIT are we all
baptized into one BODY, (Christ's mystical bo-
by,) whether we be Jews or Gentiles," &c.
Also, Gal. 3: 27. For as many of you as
have been baptized INTO CHRIST (not wa-
ter) have put on Christ." Does it not clearly
appear from the Holy Scriptures that all who
are baptized by the Spirit of God, are in a
moral or spiritual sense "in Christ Jesus,"
"made conformable unto his death,” “burial,”
and “resurrection?" And is not all this effect-
ed by the same power that raised Christ from
128
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
the dead? Why then, wade ponds, rivers, and
lakes, to find the explication of this text; rath-
er than admit, that it teaches the renovation of
our natures by the baptism of the Holy Ghost?
The fact is, there is no man living that can find
in the inspired book of God, a single passage in
which, water baptism is called a BURIAL,
much less may he hope to find death, burial,
and resurrection, mentioned as the effects of
water baptism.
Water baptism administered in any mode
with which we are acquainted, is unlike to bu-
rials of any nation of the Globe. To make a
sudden pop under water, emblematical of a
burial, is as far fetched a conceit, and as great
an abuse of language, and common sense, as
any which adorns the pages of Alexander
Campbell. Surely nothing more can be neces-
sary to convince the reader, that St. Paul in
Romans 6th, speaks of spiritual, and not wa-
ter baptism, than carefully to consider the glo-
rious EFFECTS ascribed to that baptism.
1. “Baptized into Jesus Christ."`"There-
fore, if any man be in Christ, he is a new
creature: old things are passed away; behold,
all things are become new." 2 Cor. 5: 17.
There is therefore now no condemnation to
them which are in Christ Jesus, &c." Rom.
8: 1. For we are his workmanship, created
in Christ Jesus unto good works, &c." "In
whom (Christ) all the building, fitly framed to-
gether, groweth unto an holy temple in the
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
129
Lord: In whom ye also are builded together
for an habitation of God through the Spirit."
Phil. 3:10. According to these declarations,
to be "baptized into Christ," is to experience
God's creative and renewing power, which
forms a vital union between the soul and Christ.
It is not water, but spiritual baptism, that ef
fects this.
2. "Baptized into his death." As Christ
really died fer sin, so we really die to sin, con-
sequently are represented as being "planted to-
gether in the likeness of his death," that by
"newness of life," we may be "in the likeness
of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our
old man is crucified with him, that the body of
sin might be destroyed," verses 5, 6. Hence
says the Apostle, "Likewise reckon ye also
yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive
unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord,"
verse 11. How shall we, that are dead to sin,
live any longer therein? verse 2. Here theti
is the death produced by this baptism, a death
to sin; and it certainly does not require the
wisdom of Solomon to know, it must be a spir-
itual baptism, that produces this effect. But
it is thought that immersion in water represents
the death of Christ. Can any man discern any
possible similarity between dipping a man un-
der water, and the hanging of Christ on the
Cross? Certainly not. But there is reason
in saying, when we are "Crucified to the
I
·
130
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
world," and die to sin, we are planted in the
likeness of his death."
3. “Buried with him in baptism INTO
DEATH." As Christ died and was buried, so
are his people not only "dead to sin, but buried
out of, or delivered from, the "filthiness of the
flesh and spirit." 2 Cor. 7: 1. Christ's death
and burial out of the natural world, are here
represented by the death and burial of his pec-
ple out of the pollutions of the moral world.
Here we have a burial corresponding to the
death, when the passage is understood in its
connexion and spiritual light-whereas, if it
be understood literally, the baptized must ab-
solutely be put to death by water. But it is
thought that immersion represents the "burial"
of Christ. Now, I ask, is there any possible
similarity in plunging a man under water, and
placing the body of Christ in a Sepulchre that
was hewn out of the side of a rock, which was
closed by rolling a stone to the door? Not one
particle.
4. "That like as Christ was RAISEN up from
the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we
also should walk in newness of life." As
Christ after his death and burial, was raised
from the dead by the glorious energy or power
of God, so God's people experience the resur-
rection power by the baptism of the Holy
Ghost. For by one spirit are we all baptized
into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles,
whether we be bond or free, &c." 1. Cor. 12.
TREATISE ON BAPTISM,
131
•
•
13, “That I may know him, and the power of
his resurrection, and the fellowship of his suf-
ferings, being made conformable unto his
death," Phil. 3: 10. If ye then be risen with
Christ, seck those things which are above, &c."
Col: 3:1. These passages go to show, that
rising with Christ to NEWNESS OF LIFE
does not mean, rising up out of the WATER,
to represent the resurrection of Christ; but that
the dead in sin, by the power of God, are
brought to spiritual life. Hence the expres
sion "we know that we have passed from death
unto life, (not because we have been in the
water,) but because we love the brethren," &c.
1 John 3:14. How forcible the following
verse: "Buried with him in baptism, wherein
ye also are risen with him (not from water by
the hands of a minister,) but through the faith
of the operation of God, who hath raised him
from the dead." When "buried" (as it is
called) in water baptism we are raised by the
hands of the minister; when buried by spirit-
ual baptism, we are raised "through the faith
of the OPERATION OF GOD.” Col. 2:12.
5. “Know ye not, that so many of us as
were baptized into Jesus Christ, were bap-
tized into his death." Here our Apostle ap-
peals to their knowledge of the relation they
bore to God by baptism. Was it by water or
the Spirit, that they had knowledge of their
death to sin? Let the word of God decide.
"Now we have received, not the spirit of the
132
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
world, but the Spirit which is. of God, that we
might know the things that are fully given
to us of God." .1 Cor. 2: 12. "The Spirit
itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we
are the children of God." Rom. 8: 16.
From these passages it seems that it is not
the recollection of our struggle in some pond or
river, that “beareth witness with our spirits,
that we are the children of God;" but, "the
Spirit itself." And according to St. John,
He that believeth on the Son of God, hath the
witness in himself;" Campbellism to the con-
trary notwithstanding.
We have been more particular in the inves-
tigation of this text, as on it is predicated the
doctrine, that the death, burial, and resurrec-
tion of Christ, are represented by immersion-
a doctrine it certainly does not contain.
CHAPTER XV.
BORN OF WATER AND THE SPIRIT.
John III: 5.
"Jesus answered, verily, verily, I say unto
thee, except a man be born of water and of the
Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of
God." We cannot believe that there is the
most distant allusion to water baptism in this
text, nor are we alone in this opinion. The
典
​TREATISE ON BAPTISM:
133
celebrated Dr. Clark says, "It is not necessary
that by water and the Spirit (in this place,) we
should understand two different things: "It is
probably only an elliptical form of speech, for
the Holy Spirit, under the similitude of water;
as in Mark 3: 11, the Holy Ghost and fire, do
not mean two things, but one; namely, the Ho-
ly Ghost under the similitude of fire-pervad-
ing every part, refining and purifying the
whole,"
Again, he says, "Therefore, our
Lord asserts that a man must be born of water
and the Spirit, i. e. of the Holy Ghost, which,
represented under the similitude of water,
cleanses, refreshes, and purifies the soul-
Clarke's Notes.
·
Mr. Henry, (an able Commentator on the
Holy Scriptures,) after quoting the text, "born
of water and of the Spirit," says, "that is, of
the Spirit working like water." First, that
which is primarily intended here, is to show
that the Spirit in sanctifying a soul, first cleans-
es it and purifies it, as water takes away its
filth, by which it was unfit for the kingdom of
God. It is the washing of regeneration.
Titus 3: 5. Secondly, the Spirit cools and
refreshes the soul, as water doth the hunted
hart and the weary traveller." (See his note.)
The same sentiment was ably supported by
Mr. Jennings, in his debate with Mr. Camp-
bell, in which the utter worthlessness of the
Campbellite explication was fairly exhibited.
We will now offer several important consider
134
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
·
ations against the opinion, that water baptism
is alluded to in the text.
4
•
1. The connection of the passage is against
that idea. Christ had just said to Nichodemus,
"Except a man be born again, he cannot see
the kingdom of God." (Verse 3.) Nichode
mus did not know what was meant by the new
birth, and supposed it a thing impossible to an
old man hence the question, "How can a man
be born when he is old?" &c. (Verse 4)
"Jesus answered, verily, verily, I say unto
thee, except a man be born of water and of the
Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of
God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh,
and that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit.
Marvel not that I said unto thee, ye must be
born again. The wind bloweth where it list-
eth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but
canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it
goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spir-
it."
From this language, it must be very
evident to the unprejudiced reader, that, by
“born again” (verse 3) was meant a spiritual
(and not watery) birth. This, then, is the
thing of which Nichodemus misconceived, and
which was further developed by the Saviour in
the use of the terms water, wind and Spirit.
Like the action of "water," it cleanses; like
that of "wind," it is strong and incomprehen-
sible; "That which is born of the Spirit is
Spirit," all of which go to show that the
thing mentioned by Christ, and misunderstood
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
135
by Nichodemus, was something spiritual, and
in some respects incomprehensible. This is
still more evident, from the fact, that Nichode-
mus still did not apprehend the nature of the
birth; for he finally said, "How can these
things be?" (Verse 9.) The 6th verse very
plainly shows that Christ was teaching some-
thing solely spiritual. "That which is born of
the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the
Spirit is Spirit." Is it possible for any man,
on close examination, to believe that Christ,
would have taken such a circuitous route to
teach water baptism, or, as a Campbellite
would have it, immersion; and then leave the
man wondering, "How can these things be?”
without telling him plainly, he meant, he must
be dipped under water? The fact is, in the
whole interview between Nichodemus and
Christ, neither of them used any such word as
baptize, or any of its derivatives.
2. Water is a favorite term with our Lord
to represent the Holy Spirit, and his reviving
and purifying grace.
"He that believeth on
me as the scriptures hath said, out of his belly
shall flow rivers of living water: But this
spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe
on him should receive," &c. John 7: 38, 39.
Although he here said "water," it is unequivo-
cally said, "this spake he of the Spirit." In
the same sense he used the term in his conver-
sation with the woman of Samaria. "If thou
knewest the gift of God, who it is that saith to
136
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
thee, give me to drink, thou wouldst have asked
of him and he would have given thee living
water. But whosoever drinketh of the water
that I shall give him, shall never thirst: but the
water that I shall give him, shall be in him a
well of water springing up into everlasting
life." John 4: 10, 14. "I will give unto hima
that is athirst of the fountain of the water of
life freely." Rev. 21: 6. "And he shewed
mé a pure river of water of life," &c. Rev.
22: 1. “And let him that is athirst, come;
and whosoever will, let him take the water of
life freely." (Verse 17.) "For 1 will pour
water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon
the dry ground; I will pour my Spirit upon
thy seed, and my blessings upon their off-
spring." Isa. 44: 3.
Isa. 44:3. Joel 2: 28, 29. Many
other passages might be adduced which exhibit
the same figurative use of "water.". We con-
tend, therefore, that as water is a favorite term
for the Spirit and his gracious influence, and
the context only teaches a spiritual birth; that
“born again”—“born of water and Spirit”-
"born of the Spirit," mean the same which is
realized under the influence of the Spirit, as
rivers of living water"-"living water"-
"pure rivers of water of life"-"floods upon
the dry ground;" concerning all which it
be truly said, "This spake he of the Spirit,"
and not of immersion.
•

may
3. Water baptism is not called a BIRTH
in all the book of God. Neither Christ, nor
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
137
his apostles, ever called it a birth, or represent-
ed it as such. We are said to be born of God;
because we are "born from above," "born of
the Spirit," "created in Christ," made "new
creatures," made "spiritual," and of the family
of God, &c. &c. by the renovating power of
God, with which "old things" are made to “pass
away," and "behold all things become new.
What, of all this, takes place by water baptism?
Just nothing. The “birth of water," over
which Campbellites figure so largely, is one of
the whimsies of the nineteenth century.
99
4. Passages of similar construction fre-
quently occur in the Holy Scriptures. "Born
of water and the Spirit"-"He'shall baptize
you with the Holy Ghost and with fire"-
"Washing of regeneration and the renewing of
the Holy Ghost"—"Which he shed on us abun-
dantly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour."
Titus 3: 5, 6, The washing of regeneration.
and renewing of the Holy Ghost, mean not
two things, but one; and that cannot be im-
mersion, as it is "SHED ON US abundantly," &c.
We will here let a Campbellite tell us what
is meant by the baptism of the Holy Ghost
and fire, in the Holy Spirit and fire" "We
have a variety of familiar constructions; in the
Holy Scriptures (says he,) born of water and
Spirit-Spirit and power of Elias-I con-
ferred not with flesh and blood--wrestle not
against flesh and blood-partakers of flesh
and blood-guilty of the body and blood--
138
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
•
worship him in Spirit and truth, &c. Now
surely when the Lord Jesus said to Nichode-
mus, "Ye (Jews) must be born again,” he did
not mean that some of them were to be born of
water and others of Spirit; neither can the
scriptures mean that there was to be one going
forth of John the Baptist in the spirit of Elias,
and a second going forth in his power; nor did
the apostles intimate that there was one wrest-
ling with flesh and another with blood; or that
an undiscerning disciple could be guilty at one
time of the body, and at another time of the
blood of the Lord. Surely Christ did not indi-
cate by his words to the Samaritan woman,
that one man shortly would worship God in
Spirit, and another in truth. I conclude, then,
from these particulars, and others which might
be adduced, that neither is it meant by in Holy
Spirit and fire, that there would be TWO
BAPTISMS-one in the Holy Spirit and an-
other in fire; the one for saints and the other
for sinners."* We will now let Alexander
Campbell try his hand, and see if he will not
make born of water and Spirit mean one, in-
stead of two things. After he attempts to
prove that immersion, regeneration, and the
new birth are the same, he comes to this con-
*This disciple was opposing the views of his
brethren, who think that the baptism of fire is
hell fire, or the wrath of God, into which the
sinner is to be immersed. See Evangelist,
Vol. 2, No. 2, p. 46,

TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
139
elusion: "For if immersion be equivalent to
regeneration, and regeneration be of the same
import with being born again, then being born
again and being immersed, are the SAME
THING." (See first Extra M. H. p. 28.)
Agreeably to this, to be born again, and to be
baptized are not two things but one. Conse-
quently, to be born of water and Spirit are not
TWO things but one. Here then, Mr. Camp-
bell being judge, the terms "water and Spirit"
may regard one, and not two things. Now, as
it seems there is an allusion to but one thing, or
birth in the text, we ask any man who is not
shrouded in midnight darkness by sectarian
bigotry, whether the text teaches a watery or
spiritual birth? "That which is born of the
Spirit is Spirit." Is that which is immersed
"Spirit?".
5. Christian baptism was not instituted un-
til upwards of two years after Christ said to
Nichodemus "Except a man be born of water
and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the king-
dom of God." John's baptism, (an institute of
another dispensation,) was in use, but upwards
of two years had to roll round before christian
baptism could be instituted, as the christian dis-
pensation could not usher in until the death of
Christ, and the close of the legal dispensation.
The whole tenor of the interview with Nicho-
demus, goes to prove that Christ taught Nicho-
demus, what was then essential to his salva-
tion, and the salvation of everý other man; and
-
140
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
*
not what would be essential upward of two
years hence, in another dispensation, when
christian baptism should be instituted. This
must be a very knotty place to a Campbellite
in the application of this text to his watery
birth; as they agree that christian baptism was
not instituted until Christ rose from the dead.
That Christ was instructing Nichodemus in re-
gard to something already realized in the
church, and not a thing to be instituted two
years hence, is evident from the question asked
Nichodemus "Art thou a master of Israel,
and knowest not these things?" A master of
Israel ought to have been born from above, in-
stead of being a stranger to the new birth.
But he could not have received christian bap-
tism as it was not yet instituted. Nor can we
believe that Christ taught Nichodemus, that his
only chance for Heaven, was, to live two years
longer and be dipped under water.
6. The thief upon the cross, was saved with-
out water baptism; therefore Christ never said,
"Except a man be baptized (born) of water,
&c. he cannot enter into the kingdom of Hea-
ven,"
We conclude finally, that to be "born
of water and of the Spirit," is to be born of
that Spirit which is empliatically called “water
of life" "Living water," &c. &c.
We object to the Campbellite use of this
text-
1. Because it does violence to the context,
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
141
2. Because it makes immersion à thorough
qualification for the kingdom of IIcaven.
3. Because it is inconsistent with scripture,
and the nature of things, to call water baptism
a birth, and much more so, to call immersion a
birth.
4. Because it makes Christ enjoin immersion
on Nichodemus and others near two hundred
years before any such superstition crept into
the church, and above two years before chris-
tian baptism was instituted.
5. Because it makes Christ contradict him-
self in the case of the thief upon the cross.
6. Because it represents hundreds of thou-
sands of the brightest ornaments of the church
of God (who were never immersed,) as destitutc
of the new birth, and in the broad road to ruin.
7. Because it is a blow at the root of all ex-
perimental and practical religion, and is one of
the visions of him whose light has become
darkness; and how great is that darkness!
CHAPTER XVI.
BAPTISM IN REFERENCE TO REMISSION OF SINS.
Acts XI: 38.
"Then Peter said unto them, Repent and be
baptized every one of you in the name of Je-
sus Christ for the remission of sins; and ye
shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."
142
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
Mr. Campbell and his disciples use this text
to prove-
1. That under the gospel dispensation, the
pardon of sin and gift of the Holy Ghost can-
not be received previous to baptism, (or as they
call it, immersion.)
2. "That baptism is the only appointed
means or way of the pardon of sin."
3. That all who are haptized, believing his-
torically, (for Campbell says there is no great-
er faith) that Jesus Christ is the Son of God,
is infullibly and absolutely born of God, and
is made as innocent, as clean, as unspotted as
an angel.
A few quotations will satisfy the reader that
we do not misrepresent their views: "He
(God) appointed baptism to be, to every one
that believe the record he has given of his Son,
a formal pledge on his part of that believer's
personal acquittal or pardon, so significant and
so expressive, that when the baptized believer
rises out of the water, is born of water, en-
ters the world the second time, he enters it as
innocent, as clean, as unspotted as an angel."
-Debate with McCalla, by A. Campbell, p. 137.
"In, and by the act of immersion, so soon as
our bodies are put under the water, at that very
instant our former or old sins are all washed
away, provided only that we are true believ-
ers."
Christian Baptist, vol. 5, p. 100.
"It is quite suflicient to show that the for-
giveness of sins and christian immersion werc,


TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
143
in their first proclamation by the holy apostles,
INSEPARABLY CONNECTED TOGETH-
ER." C. B. vol. 5, p. 160.
*
"For obtaining this (the Holy Spirit in the
pardon of sin and purification of the heart)
there must be some appointed way; and that
means or way is immersion,” C. B. vol. 5,
p. 223.
"The actual enjoyment of forgiveness, ac-
ceptance; adoption, and the gift of the Holy
Spirit, are, by a gracious necessity, made con-
sequent on a believing immersion." C. B. vol.
5, p. 269.
"Remission of sins cannot in this life be re-
ceived and enjoyed previous to immersion."
1 Extra M. Harbinger, p. 34.
"Immersion ALONE was that act of turn-
ing to God." 1 E. M. H. p. 35.
A fudge for all this vapouring about immer-
sion! We will now offer unequivocal and in-
spired authority directly against these sayings,
and the three specified positions predicated on
the text.
1. The case of the Gentiles in the house öf
Cornelius: "To him give all the prophcts wit
ness, that through his name whosoever believ-
eth in him shall receive remission of sins.
While Peter yet spake these words the Holy
Ghost fell on all them which heard the word:
And they of the circumcision which believed
were astonished, as many as came with Peter,
because that on the Gentiles also, was poured out
144
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
•
the gift of the Holy Ghost." Acts 10:43,45.
Here the Gentiles were pardoned-received
the Holy Ghost, &c. in the very act of hears
ing the gospel with faith. "While Peter yet
spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all
them," &e. This happened, not in the river,
but in the house of Cornelius. Nor was this
merely the gift of miracles. "Peter rose up
and said unto them, men and brethren, ye know
how that a good while ago, God made choice
among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth shall
hear the word of the gospel and believe: And
God which knoweth the hearts, bear them wit-
ness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he
did unto us; and pat no difference between
us and them, purifying their hearts by faith."
Acts 15: 7, 8, 9. This passage clearly shows
that they received the purifying influence of
the Spirit by faith as well as the miraculous
gift of the Spirit. And as a farther evidence
of this, Peter added, "Can any man forbid
water that these should not be baptized which
HAVE RECEIVED the Holy Ghost as well
as we?" Acts 10: 47. These passages must
outweigh a thousand volumes of the inventor
of the "womb of waters." St. Paul says,
“Let God be true, but every man (who denies
his truth) a liar."
2. The case of Simon of Samaria is to the
point: "Then Simon himself -believed also;
and when he was baptized," &c. Acts 8: 13.
He actually "believed" (historically, no doubt,
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
145 -
as a lower belief we are sure he could not
have,) and was baptized." But were his sins
forgiven? No! He was still in the gall of
bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity, (verse
23.) Simon "believed and was baptized,” but
not pardoned; therefore pardon and the gift of
the Holy Ghost are not INSEPARABLY
CONNECTED with such a baptism. But the
question is, why was he still in the "gall of
bitterness and bond of iniquity?" Peter said
to him "thy heart is not right in the sight of
God, (verse 21.) "Simon did not believe with
the heart unto righteousness"-had not the
faith that “worketh by love and purifies the
heart," but barely a historical faith or belief--
to all intents and purposes, the very descrip-
tion of faith professed and taught by Camp-
bellites as the ONLY gospel faith. Simon be-
lieved, was baptized, was still unpardoned, and
consequently destitute of the new birth. Had
he lived in this age of waterism he would un-
doubtedly have been considered as "innocent,
as clean, as unspotted as an angel." Sinion
was commanded to "repent and pray" for for-
giveness, and of course for the new birth.
Here then, is a plain case of seeking "remis-
sion of sins" and the gift of the Holy Ghost
after a believing baptism: and if ever Simon
got religion, it was in the use of other means,
and that after baptism. We therefore draw
the following plain inferences from the case:
1. That the pardon of sins and new birth
K
140
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
are not inseparably connected with a believing
(historically) baptism.
2. That all persons who have merely his-
torically "believed" the record of God, and
been baptized, and from that fact been taught
they were the children of God, have been
grossly deceived; and are still in the "gall of
bitterness and bond of iniquity."
3. That all such ought to "repent and pray"
for forgiveness, as the apostle directed Simon.
4. That as it was possible for Simon to ob-
tain pardon after baptism, and in the use of
other means, so it is possible for others in a sim-
ilar condition. Therefore, baptism is not the
only "means and way" of pardon.
5. We also infer from the case of the con-
versions in the house of Cornelius at Cesarea,
that men may be pardoned BEFORE being
baptized with water, and in the use of other
means, &c.
6. That we are "justified by faith," "the
children of God by faith," &c. and not by
water.
7. That therefore the Campbellism predica-
ted on the text at the head of this chapter, is
perfect rottenness, and their explanation worse
than senseless.
8. Finally, we assert, that water baptism
may be administered with propriety to a peni-
tent believer, not as the "regenerating act,"
but as one among many means favorable to
salvation, and the text is not abused when s0
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
147
applied; because pardon is inseparably con-
nected with evangelical repentance, (which
implies faith,) baptized or unbaptized.
CHAPTER XVII.
A SUMMARY VIEW OF THE MODE OF BAPTISM.
Having now noticed the various important
passages and events recorded in the scriptures,
that can be brought to bear on the controversy
in regard to the mode of baptism, we will now
present, briefly, several of the most important
items on which we have predicated our argu-
ments:
1. John "Baptized WITH water," (not un-
der it,) and said to his disciples "He (Christ)
shall baptize you WITH the Holy Ghost and
WITH fire," (not under the Holy Ghost and
fire.)
2. The baptism of Christ by John, was his
priestly consecration. The mode is thus deci-
ded: "And thus shalt thou do unto them, to
cleanse them; SPRINKLE WATER of puri-
fying upon them." Num. 8: 7.
3. Water baptism is the external sign of
the baptism of the Spirit. The Spirit was
"POURED OUT"-"SHED ON”—“FELL
ON," &c. Water baptism must entirely lose
148
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
its emblematical signification in any other mode
than pouring or sprinkling.
the
4. From the very best human authority,
word denoting the ordinance, is justly and pro-
perly applied to pouring or sprinkling.
5. The use of the word in the infallible book
of God, is demonstration, that pouring or
sprinkling is the scriptural mode of baptism.
6. The case of the Eunuch, who was taught
and baptized agrecably to the prediction, "So
shall he SPRINKLE many nations," is very
clearly in favor of sprinkling.
7. The case of Paul's baptism, in the house,
STANDING UP, (instead of being plunged
into a pond or river,) is a striking case of pour-
ing or sprinkling.
8. The case of the three thousand baptized
at Pentecost, in the space of six hours, by 12
men, 250 to each administrator, less than 1
minutes to each subject, forbids the idea that
they were immersed.
9. The Gentiles baptized in the house of
Cornelius, were certainly not immersed.
10. The baptism of the jailer at midnight
in the prison of Phillippi, must speak a thou-
sand volumes against immersion, unless it can
be proved that Paul was hypocritical enough
to slip out at night and back again, and then
represent that he would not leave the prison un-
til‍taken out publicly.
11. We have shown from the history of the
mode of baptism, that there are good reasons
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
149
for believing that immersion is one of the in-
ventions which superstition originated. Na-
ked immersions seem to have been the first im-
mersions, agreeably to Wall, Robinson, Wat-
son, &c.
12. We have shown, that "buried with
him," &c. in Romans 6-"born of water," &c.
John 3, have nothing to do with this coutrover-
sy about water baptism. Campbellites can as
readily prove by these texts, that they have
been "impregnated by the word," have "come
forth from the womb of waters," and are now
as "innocent, as clean, as unspotted as the an-
gels," as they can, that immersion is the scrip-
tural mode of baptism,
We will close this chapter, with the remarks
of the celebrated Mr. Watson:
-"Against the doctrine that the only legitimate.
mode of baptizing is by immersion, we may
first observe, that there are several strong pre-
sumptions.
1. It is not probable, that if immersion were
the only allowable mode of baptism, it should
not have been expressly enjoined.
2. It is not probable, that in a religion de-
signed to be universal, a mode of administer-
ing this ordinance should be obligatory, the
practice of which is ill adapted to so many cli-
mates, where it would either be exceedingly
harsh to immerse the candidates, male and fe-
male, strong and feeble, in water, or in some
places, as in the higher latitudes, for a great
•
150
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
part of the year impossible. Even if immer-
sion were in fact the original mode of baptiz-
ing in the name of Christ, these reasons make
it improbable that no accommodation of the
form should take place, without vitiating the
ordinance. This, some of the stricter Baptists
assert, although they themselves depart from
the primitive mode of partaking of the Lord's
Supper, in accommodation to the customs of
their country,
3. It is still more unlikely, that in a religion
of mercy there should be no consideration of
health and life in the administration of an or-
dinance of salvation, since it is certain that in
countries where cold bathing is little practised,
great risk of both is often incurred, especially
in the case of women and delicate persons of
either sex, and fatal effects do sometimes occur.
4. It is also exceedingly improbable, that in
such circumstances of climate, and the unfre-
quent use of the bath, a mode of baptism should
have been appointed, which, from the shiver-
ing, the sobbing, and other bodily uneasiness
produced, should distract the thoughts and unfit
the mind for a collected performance of a reli-
gious and solemn act of devotion.
5. It is highly improbable, that the three
thousand converts at the Pentecost, who, let it
be observed, were baptized on the same day,
were all baptized by immersion; or that the
jailer and "all his" were baptized in the same
manner in the night, although the Baptists have

TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
151
invented "a tank or bath in the prison of Phil-
lippi" for that purpose.
Finally, it is most of all improbable, that a
religion like the christian, so scrupulously deli-
cate, should have enjoined the immersion of
women by men, and in the presence of men.
In an after age, when immersion came into
fashion, baptisteries, and rooms for women,
and changes of garments, and other auxiliaries
of this practice, came into use, because they
were found necessary to decency; but there
could be no such conveniences in the first in-
stance, and accordingly we read of none.
With all the arrangements of modern times,
baptism by inmersion is not a decent practice;
there is not a female, perhaps, who submits to
it, who has not a great previous struggle with,
her delicacy; but that, at a time when no such
accommodations could be had as have since
been found necessary, such a ceremony should
have been constantly performing wherever the
apostles and first preachers went, and that at
pools and rivers, in the presence of many
spectators, and they sometimes unbelievers and
scoffers, is a thing not rationally credible,"
Watson's Ins. p. 441.
152
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
CHAPTER XVIII.
REGENERATION NOT IMMERSION.
Titus III: 5.
"Not by works of righteousness which we
have done, but according to his mercy he sav-
ed us, by the washing of regeneration, and re-
newing of the Holy Ghost." Mr. Campbell,
(in his remarks in regard to his debate with
Mr. Jennings,) says, "If, (regeneration) was
represented by me as the act of being born,
and if my opponent (Mr. Jennings) understood
and regarded the import of his concessions on
Titus 3: 5, he must feel that he had decided
the cause against himself: for if the washing
of regeneration was equivalent to being born
again, and if the washing of regeneration was
different from the renewal of the Holy Spirit,
then, unless he could show some other use of
water than the baptismal, it must follow that
the only time the term regeneration occurs in
the New Testament applied to a person, it is us-
ed as convertable with, or equivalent to im-
mersion, which was the only question before
us."
Har. Vol, 2: No. 3: p. 119.
We will here subjoin Mr. Jennings' remarks.
"On the other hand, it was contended, that his
(Mr. Campbell's) argument was nothing better
than a sophism; that its chief fallacy consisted
in two particulars; first, in having untruly rep-
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
153
resented the scriptural import of the term re-
generation, to denote "only the act of being
born." Second, in having contrary to the
truth, assumed it as a point established, that by
"the washing," spoken of by the apostle, in
connexion with regeneration, is meant immer-
sion. In determining the scriptural import of
the term regeneration, as used by the apostle,
(Titus 3: 5,) the Bishop, (Mr. Campbell) not-
withstanding all his pretensions to learning, did
not, as he frequently does, enter upon a critical
examination of the original term. This he
carefully forbears to do, and no doubt for the
plain reason, that the import of the original
word is too obvious, to admit of its being wres-
ted from its true meaning, in such manner as
to answer his purpose. The original, (Palig-
genesia) is a compounded word; it comes from
Palin, again, and Genesis, a birth, or a being
born. And according to Parkhurst, a Lexi-
cographer, cited by the Bishop himself, as an
authority in relation to another word in the
same passage, and indeed according to the evi-
dent import of its roots, it means, not as he has
untruly represented, the mere "act (or circum-
stance) of being born," but "a being BORN
AGAIN;" not merely a birth, "but a new
birth," or regeneration, which, from its root
and formation, is evidently in its application
to this subject, the same thing, if the word
generation, as it is found in this compounded
toum, monns production, as it certainly does,
154
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
then regeneration as certainly means a re-pro-
duction. Thus the term is sometimes used to
denote the restoration of metals to their primi-
tive state, after having been decomposed and
apparently destroyed, by a chemical process.
Thus the term regeneration, as applied (Titus
3:5) to spiritual things, and "with a reference
to a personal change," in the true spirit or
meaning of the original word it is designed to
translate, denotes the commencement of that
spiritual renovation of human nature, where-
by man is in due time perfectly restored to his
primitive state, as it regards the image of God,
in which he was at first created, and which was
really destroyed or lost by the fall, or in other
words, to that "holiness without which no man
shall see the Lord." Yet, Mr. Campbell, con-
trary to the evident meaning, as well of the
term regeneration as of the original words of
which it is a true translation, would have it be-
lieved that its scriptural meaning is simply
what he calls "the act of being born." Wheth-
er this be the result of ignorance or design,
let the candid and intelligent reader judge;
for to every such reader, it is supposed it must
evidently appear, that as in fixing the meaning
of the phrase, "born again," he overlooks that
most important part of the explanation given
by Christ, i. e. "born of the Spirit,” so in de-
fining the term regeneration, he rejects that
part of the compounded word which signifies
"again," and which renders it exactly equiva
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
155
•
lent, not to the (mere) act of "being born," but
to being "born AGAIN." But, says Mr. C.,
"Paul has associated the idea of water with
regeneration," inasmuch as he speaks "of the
washing of regeneration," and he alleges that
"it is conceded by the most learned Pedo-bap-
tists and Baptists," that this phrase "refers to
[baptism] immersion." In reply, I observe,
in the first place, upon the supposition that in
this passage there is an allusion to the applica-
tion of water in baptism, as is conceded accord-
ing to the array of human authorities exhibi-
ted by the Bishop, [Extr. p. 28,] by Dr. Mack-
night, Parkhurst, in his Lexicon, and even
Matthew Henry and others, what does the con-
cession amount to? That it is only by the wa-
ter of baptism that a person can be born of
God, or wash away his sins, or obtain for-
giveness, &c.? No. But [and that even ac-
cording to his chief Presbyterian authority,
Dr. Macknight,] the allusion is to the water of
baptism as "an EMBLEM of the purification
of the soul from sin." But let the point con-
tended for be conceded by whom it may, it fur-
nishes no conclusive reason why any should
believe that in this passage or in that in John,
[chap. 3: 51 there is any allusion to baptism,
unless it can be shown from the word of God.
The direction of our Master in Heaven, is to
call no man master on earth." Debate on
Campbellism, pp. 223,-4-5.
Great pains are frequently taken to impress

156
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
the public with the idea that the most learned
and intelligent Methodist commentators agree
with Campbellites in the application of this
text. Let us hear two of the most learned
and extensive commentators among the Meth-
odists upon this subject:
"They who think baptism to be regenera-
tion, neither know the scriptures nor the power.
of God; therefore they do greatly err.
Dr.
Clark's Com. Titus 3: 5, [latter clause.]
"By the washing of regeneration, that is, by
regeneration itself, the thing signified, and not
merely by baptismal water, the outward and
visible sign; which regeneration cleanses the
soul from the filth of sin [as water washes the
body,] implying the renewing influences of the
Holy Ghost," &c. Benson's Com. Titus 3:6.
Sometime since we made the following re-
marks upon this subject, in the GOSPEL HERALD.
Vol. 2, No. 4, p. 87.
"IMMERSION AND REGENERATION.
""
"Proposition. I now proceed to shew that im-
mersion and regeneration are two bible names for
the same act contemplated in two different points
of view."
"Regeneration and immersion are two names.
for the same thing."
So says the learned Editor of the "Millenni-
al Harbinger;" in his "extra" No. 1, of July
1830.
If these propositions are true-if the terms
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
157
\
*
immersion and regeneration are in their scrip
tural sense synonymous, then, we may without
doing violence to the meaning of the writers of
the New Testament, substitute the one for the
other, in all those passages, in which either
term is used. Now let us try this interpreta-
tion. We must not be understood, however, as
conceding that the word in our common Bibles,
translated baptizing means immersion only, or
indeed immersion at all. We apply the rule
according to the interpretation given the word
by the Harbinger.
"I indeed regenerate [baptize] you with wa-
ter unto repentance: but he that cometh after
me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not
worthy to bear: he shall regenerate [baptize]
you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.".
Mat. ch. 3.
"Then cometh Jesus from Gallilee to Jordan
unto John, to be regenerated [baptized] of him.
But John forbade him, saying, I have need to
be regenerated [baptized] of thee, and comest
thou to me."-Ib.
"And Jesus when he was regenerated [bap-
tized] went up straightway out of the water."
-Ib.
"I thank God I regenerated [baptized] none
of you, but Crispus and Gaius;-lest any should
say that I regenerated [baptized] in mine own
And I regenerated [baptised] also the
household of Stephanus: besides, I know not
whether I regenerated [baptized] any other.
name.
158
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
For Christ sent me not to regenerate [baptize]
but to preach the gospel."-1 Cor. 1 ch.
"And Paul said unto them, unto what then
were ye regenerated? [baptized.] And they
said, unto John's regeneration [baptism.]-
Then said Paul, John verily regenerated [bap-
tized] with the regeneration [baptism] of re-
pentance, saying unto the people, that they
should believe on him which should come after
him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard
this, they were regenerated [baptized] in the
name of the Lord Jesus." Acts 18.
"Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye
should be ignorant, how that all our fathers
were under the cloud, and all passed through
the Sea; and were all regenerated [baptized]
“unto" Moses in the cloud and in the Sea."
1 Cor. 10 ch.
"Can any man forbid water, that these should
not be regenerated, [baptized,] which have re-
ceived the Holy Ghost as well as we. And he
commanded them to be regenerated [baptized]
in the name of the Lord."-Acts 10 ch.
We wish to try the following extract, p. 29,
by this same rule, to see if the doctrine it con-
tains can be true.
"To call the recieving of any spirit, or any
influence, or energy, or any operation upon the
heart of man, regeneration, is an abuse of all
speech, as well as a departure from the diction
of the Holy Spirit, who calls nothing personal
regeneration, except the act of immersion."

•
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
159
"John truly regenerated [baptized] with wa-
ter, but ye shall be regenerated [baptized] with
the Holy Ghost not many days hence.”—Acts
1 ch.
“I-indeed regenerate [baptise] you with wa-
ter, unto repentance, but he that cometh after
me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not
worthy to bear: he shall regenerate [baptize]
you with the Holy Ghost and with fire."-
Mat. 3 ch.
"For by one spirit are we all regenerated
[baptized] into one body." 1 Cor. 12.
Equally curious with this rule of interpreta-
tion, is the following wise sentence from the
same Essay, p. 29.
"Persons are begotten by the Spirit of God,
impregnated by the Word, and born of the Wa-
ter."
CHAPTER XIX.
CAMPBELL'S TRANSLATION.
We have many objections to this version, but
our limits will only admit of a few remarks in
regard to it.
1. We object to it because it is intended to
give currency, publicity, and support to Alex-
ander Campbell's own pecular sentiments, ra-
ther than to give the literal and correct read-
160.
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
ing of the inspired book of God. This objec
tion is not only sustained by an examination of
the version itself, but also by the very reasons
Mr. C. gives in its favor. In his preface, p. 7,
he says, "And the King's translators have fre-
quently ERRED in attempting to be, what
some would call, LITERALLY CORRECT.
They have not given the MEANING in some
passages where they have given A LITERAL
TRANSLATION." From this it seems the
King's translators "ERRED," in being "LIT-
ERALLY CORRECT:” and should have giv-
en the "MEANING” instead of a "LITERAL
TRANSLATION." The plaiu inference is,
that Mr. C. will give the "MEANING” instead
of “A LITERAL TRANSLATION," he will
not "ERR" with the King's translators. But,
who is to determine the "MEANING?" Why,
ALEXINDER CAMPBELL. Selah! This
version is in accordance with these remarks.
It contains Campbellism, instead of the truth
of God,—it is a forgery palmed upon his de-
luded followers, for the New Testament of our
Lord.
Mr. C. in his reply to Dr. Cleland, says,
"He (Cleland) would not have translated it
(baptize) at all, but have left it in the Greek
for every one to quarrel about. Is this con-
troversy, about the mode of baptism and mean-
ing of the word, ever to terminate? If it is
destined to come to an end, the sooner the bet-
ter: and nothing, we imagine, will so expedite
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
161
such a desirable issue as the course WE have
pursued." M. H. vol. 4, p. 531.
. So it seems Mr. C's. translation is to end all
"QUARRELS" and CONTROVERSIES a-
bout the mode of baptism, and meaning of the
word that denotes the ordinance, and this too
by giving the "MEANING" instead of "A
LITERAL TRANSLATION." Truly this
is a very high stand for a man "neither called
nor sent of God." To use the language of
Dr. Jennings: "This bold step, it will become
the Bishop of Bethany to take; it. is not the
only instance in which, like the Bishop of
Rome, he has assumed infallibility to himself.
Can any thing be conceived of more arrogant?
A man who, as an author, professes to be no-
thing more than an humble compiler of a version
of the New Testament, from the works of three
tranlators, yet, in opposition to their authority,
and by his own individual authority, hesitates
uot to make an alteration, involving a decision of
a question, for the whole of that part of Protest-
ant Christendom who speak English, upon
which they have long been divided, and for a
satisfactory decision of which, the united wis-
dom of christians could neither devise any
method, nor erect any tribunal. And yet this
is not all; nor have we vot arrived at the sum-
mit of this man's arrogance. If the views of
Mr. C. concerning the nature and effect of bap-
tism, accorded with those of the various socts
of evangelical christians, the alteration made
L
162
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
by him, in his version of the New Testament,
so as to make baptism conclusively to mean
and to be valid only, when performed by im-
mersion, would still have been bold, unprece-
dentod, and unwarrantable, but still it would
not have so high a degree of presumption and
bigotry, as it now has, when it is considered
that, according to his creed, there is no forgive-
ness for such as have not been immersed, and
that immersion is the ONLY MEANS of wash-
ing away our sins. It is then fearlessly asked,
if the Bishop of Bethany could have acted
more in the style of a Pope?
1. HE DERIDES, without hesitation, a
question that has for many ages divided the
christian world, and then suspends the salva-
tion of the soul, or which is the same thing in
substance, the forgiveness of sins and accept-
ance with God, upon an implicit acquiescence.
in HIS DECISION."
2. We object to this version, becausc, in or-
der to support Campbellisin, it necessarily con-
tains many untruths, some of which we have
noticed in our remarks upon the mode of bap-
tism. "I indeed IMMERSE you in water-
He will IMMERSE you in the Holy Spirit
and fire." Such absurdities need no comment
here. Again: "Now I would not have you
ignorant, brethren, that our fathers were all-
IMMERSED into Moses, in the cloud and in
the sea." Now, we have proved to an abso-
lute certainty, that this is untrue, that they were
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
163
BAPTIZED, but not iminersed, and it must be
a desperate cause that requires such an abuse
of the book of God to support it.
·
3. We object to this and all such versions,
because they are calculated to destroy public
confidence in the inspired volume. For if
translators and compilers are to give what they
judge to be the “MEANING" instead of "A
LITERAL TRANSLATION" of the Holy
Scriptures, and thus give to the world the vi-
sions, whimsies, speculations and midnight
dreams of evening speculators, and pronounce
it all: "THE WORD OF GOD," "THE SA-
CRED WRITINGS OF THE APOSTLES. AND
EVANGELISTS of JESUS CHRIST, COMMONLY
STYLED TIME. NEW TESTAMENT," we may
soon have as many jarring and discordant
TESTAMENTS as the world can produce of
bigoted, fraudulent, and reckless sectarians.
Yes, and these versions would be ever changing
with their fickle minded authors, and still, by
them, called THE WORD OF GOD. (How
easy, with such a word; to be impregnated,"
"begotten by a Spirit," and come forth from
the "womb of waters.") Let Mr. C's. version
be a specimen; his second edition published
only about two years after the first; in this
short time, he found it necessary to make up-
wards of five hundred alterations in phraseolo-
gy, and many in doctrine, in order to give the
"meaning," in the single book of Matthew.
What a variety of New Scriptures (pardon the
་་
164
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
expression) we should have had, if Mr. C. had
commenced his career in this business, à little
earlier in life. The world would have been
blessed with Seceder, Regular Baptist and Re-
former Testaments, of various sorts; as he
came to America a Seceder preacher, after
which he joined the Regular Baptists, and was
'ordained elder; since which he has rent the
Baptist Church most recklessly, and headed his
party, and, to use the phrase of a preacher
said to have been in the brush, he is not yet
46. zactly fixed."
If our limits would admit, we would like to
give many quotations from the first and second
Editions of this version, (the Editions we have
examined,) showing the alterations in two
years. We have only room for two or three:
Mat. 4: 3. "Whereupon the tempter ac-
costing him, said, if thou be A SON OF
GOD, command that these stones become
loaves." First Ed. 1826.
+
"Whereupon the tempter accosting him, said,
if you be GOD'S SON, command," &c.
Second Ed. 1828.
Mat. 14: 33.-"Thou art assuredly A SON
OF GOD." First Ed. 1826.
“YOU ARE assuredly the Son of A GOD,”
Second Ed. 1828.
The first Ed. implies a plurality of SÒNS,
the second a plurality of GODS. Once more:
Mat. 7:22.-"Many will say to me on that
day, Master, master, have we not taught in
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
165
•
thy name, AND IN THY NAME EX-
PELLED DEMONS, and in thy name per-
formed many miracles?" First Ed, 1826.
Many will say to me on that day, Master,
master, have we not taught in your name, and
in your name performed many miracles?"
Second Ed, 1828. In this, "and in your name
expelled demons," is left out. Hundreds of*
alterations might be given, but this may suffice.
Would it not be the "Genuine translation of
G. Campbell, J. Macknight and P. Doddridge,
Doctors of the Church of Scotland,” with a
thousand alterations?* Are not such versions
calculated to destroy public confidence in the
divine oracles?
4. We will now give one or two passages
from Mr. C., going to show, that his sectarian.
zeal and bigotry have evidently disqualified
him for doing justice to the religious public, in
a translation of the scriptures:
•
“Ques, 176. What, then, is the duty of all
christians found in these communities? (Bap-
tists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopali-
ans, &c.)
·
Ans. They are commanded to "come out of
them." Rev. 18:4. Come out of her, my
people, that you be not partakers of her sins,
and that you receive not of her plagues,”
*Since writing the above, I find on examin-
ing the third Edition, these pages altered a
third time.
166
TRÈATISE ON BAPTISM.
Ques. From whom are they commanded to
come out?
Ans. From BABYLON, the APOSTACY.
Ques. And do ALL SECTS CONSTI-
TUTE BABYLON?
•
Ans. YES." Ex. Harbinger, No. 4, p. 367.
If this be correct, then, God had no church
or society, that could even be considered a
branch of his church, in the world, till Mr.
C's. whirls set him down at the head of a par-
ty. Have the most hardened and daring infi-
dels ever assumed a more hostile attitude?
With regard to the creeds of those churches,
he says, "They are known to have PRO-
DUCED HYPOCRISY, FALSE SWEAR-
ING and PREVARICATION, for the sake
of livings-strife, envy, hatred and indeed
EVERY EVIL WORK.” E. H. No. 4, p. 346.
What a pity Mr. C. did not live in the days of
Voltaire, Tom Paine, &c. that he might have
joined them in their slander, detraction, and
abuse of the church of God.
S
Had we better not all turn Campbellites,
that we may be "impregnated with the word,"
and come from the "womb of waters" "as in-
nocent, as clean, as unspotted as the angels?"
Truly all that can be wanting on our part, for
such a happy change, is the faith that removes
mountains, alters scriptures, rends churches,
abuses christians, strains at nothing, and swal-
lows A. Campbell!
For many important objections to Campbell's
TREATISE ON BAPTISM,
167
Testament, we refer the reader to Dr. Jen-
ning's, Cleland's and McCalla's works.
We will close this chapter with an extract
from Dr. Cleland's Strictures, pp. 44-5-6-7:
"Where now is that exactness, uniformity,
and beauty, so exultingly ascribed to this new
translation, by its author? When he ascribes
this translation, exclusively and unreservedly,
to "George Campbell, James Macknight, and
Philip Doddridge, Doctors of the Church of
Scotland," has he not insidiously hung out false
colours, to decoy the ignorant and deceive the
unwary? Though he has declared to the con-
trary, yet its peculiar, distinctive, sectarian
mark is most glaringly prominent. "If, (says
he,) the mere publication of the inspired wri-
tings requires, as we believe it does, the pub-
lisher to have no sectarian object in view, we
are happy in being able to appeal to our whole
course of public addresses, and to all that we
have written on religious subjects, to shew that
we have no such object in view""The whole
scope, design, and drift of our labors is to see
christians intelligent, united and happy." Can
any candid man read all the volumes of the
"Christian Baptist," the "Millenial Harbinger,"
and this famous testament, without having his
credulity and charity both severely tried, on
hearing such a declaration from the greatest
theological pugilist and partizan in all the land?
But even should credulity and charity sustain
themselves under this first trial, they will hard-
168
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
ly survive the next, as follows: "We have no
aversion or umbrage against any one (sect)
more than another"-[Presbyterians excepted.]
"We oppose them most who oppose and depart
from the simplicity that is in Christ."—[Not
Unitarian allies, but Presbyterians.] "I do.
most solemnly declare, that as far as respects
my feelings, partialities, reputation, and world-
ly interest, as a man, I would be a Presbyterian,
a Methodist, a Quaker, Universalist, a Socini-
an, or any thing else," [Pagan, Mahometan, or
Atheist,] "before the sun would set to-morrow
if the Apostolic writings would, [] IN MY
JUDGMENT, authorise me in so doing" Pref.
p. 13. Thus snugly retreated and fortified
within himself, see what splendid, attractive,
fascinating colours he can extend by Apostol-
ic" hands, to an admiring world, from behind.
the impregnable rampart of his own infallible
judgment. Candid reader, how much do you
think such a fine declaration as this is worth?
"We shall now, as before intimated, pay a
little attention to the comparative claims of this
new, above the old version, made in the lofty
tone of exultation. We would only say,"
says this sapient reformer, "that the edification
and comfort of a christian may be greatly pro-
moted by a minute examination of this version,
and a diligent comparison of it with the com-
mon one. Having thus established, at least in
his own mind, the superiority of his reformed
Testament, with great confidence and self-com-
"}
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
169
placency, no doubt, he makes the following dec-
laration: “That translation will be universally
received which has the strongest claims on an
intelligent, united, and happy christian commu-
nity." We join issue here, and put this matter
to the test. We have men of "illustrious name"
-of gigantic stature, in respect of intellectual
character, and in comparison with whom, A.
Campbell is as a glow-worm to the merid-
ian splendor of noon-day, who testify, most pos-
itively, to the superior claims of the common
version. We will introduce a few of them, se-
lected from a large number, as a specimen.
And we will set in front two of our author's
main authorities, on which he pretends to found
this new translation.
1, Dr. GEORGE CAMPBELL.-"The agree-
ment of all the translations, as to the meaning,
in every thing of principal consequence, makes
their differences, when properly considered, ap-
pear as nothing,"
5
2. Dr. DODDRINGE."On a diligent compar
ison of our translation with the original, we
find that of the New Testament, and I might
add that also of the old, in the main, faithful
and judicious. You know, indeed, that we do
not scruple, on some occasions, to animadvert
upon it; but you also know, that these remarks
affeot not the fundamentals of religion, and sel-
dom reach any further than the beauty of a fig-
ure, or at most the connection of an argument."
3. JOIN SELDEN.-"The English translation
170
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
of the Bible is the best translation in the world,
and renders the sense of the original best.”
4. BISHOP WALTON.--"The English trans-
lation made by divers learned men at the com-
mand of King James, may justly contend
with any now extant in any other language in
Europe."
"
5. BISHOP LOWTII.-"The vulgar transla-
tion of the Bible, is the best standard of our
language."
8. Dr. MIDDLETON. "The style of our
present version is incomparably superior to any
thing which might be expected from the finical
and perverted taste of our own age. It is sim-
ple, it is harmonious, it is energetic; and, which
is of no small importance, use has made it fa-
miliar, and time has rendered it sacred."
•
7. Dr. GEDDES.-"The highest eulogiums
have been made on the translation of James
the First, both by our own writers and by for-
eigners. And indeed, if accuracy, fidelity, and
the strictest attention to the letter of the texf,
be supposed to constitute the qualities of an ex-
cellent version, this of all versions must, in
general, be accounted the most excellent."
8. Dr. WHITTAKER:-"The highest value
has always been attached to our translation of
the Bible. . . . . . It may be compared with any
translation in the world, without fear of in-
feriority; it has not shrunk from the most
rigorous examination; it challenges investi-
gation; and, in spite of numerous attempts
TREATISE ON BAPTISAL.
171
་
to supercede it, has hitherto remained unri-
valled in the affections of the country."
"Let us not therefore," he continues, "too hasti-
ly conclude that they (the translators) have fal-
len on evil days and evil tongues, because it
has occasionally happened that an individual
[such as Alexander. Campbell for instance] as
inferior to them in condition as in talents and
integrity, is found questioning their motives,
or denying their qualifications for the task
which they so well performed."
9. Rev. C. Buck. The divines employed
by King James to translate the Old and New
Testaments, have given us a translation which
with very few exceptions, can scarcely be im-
proved. These divines were profoundly skilled
in the learning as well as in the languages of
the East; whilst some of those, who have at-
tempted to improve their version [A. Camp-
bell for instance] seem not to have possessed a
critical knowledge of the Greek tongue, to have
still less of the Hebrew, and to have been abso-
lute strangers to the dialect spoken in Judea in
the days of the Saviour, as well as to the man-
ners, customs, and peculiar opinions of the
Jewish sects."
10. Dr. JOHN TAYLOR, author of the excel-
lent Hebrew and English concordance, and so
far as philology is concerned, a first rate wit-
ness, says, “You may rest fully satisfied, that
as our English translation is, in itself, by far
the most excellent book in our language, so it
172
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
is a pure and plentiful fountain of divine
knowledge, giving a TRUE, CLEAR, and
FULL account of the divine dispensations,
and of the gospel of our salvation: inso-
much that whoever studies the Bible, the EN-
GLISH BIBLE, is sure of gaining that
knowledge and faith, which if duly applied
to the heart and conversation, WILL INFAL-
LIBLY GUIDE HIM TO ETERNAL LIFE.”
11. Dr. ADAM CLARKE.—"Those who have
compared most of the European translations
with the original, have not scrupled to say that
the English translation of the Bible, made un-
der the direction of King James the first, is the
most accurate and faithful of the whole. Nor'
is this its only praise: the translators have
seized the very spirit and soul of the origin-
al, and expressed this almost every where,
with pathas inimitable. Besides, our trausla-
tors have not only made a standard transla-
tion, but they have made their translation the
standard of our language: the English tongue,
in their day, was not equal to such a work-
but God enabled them to stand as upon Mount
Sinai, and crane up their country's language
to the dignity of the originals, so that after the
lapse of two hundred years, the English Bible
is, with very few exceptions, the standard of
the purity and excellence of the English
tongue. The original, from which it was ta-
ken, is alone superior to the Bible translated by
the authority of King James,”
TREATISE ON BAPTISM;
173.
•
+
12. Rev. T. H. HORNE.-"When we con-
sider the very few REAL faults, which the most
minute and scrupulous inquirer has been able
to find in our present translation, ... we
cannot but call to mind, with gratitude and ad-
miration; the integrity, wisdom, fidelity and
learning of the venerable translators, of whose
pious labors we are now reaping the benefit;
who, while their veneration for the sacred scrip-
tures induced them to be as literal as they could,
to avoid obscenity, have been extremely happy
in the simplicity and dignity of their expres-
sions, and who, by their adherence to the He
brew idiom, have at once enriched and adorn-
ed our language. And instead of being impa-
tient for a revision of the present text, we shall
(to adopt the energetic expression of Mr. Todd)
"take up THE BOOK, which from our in-
fancy we have known and loved, with increased
delight; and resolve not hastily to violate, in
regard to itself, the rule which it records,-
FÖRSAKE NOT AN OLD FRIEND, FOR
THE NEW IS NOT COMPARABLE TO
HIM." For a full account of our common
English version, and for further reference to
the most of the foregoing extracts, the reader is
referred to "Horne's Introduction," vol. 2, pp.
247-258.
"And now judge ye all, who can impartially
weigh this subject, and say which translation,
having the strongest claims on an intelligent
christian community, is entitled to universal
∙174
TREATISE ON BAPTISM;
acceptance? Our "old friend": the common
the_common
version, or "the new," with its pretended tripa-
ternity from Doctors Campbell, Macknight, and
Doddridge, with "emendations," and attempts
"to modernize the style," and the like disin-
genuous, unlicensed privileges, by Alexander
Campbell? Was there any immediate or press-
ing necessity for such an attempt to palm upon
the community a work of this character al
work specious and imposing in its pretensions,
hypocritical and sectarian in its features, and
an enormous tax on the public, established by
"Copy-right Secured," to favor the "worldly
interest" of the author; and in no respects
equal, much less superior, to the common ver-
sion, made familiar by use and rendered sacred
by time; and so much better calculated to edify
and comfort the humble and candid christian,
who, upon this brief review, will more than
ever adhere to the rule which it records,-"for-
sake not an old friend, for the new is not com
parable to him?” ”
CHAPTER XX.
MR. CAMPBELL AS A CONTROVERSIALIST.
We have attentively read a considerable part
of Mr. Campbell's writings, and must say he
is certainly the most unfair, ungenerous, and
TREATISE ON BẬPTISM,
175
·
irreligious controversialist with whom we are
acquainted. He seems willing to resort to any
mcans, however irreligious, to carry his point,
when hard pressed by an opponent, Accord-
ing to his account, his antagonists are "igno-
rant," "illiterate," "lying," "corrupt," "secta-
rians,”—under the dominion of "Creeds”
pro-
ductive of lying hypocrisy, prevarication,
false swearing, and every evil work;"-un-
der the influence of the "unclean spirits of
the Apocalyptic frogs;"chained in Babylon,
&c. &c., whilst he and his disciples are
learned almost above all science, and ought to
be looked up to as angels of God, being as "in-
nocent, as clean, as unspotted as the angels."
Few men are better qualified to head a deluded
and infuriated party than Mr. C. Truth and
manliness are seldom exhibited in his notices of
his theological antagonists and disputes. A
specimen of his general course may be seen in
his notices of his controversies with Messrs.
Walker, McCalla, Jennings, &c. and the evi-
dences these men have produced of his mis-
representations. Indeed, it seems, that Mr. C..
cannot give an honest representation of the
smallest matter of this sort. This is clearly
exhibited in his notice of a short altercation be-
tween him and myself, in 1831. He mentions
it as follows:
•
•
"A Methodist preacher, whose name I am
now. unable to record, after the address, asked
leave to bring forward a string of what he sup-
176
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
posed to be heretical tenets, culled from the
pages of the Christian Baptist and the Harbin-
ger, which he wished to debate. . An invita-
tion had been given in the notice published by
the brethren to all persons who had any objec-
tions to make, to come and hear, and offer them
while we were present, to prevent misrepresen-
tations afterwards. This notification, which
had respect to the discourse to be offered, the
gentleman converted into a license to submit
the cullings of eight volumes as the subjects of
discussion. The sun at this time was about
one hour high, and my appointment required
me to travel the next day to meet it!! If I re-
member right, one of the first items was some-
thing about "the Trinity," or "the doctrine of
the Trinity," which he was apparently anxious
to discuss. Soon discovering the calibre of
his intellect, education, and the bent of his pre-
judices, we told the gentleman that if he had
any thing to propose or object, or to inquire,
touching the matters of the discourse delivered,
we should hear him with all patience and atten-
tion, but if he had any thing to debate about
"Trinity" or Unity, or any foreign topics, we
would beg to be excused, as we always chose
our opponent when we had any thing worthy a
formal discussion: After a little reconnoiter-
ing the gentleman withdrew, and we dismissed
the assembly." M. H. vol. 2, No. 4.
This event had the following notice, in the
Western Luminary, in which the reader will
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
177
perceive that Mr. C's. memory is strangely
treacherous, recollecting but little that did, and
several things which did not transpire on that
occasion:
"MR. ALEXANDER CAMPBELL,
"Mount Sterling, January 24, 1831."
"To the Editors of the Luminary and Advocate:”
"On the 14th inst. Elder Alexander Camp-
bell preached in this place. A few days previ-.
ously, a printed advertisement was stuck up, at
different public places, of which the following.
is a copy:
१
"SERMON.-Alexander Campbell of Brooke
County, Virginia, will preach in the Court-
House in Mount Sterling, on Friday, the 14th
inst. All those who are in the habit of oppos-
ing him and his views, are invited to attend, and
meet him face to face, and not behind his back,
with their objections. January 10, 1831."
"After Mr. C. had concluded his discourse,
Mr. Jamieson, as I understood, at his (Mr. J's.)
request, was introduced to Mr. C.
"Mr. J. addressed the congregation, inform-
ing them that, although it might be unpleasant
to them, yet he considered it his duty to call up-
on Mr. C. publicly to say if the advertisement
which announced his appointment, and which
was read, was in accordance with his wishes.
Mr. C. replied, perfectly so. Mr. J. remarked,
that, as a minister of the gospel, he had occa-
sionally objected to the views of Mr. C. and
M
178
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
that he still had the most serious objections to
the system he advocated; that he was then
prepared to expose some of Mr. C's. religious
sentiments. The first quotation from the wri-
tings of Mr. C. which was read by Mr. J. was
this: "As to the doctrine of the Trinity, and
whether Jesus Christ be the very and eternal
God: these are untaught questions, and the
sooner they can be forgotten, the better for
saint and sinner." Mr. C. admitted these to
be his words, as they corresponded with hist
views. Mr. J. remarked, that he felt himself
perfectly prepared to prove from the scriptures,
the doctrine of the Trinity, and that Jesus
Christ is the very and eternal God-That he
should ask the privilege of occupying the same
length of time, in the investigation, as Mr. C.
did. Mr. C. observed, that when he gave an
invitation to opponents on such occasions, he
only intended to hear and answer objections to
the discourse just delivered, but he perceived
that he was now called on to answer what was
contained in several volumes of his writings,
and that it could not be attended to.
Mr. J. thought that Mr. C's. several volumes
must be very small, if he called on him for such
an investigation. He had taken but a few
plain sentiments, which he considered perfect-
ly inconsistent with the word of God; and that
if Mr. C. would undertake to sustain them,
that he was prepared for the investigation;-
that the challenge contained in the advertise-
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
179
ment did not restrict to the particular discourse,
but to his views in the general, to which his
opponents had been in the habit of making ob-
jections.
Mr. J. then read extracts from Mr.
C's. publications on several other subjects, and
added, that they were views which he consid-
ered erroneous-that he had objected to them,
and did not believe that Mr. C. could sustain
them. Mr. C. remarked, that it would be im-
possible for him to discuss the subjects, as he
had to preach in Paris on Sunday, and that he
would necessarily have to leave town that eve-
ning or next morning,-that the controversy
would have to close, before it was half
through. He wished to know if Mr. J. in-
tended to try to support that Jesus Christ, was
the very and eternal God, and the doctrine of
the Trinity-if so, his congregation would at
once perceive it would require a long discus-
sion; that he and his brethren wished to con-
fine themselves to scriptural phraseology, and
if Mr. J. would show the word Trinity in the
Testament, and where the words very and
eternal God are applied to Jesus Christ, it
would terminate the controversy. Mr. J. ad-
mitted that the word Trinity was not found in
the Holy Scriptures, but that the doctrine of
the Trinity was taught in the most clear and
unequivocal language, and that he was pre-
pared to prove it-That the scriptures clearly
taught that Jesus Christ was the very and eter-
nal God. He considered these among the most
180
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
essential principles in the christian religion;
in regard to which, he could make it manifest
that Mr. C. was clearly wrong. Mr. C. ob-
served, that when he chose to have a contro-
versy, he always selected his opponent. He
said that the gentleman acknowledges the word
Trinity is not in the book; he asked the ques-
tion, if the thing is not in the book, how can
the doctrine of the thing be there if the thing
itself was not there? He believed that Jesus
Christ was God's own Son, and he would go
as far as any man to sustain his character.
He further cbserved, that he gave the gentle-
man credit for his sincerity, when he said he
could prove the doctrine of the Trinity, and
that Christ was the very and eternal God; so
he said, Tom Paine thought he could prove
there was no truth in the christian religion,
but he failed,—neither can the gentleman
prove from the scriptures, the doctrine of the
Trinity, or that Jesus Christ was the very and
eternal God; that his assertion would go as
far as the gentleman's. Mr. C. considered it
improper to make this subject a matter of de-
bate on this occasion, as it did not come within
the purview of the day's services. Mr. J. re-
marked, that he considered Mr. C's. remarks
as a mere apology for a flight-that his insinu-
ations were designed to raise a dust to cover
his retreat. Inasmuch as the advertisement
perfectly met the wishes of Mr. C., Mr. J. said
he came forward as an opponent, not solicit-
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
181
on.
ing a controversy, but because publicly called
He was not anxious to be Mr. C's. oppo-
nent in controversy, but felt fully prepared to
prove the doctrine of the Trinity, if put to the
proof. IIe had never said the thing was not in
the book, but acknowledged the word Trinity
was not. Mr. C. said he was accused of fly-
ing; but he was not yet on the wing; he could
not see from what he should fly; he thought it
did not comport with the spirit of meekness,.
thus to speak of him; he contended that the
doctrine of any thing was the meaning of the
thing, and that consequently there could be no
doctrine of the Trinity.
One of the topics introduced by Mr. J. was,
that Mr. C. had contended that immersion and
regeneration were two Bible names for the
same act, contemplated in two different points.
of view. Mr. C. remarked, that this position
came within the purview of the day's labor,
and he had no objections to discuss this matter
with Mr. J., provided that, in the discussion,
they be restricted to one text-the only one
where the word regeneration occurs--
---(Titus
`3:5;)—That it must be a verbal criticism on
the word regeneration, and that it was conse·
quently necessary that Mr. J. should under-
stand the Latin language. [The Editor of the
Luminary used in the publication, the word
Greek improperly, and was corrected after-
wards by the writer.] They would choose
three lawyers, acquainted with the rules of
182
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
debate, as moderators. Mr. J. then replied,
that Mr. C. was flying from the circumstances
in which he was involved by his sentiments
and challenge, and not from him; that if his
remarks were inconsistent with the spirit of
meekness, neither he nor his friends were able
to discern it, and he would prefer a more dis-
interested witness than Mr. C. on that subject;
that to say the worst, he certainly had not ex-
hibited a greater want of meekness of spirit
than Mr. C. had done, in attempting in his ser-
mon to traduce the character of the pious of
the present day; that he had represented the
Methodist Church and others, as daughters of
the mother of Harlots-the whore of Babylon
-mystic Babylon-partaking of the spirit and
character of the ancient mother. He consid-
ered the remarks of Mr. C. on the subject of
the Trinity, and that Christ was the very and
eternal God, as mere equivocation. He was
willing to meet Mr. C. on the broad proposition
as contained in the quotation which he had
read, on the sameness of meaning of regener-
ation and immersion, and abide the views of
the moderators in regard to the order of the
controversy, but was not willing to abide by
the restrictions of Mr. C., as he considered it
an attempt on the part of Mr. C. to avoid the
force of scriptural evidence of his error. He
had no objection to three lawyers being moder-
ators, provided they were not of Mr. C's. par-
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
183
ty. He wanted no more than the New Testa-
ment to prove the fallacy of Mr. C's. doctrine.
"There was then a proposition that the two
gentlemen should meet in the Court-House at
early candle-light. Mr. C. agreed to meet,
provided Mr. J. would abide by the restrictions
which he had previously suggested, that they
should be restricted to the single text in which
the word regeneration occurs, and a verbal
criticism on that word. He again suggested
that Mr. J. must understand Latin, as the con-
troversy must turn on a verbal Latin criticism.
Mr. J. said he would meet him on the proposi-
tion if he were permitted to take the common
version of the scriptures; he had understood
that Mr. C. had offered, with others, to abide
by this version in controversy. He considered
Mr. C's. views essentially wrong, and if the
moderators should think it right to restrict him
to a verbal criticism of the one text, he should
submit, but that Mr. C. should not make alto-
gether his own terms. He said Mr. C. could
avoid the investigation if he chose, by his ac-
quaintance with the Latin language and his
superior learning; he had no pretensions that
way. Mr. C. replied, that he was not disposed
to meet unless the debate should be upon the
principles HE HAD LAID DOWN; that Mr.
J. reminded him of a Presbyterian preacher in
Nashville, with whom he recently had had a
controversy on the same subject, who equivoca-
ted, and the moderators were unable to keep him
184
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
.
to the points; that Mr. J. seemed disposed to
go through and through the scriptures, but that
it best suited his convenience to leave town that
night.
He remarked that he had friends
enough present, who would meet Mr. J. and
defend HIS VIEWS, whenever he (Mr. J.).
thought proper to debate on any of his senti-
ments; he named some two or three. Mr. C.
denied having said that the Methodist Church
was the daughter of the mother of Harlots;
she was probably only the grand daughter,
having descended from the church of England..
He also remarked that he saw what Mr. J. was
after; he had lately read a piece in the Gospel
Herald, in which his views were much misrep-
resented.
"The foregoing detail I believe is strictly
correct, and as there seems to be much curiosi-
ty throughout the community to understand Mr.
Campbell and his sentiments, I have thought
proper to address you, that you may make your
readers acquainted with what transpired here.
"I make no comment; I leave that for your.
readers. I belong to neither of the religious.
societies of which the two gentlemen are mem-
bers, and have studiously endeavored not to
give a coloring to the observations of either
party.
A."
The character of Mr, Apperson (a respecta-
ble lawyer of Mt. Sterling, and member of the
Presbyterian church, who wrote the above), is,
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
185
too well known to need any endorser to his state-
ments. But few, it is presumable, not previ-
ously informed on the subject, could have be-
lieved that the writers of the above picces al-
lude to the same event. And there are none,
we think, but what must see that Mr. C's. re-
marks are a wilful misrepresentation of the
whole matter.
1. Mr. C. says "A Methodist preacher
asked leave to bring forward a string of what
he supposed to be heretical tenets."""
Mr. Apperson's account of my introduction
to Mr. C.-my address to the congregation,-.
my questions to Mr. C. in regard to his chal-
lenge, his making the challenge his own,
my acceptance of it, &c. &c.; all go to show,
that what I said was drawn from me by the
challenge of Mr. C. Consequently, to represent
me as soliciting a controversy with ALEXAN-
DER CAMPBELL by "asking leave to bring
forward a string of tenets &c. is not true.--E
"asked" no such "leave."
2. Mr. C. says, "This notification, which
had respect to the discourse to be offered," &c..
The reader will please turn to it at the head
of Mr. Apperson's piece; and it will be clear-
ly seen that this confining the challenge to his
discourse, was a subterfuge of Mr. C's. own
seeking, to save appearances. The challenge
says, "All those who are in the habit of oppo-.
sing him and his views, are invited to attend,
and meet him face to face and not behind his.
186
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
*
back, (not meet him behind his back) with
THEIR OBJECTIONS." Here it seems "All"
who were in the "habit" of opposing "him, or
his views," were to "meet him face to face-
with their objections-not to his sermon, but to
his "views" which they had been in the "habit"
of opposing.
Now can any man in his senses suppose Mr.
Campbell did not know he was misrepresenting
-the fact when he said, "this notification, which
had respect to the discourse to be offered, the
gentleman converted into a license to submit
*the cullings of eight volumes as the subject of
discussion."
99
3. Besides the one just exposed, there are
two other untruths in this short quotation. Mr.
C. says, "This notification--the gentleman
converted into a license," &c. Now we ask
did not the challenge contain the "license" with-
out "converting." The scrap of paper on
which the challenge was printed, and that was
read on the occasion, was a little ragged and
dirty. Did Mr. C. think I had plunged it under
water, (as immersion is conversion with him?)
4. He says, I "submitted" the cullings of
eight volumes. How Mr. C. could know how
many volumes I had culled is something strange.
When I wrote the "string of tenets" as he calls
them, to meet him agreeably to his challenge,
I do not believe I had one volume of his eight
in my house. And as the little unbound book
(in which I had written his sentiments) is now
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
187
before me, that seemed such a trouble to him on
that occasion,-I now assert that his assertion
is at least seven times larger than true.
The last item of this precious little "notifica-
tion" of his, is, after a little reconnoitering the
gentleman withdrew, and we dismissed the as-
sembly. Did Mr. C. mean that I left the house
or started before the assembly was dismissed,
as many of his disciples have represented? If
so, it is not true. I remained as near Mr. C.
as his best friend until, to use his own phraseol-
ogy he "backed out," asserting that he would
not meet unless I understood Latin, and would
abide by the principles he laid down.
The remarks of Dr. Cleland are so just and
appropriate, we cannot deny them to the reader.
"A word or two to our friends respecting the
style and manner of Mr. C. as a controversial-
ist. In the estimation of his enthusiastic devo-
tees, this man is equal to Herod, at whose ora-
tion "the people gave a shout, saying, it is the
voice of a God, and not a man. "" He is indeed
a prodigy-a rara avîs in terris. I speak
now of his writings, so far as I have seen them.
In all my animadversions on them, I have en-
deavored to keep in mind the Latin precept,
“Parcere personis, dicere de vitiis—“To be
sparing of persons, and to lash their crimes."
I have no wish to enter the arena of controver-
sy with such a man. I should gain nothing but
certain defeat; sharing the same fate of "Dr.
Jennings, Dr. Ralson, Messrs. McCalla, and
188.
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
all other writers of the brotherhood." There
is no withstanding such a chivalrous theological
knight as this.
Thrice he routed all his foes,
And thrice he slew the slain."
•
"The choice of the weapons, as well as the
mode of warfare, of this "valorous champion.
of the church militant," is truly remarkable.
As to truth and candor, meekness and charity,.
fair reasoning and manly argument, these be-
long not to his escutcheon. But empty decla-
mation, flashes of abortive wit and ridicule,.
horrific apostrophising, tripping levity and iro-
ny, quibbling on single words, and punning on
letters in the alphabet, immodest pretensions to
superior talents; these, and such like, form the
missiles of this modern Goliah, who has, accor-
ding to his own account, such a dash of satire
in his constitution—a genius naturally inclined.
to irony, which he has often to deny.". In the
mode of his warfare, he has his appropriate
representative among the beasts of the field,.
the fowls of the air, and the fishes of the sea..
In the field, the quadruped camel, we are in-
formed, becoming enraged, the life of his dri-
ver is greatly endangered. To avoid which, he
runs a little ahead of the animal, sheds off his:
outside dress and throws it down, which is im-
mediately seized by the enraged beast-thrown
about with great fury, and he then returns to,
his burthen, well satisfied with his chivalrous.
achievement. A biped Campbell acts a simi--
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
189
lar farce, in venting his crazy malignity and in-
furiated vengeance on his literary and theolo-
gical opponents. Again; as it respects argu-
ment, when closely approached by his antago
nist, he seems to prefer "the instinctive but wi-
ly logic of the bird," which is observed to quit
the nest at the approach of the suspected ene-
my, and to flutter all about in every other di-
rection, to draw off the unwelcome intruder
from her precious deposite. Such is the con-
duct of this. camelian controvertist. If by
shuffling and evasion, punning and quibbling,
he can succeed in throwing up dust, or raising
a mist before the eyes of his ignorant votaries,
he has gained a triumphant victory. But above
all is he like a certain fish, which I think they call
a squid. When hotly pursued and hard press-
ed by an enemy, to effect an escape it emits a
dark and offensive liquid behind, which answers
the threefold purpose of obscuring the path, as
well as offending the olfactory organ of the
pursuer, and thereby effects a sccure retreat.
Can any thing better represent A. Campbell's
polemic writings than the above animals?"
190
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
CHAPTER XXI.
[For this Chapter we are indebted to the Rev. Wm.
Adams.]
MR. CAMPBELL AND THE APOCALYPTIC FRoGs.
In incidentally turning over the pages of No.
2. Vol. 4, of the Millenial Harbinger I found
on page 75, the following remarks: "The un-
clean spirit of the Apocalyptic frogs appears
to have possessed my friend Cleland and the
nephew of the late Mr. Jennings. Their
croaking is heard in all corners of the land."
Whatever may be the meaning of that part
of the book of Revelation referred to in the
above remarks, we are of opinion that it claims
a more grave and serious notice than that
which Mr. Campbell has here given it.
It is an important prophecy which either has
been accomplished, is now fulfilling; or will be
hereafter fulfilled. And some are of opinion
that a part of the passage predicts the hersey
taught by Mr. Campbell and his followers.
Let us examine the text, together with the rea-
sons for applying it to Campbellism. Rev.
16: 13, 14. And I saw three unclean Spirits
like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon,
and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of
the mouth of the false prophet. For they are
the spirits of devils working miracles, &c.
These unclean spirits appear under the pouring
TREATISE ON BAPTISM,
191
out of the sixth vial, the signs of the pouring
out of which, according to Mr. Benson, already
appear. See. Com. on the passage. As these
spirits proceed out of the mouth of the dragon,
and of the beast, and of the false prophet, and
the mouth is the medium of communicating
language, we understand by the representation
three unholy doctrines or heresies. One of
these spirits proceeding out of the mouth of the
Beast or Papal power is that of which we now
speak, not detaining the reader with remarks
on the other two at all.
A spirit or doctrine has made its appearance
among us (namely Campbellism), which bears
evident marks of papal origin; in the support of
which opinion we offer the following reasons.
1. We are taught by the papacy that regen-
eration and the new birth are received in the
act of baptism. Campbellism teaches the same
thing.
2. The Catholics teach the authority and
power of the priest to remit sins; Campbellism
by declaring that sins are remitted by and
through immersion, evidently teaches the same
doctrine, for as baptism is according to this
theory, the act of remitting sins, and the minis-
ter who performs baptism is the agent, the act.
of remitting sins must necessarily be his. This
is conceded in a conversation between Mr. Jer-
emiah Vardeman (at that time a Campbellite)
and Mr. Campbell, published by Mr. Campbell
in the Millenial Jarbinger, No. 6. Vol. 3. pp.
192
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
+
280, 281. “But I must tell you (says Mr.
Vardeman) of a rencounter which I had with a
Catholic Clergyman a few months since. The
Right Rev. Mr.
from Bardstown, do you̟
know, had the audacity to come over into my
bounds, and right in the field of my labours be-
gan to hold forth the rank doctrine of Catholic
absolution. He contended that he and his
brethren had the power of forgiving sins, and
proved it all by scripture. Well, thought I, my
good sir, I will return the compliment. A few
weeks after, I sent on an appointment to Bards-
town, and had it publicly announced that I was
going to prove that the Baptist ministry had as
much power of remitting sins as the Catholic
ministry. I went on at the time appointed, and
was very courteously received by the whole
Catholic priesthood belonging to the establish-
ment in that place. My text was, "Whose
sins soever you remit, they are remitted; and
whose sins soever you retain, they are re-
tained." My method was to shew—
1. That the Lord had conferred on Peter
this power.
2. That Peter did remit and retain sins when
first he announced the Gospel. He proclaimed
remission to all who were present and were
baptized, and condemnation to them that would
not repent and be baptized.
3. That he taught christians how they were
to obtain remission by confession. Then I
came to the question that startled the doctors.
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
193
It was stated thus: How is it, said I, let me
ask, that we have this power now in the minis-
try, of forgiving sins? I answer for myself
and my brethren, we have it not in our persons;
nor do the ministers of the Catholic church
contend that they have the power of absolv-
ing, in their persons. So far we are agreed.
Well then, what remains? Our office? Yes;
it is an official power; and this is all that the
Catholics can claim. But let me add, there is
this difference: they, without any warrant, as-
sume to forgive sins committed after baptism,
but we assume only to remit sins committed be-
fore baptism, &c.
3. The Catholics teach purification by pur-
gatorial fire; Campbellism, by fair construc-
tion, teaches the same thing, by assuring us on
the one hand, that baptism is regeneration,
and on the other, that the baptism of fire spo-
ken of by John the Baptist, is "hell fire."
Thus "He shall baptize (regenerate) you in
the Holy Ghost and in fire, (i, e. hell fire.)
4. The Catholics teach that they are the on-
ly true church of God; Campbellism makes
the same claims. "WE proclaim the ancient
gospel! WE restore the ancient order of
things."
5. The Catholics exercise the spirit of intol-
erance toward the ministers and members of
all other churches. The peculiar spirit of
Campbellism is, "I am, and none else beside

me."
N
194
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
6. The Catholics allow the validity of bap-
tism performed by a lay member; Campbell-
ism makes it the privilege of all her members
to baptize. Compare this item with the com-
mission given by our Lord to the eleven Apos-
tles, "Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing,"
&c. and see whether this part of their system
be indeed the ancient order of things.
7. The Catholics oppose Bible Societies,
Tract Societies, Sabbath School Societies, and
Temperance Societies; so do the Campbell-
ites. The above comparison of Campbellism
with the beast, will, we think, abundantly
evince that it proceeded out of his mouth; and
teaches us the true origin of that heresy.
Having shewn that Campbellism came out of
the mouth of the beast, we proceed to shew
wherein it is like frogs, for those spirits are said
to be like frogs:
1. Frogs are a race of reptiles that can only
be produced under water; Campbellism can
only be produced in the same way, and that
according to their own shewing; in this, then,
they are like frogs.
2. Frogs perform all their actions in a con-
fused way, without any fixed rule or order;
Campbellism sets itself against creeds, confes-
sions of faith, disciplines, and forms of gov-
ernment; thus by despising dominion, they are
like frogs.
3. Frogs have a tremendous capacity of
swelling. Æsop discovered this and represents
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
195
one trying to swell himself to the enormous
size of an ox; and a peculiarity of Campbell-
ism is to swell, vapour and exalt itself above
all other professions of christianity. The mem-
bers of other denominations are in Babylon,
are blind guides leading the blind, are false
teachers, deceivers, sectarians, &c. while they
the Campbellites (though known to be the most
rigid sectarians of the day,) are the disciples,
members of Messiah's kingdom, are the re-
storers of the ancient order of things, teach-
ers of the true gospel, REFORMERS, CHRIS-
TIANS, &c. In all such swelling pretensions
they evince their similarity to frogs.
4. Frogs, when numerous, become a plague;
witness the plague of frogs in Egypt, related
by Moses; and Campbellism has been the
plague of the church, and the world, whenever
its proselytes have become numerous, impu-
dent and noisy as frogs, "their croaking is
heard in all corners of the land.”
5. Frogs are, by the common consent of
mankind, considered unclean; for although
they are often immersed in water, yet they as-
cend from it covered with slime, an abomina-
tion to the whole earth; and Campbellites pro-
fess (indeed) to be washed from their iniquities
by immersion, and to "ascend from the womb
of waters as innocent, as clean, as unspotted as
an angel;" but it so happens that these inno-
cent, clean, unspotted angels live among us,
and we have the opportunity of testing their
196
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
character by our Lord's rule, "By their fruits
ye shall know them;" and having witnessed so
many instances of drunkenness, gambling,
pride, intolerance, singing of carnal songs, at-
tending frolicks, and Sabbath breaking, we are
driven to the conclusion that such (notwith-
standing their high pretensions,) are no other
than "baptized heathen washed to fouler stains."?
True, they plead the absence of a divine pre-
cept for the observance of the Christian Sab-
bath, but seeing we are commanded to “be sub-
ject to the powers that be," and "to obey every
ordinance of man for the Lord's sake," is it not
evident that a man can neither be a good chris-
tian or even a good citizen, who profanes the
Lord's day? Indeed, when we consider that it
is the blood of Jesus which "cleanses from all
sin," and "purges the conscience from dead
works;"that the virtue of that atoning blood
is applied by the Holy Ghost-"But ye are
washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justi-
fied in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the
Spirit of our God," and that this is received
on our part by faith, as it is written, "That we
might receive the promise of the Spirit through
faith," Gal. 3: 14-"Purifying their hearts
by faith," (and that before baptism, as the con-
text shews;) see Acts 15: 89, also 10: 43, 44,
45; when we also include our Lord's declara-
tion, Luke 11: 13-"If ye then, being evil,
know how to give good gifts to your children,
how much more shall your Heavenly Father
+
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
197
give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?”.
Taking, we say, all this into consideration, we
cannot but see that they who look to an out-
ward ordinance, and not to God who is a Spirit,
for a clean heart and a pure conscience, must
and will be deceived. The heart and con-
science cannot be reached by an outward ap-
plication of water; nothing but the blood of
Christ applied by the Spirit of God can reach
the case; and the penitent calling upon God
through faith in Jesus Christ, fulfils the condi-
tion upon which such application will be made.
We conclude, then, that they who profess not
to have prayed for the gift of the Spirit, and
not to have received it by faith, have not re-
ceived it at all in its cleansing and purifying in-
fluences: and consequently, although they may
have received baptism, which is only an out-
ward sign of this inward cleansing, yet there
is much reason to fear that they are destitute
of the great blessing therein signified, and like
the Apocalyptic frogs are "unclean spirits.”
6. Those unclean spirits are said to be "The
spirits of devils working miracles;" and the
Campbellites profess to perform the greatest of
all miracles, the remission of sins, the new birth,
regeneration, purging the conscience, &c. Its
author says (Harbinger Extra, No. 1, p. 55,)
"All who, believing, are immersed for the re-
mission of their sins, have the remission of
their sins in and through immersion”—“Being
born again and being immersed, are the same
198
TREATISE ON. BAPTISM.
thing." To the regenerated he says-"Down
into the water you were led-in its womb you
were concealed-there your consciences were
released, there your old sins were purged
away;" p. 55. Who can read such declara-
tions without horror?-that a man that is a
worm, and the son of man that is a worm,
should profess to perform an act upon his fel-
low man by which his sins are remitted;-sins
committed against God, remitted by man!-
that a man should constitute his neighbor a
child of God!-regenerate his soul!-purge his
conscience! and remove his old sins! But
such are the miraculous pretensions of the
Campbellites, and who can hear them and not.
discover, that they bear strong features of "the
spirits of devils working miracles" spoken of
in the Revelation? Surely persons thus puri-
fied will have to sing in heaven (and to heaven
they will go according to their conceit,) a dif-
ferent song from that of the redeemed-"Unto
him which loved us, and washed us from our
sins in his own blood, to him be glory," &c.
for such a song would be to them untrue, unless
it can be made appear that the blood of Christ,
and Jordan, &c. mean the same thing. The
redeemed are washed in the blood of Christ--
Campbellites in the water. Their song, there-
fore, must, if consistent with their doctrine, be
something like the following: "Unto him that
loved us and sent Alexander to wash us from
our sins in some pond, creek or river, to him
TREATISE ON BAPTISM.
199
be glory," &c. And the Elder can never say
concerning these as he does concerning the re-
deemed "These are they that have come out
of great tribulation, and have washed their
robes and made them white in the blood of
the Lamb;"—but, these are they whose robes
were washed by their neighbors in water.
In conclusion, after reviewing the reasons for
believing that Campbellism came out of the
mouth of the beast, as also its strong resem-
blance to the Apocalyptic frogs, say whether
Mr. Campbell had not better be employed in
hardening his forehead to receive the blow giv-
en by this scripture, than to amuse himself and
others by hurling it at others? Or rather, had
he not better renounce his heresy, and embrace
the truth as it is in Jesus, and thereby escape
the fearful company and consequence to which
the word of God, in his present condition, con-
signs him?
200
QUESTIONS ON BAPTISM.
QUESTIONS ON BAPTISM.
[Extracted from the Rev. Valentine Cook's Treatise on
Baptism.]
1. Since the church of Christ is called a
house, built on the foundation of the apostles
and prophets, Christ being the chief corner
stone, do not those, who reject infant baptism,
pull down the house, or part of the building at
least?
2. Since the church of God is called a fami-
ly, and infants are part of this family, do not
those who cast them out of the church, by not
baptizing them, destroy part of this family?
3. Infants are part of the church which is
called an olive tree; and some branches being
broken off by unbelief, were the balance,
namely infants, in particular, ever broken off?
How then dare we break them off by refusing
to baptize them?
4. Since baptism as well as circumcision is
a token of regeneration, or salvation, do we not
in effect deny the salvation of infants by not ad-
mitting them to baptism? And does not this im-
ply a denial of God's work? Is not this a sin?
5. Moses was a type of Christ; his baptism
in the sea a type of christian baptism: as in-
fants were baptized unto Moses, ought they not
to be baptized unto Christ now? If not, is
Moses a type of Christ?
6. Since a little child is made an example
QUESTIONS ON BAPTISM.
201.
and copy of all religion, and we must be con-
verted and become as little children in point of
innocence, if we refuse to baptize an infant,
who is the example, can we with proprie-
ty baptize those adults, who are only the imita-
tion of this example?
7. He that receiveth one such little one in
my name, said Christ, receiveth me, and to
baptize them is to receive them in Christ's
name; does it not follow, that if we refuse to
baptize them we reject Christ, and consequent-
ly him that sent him: and can a christian do
this?
8. Abraham, the father of the faithful, by a
command of God received them into his church;
how dare we the children of Abraham, refuse
to admit them into the church by baptism, with-
out an express precept? .
9. Since baptism is the sign, seal, and door
of the visible church, as regeneration is of the
spiritual church, and Christ is in his house and
we are commanded to suffer little children to
come unto him, do we not break his command,
when we refuse to baptize them and admit them
in at this door?
10. Since infants are the members of Christ's
body, can we refuse to admit a member of
Christ's body to baptism?
11. Since the church of Christ is called a
sheep-fold and the door of this fold is baptism,
ought the old sheep to be admitted and the lambs
turned out?
202
QUESTIONS ON BAPTISM.
12. Since the promise of God means salva-
tion, and this promise is to us and our children,
and baptism is the token of this salvation
promised, do we not rob infants of their right,
and God of his glory in not baptizing them?
The apostles were commanded to baptize all
nations, and infants are a great part of all na-
tions; did they not neglect this command if
they did not baptize them?
13. If infants are admitted into heaven by
the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and made a
part of the church triumphant, ought they not
to be received into the church by water bap-
tism? If not, how is the will of God done up-
on earth as it is done in heaven?
14. If infants are admitted into the church
on earth and in heaven, but not in hell, is not
that church which has no infants in it more
like hell than heaven?
15. If we are to be converted and become
like a child in order to be baptized: then if a
child is like a converted person, ought it not to
be baptized also?
16. He was debtor to fulfil the whole law,
who was circumcised; he that is haptized to
John's baptism is bound to fulfil the duties of
John's dispensation. And to believe the Mes-
siah is yet to come and suffer, how can he be
a christian who is to believe this? If John's
was the christian baptism, why did St. Paul
baptize twelve persons over again who were
John's disciples, and are not they wrong who
follow this baptism at Jordan?
QUESTIONS ON BAPTISM.
203
17. Is not the baptism of the Holy Ghost
and fire performed by pouring and sprinkling?
And if so, it is not a burial; and how can the
Holy Spirit be a man's grave? What is a bap-
tism of fire? What is a grave of fire? Who
does not see that those who suppose that bap-
tism is a funeral are mistaken themselves and
are misleading others?
18. When Moses and the prophets mention
the use of water as a token of purification
either spiritually or literally, they all call it
pouring or sprinkling, and not dipping; and
baptism is acknowledged by all parties to mean
washing; and we are washed by blood and
made kings and priests to God, and the sprink-
ling of clean water and the blood of Jesus is
the end of all external washing; ought we not
to use water in baptism the same way?
19. It follows, that when we call sprinkling,
baptism, we give it the right name; if so, the
pouring of the Spirit is spiritual baptism; the
sprinkling or pouring of water is also baptism,
Is there as clear a proof that immersion is bap-
tism?
20. Since John's baptism is not the christian
baptism, and he directed the people to repent
and believe on him that was yet to come and
suffer, and St. Paul baptized some of John's
disciples over again, and directed them to be-
lieve on him that was to come and had suffered,
and as the Baptists follow John's baptism and
the Pedo-baptists follow the baptism of Paul or
204
QUESTIONS ON BAPTISM.
the christian baptism, is it strange that we and
the Baptists should disagree, when St. Paul
and the Baptists are at variance?
21. Since circumcision without the circum-
cision of the heart, is no circumcision (accord-
ing to St. Paul,) and water baptism or putting
away the filth of the flesh externally, is no bap-
tism without the baptism of the Spirit; as
signs and seals without their objects are noth-
ing; and as the Campbellites deny the baptism
of the Spirit, and practice immersion for re-
generation or the new birth, are they not with-
out any valid baptism? and should not their
baptism be rejected by every branch of the
church of God?
22. As Jesus Christ authorised gospel minis-
ters, and such only, to administer baptism, is
not the Campbellite immersion destitute of di-
vine authority, and in opposition to Christ, as
they are destitute of a gospel ministry?—and
should not their immersion be rejected by all
christians as downright mockery of God's holy
institution?
23. By circumcision, a small wound and a
little blood was sufficient for an outward sign
of the whole work of the Spirit under the for-
mer dispensation; why should not a little water
be deemed sufficient as a sign and seal of holi-
ness under the gospel? A little bread and
wine in the sacrament of the supper is the seal
of an abundance; why may not a little water
in baptism be a competent sign, seal and token
of the whole work of regeneration?
ORATION.
205
[The following poetic effusion is the conclusion of
an anonymous Poem, entitled "ALEXANDER THE
GREAT; Or the Learned Camel," which the public
have ascribed to the Rev. Wm. Phillips, of the Metho-
dist Episcopal Church:]
THE ORATION.
"Ho! every mother's son and daughter!
Here's the "gospel in the water;"
Here's the ancient gospel way-
Here's the road to endless day-
Here begins the "reign of Heaven,"
Here your sins shall be forgiven;-
Ev'ry mother's son and daughter!
Here's the "gospel in the water.”
All ye sons of Adam's race
Come and share this wat'ry grace;
Water gives the soul promotion,
Water is the healing lotion,
Water purifies the nation,
Water is regeneration!
Ev'ry mother's son and daughter!
Here's the "gospel in the water.”
From your hearts the veil of night,
Long has hid the ancient light;
I have torn the veil away,
I have brought the gospel day;
I will take you by the hand,
In the kingdom you shall stand!
Ev'ry mother's son and daughter!
Here's the "gospel in the water."
Sure you need not wait a minute,
To repent-there's nothing in it-
Never stop to read or pray,
Such is not the ancient way----
206
ORATION.
Immersion is the way alone,
By Paul and John and Peter shown.
Ev'ry mother's son and daughter!
Here's the "gospel in the water."
Never wait to get the Spirit,
Through the water you'll inherit
Kingly blessings, royal favor,
Water is the only Saviour-
Water is the second birth,
Nothing else you need on earth.
Ev'ry mother's son and daughter!
Here's the "gospel in the water."
Mystic doctors, long have tried,
To bewilder and divide;
Talking, without common sense,
Of the Spirit's influence,
And of being born of God-
Nonsense-never understood.
Come to me each son and daughter!
Here's the "gospel in the water."
Though your sins be black as jet,
Never mind to mourn or fret-
Come to me, no longer dream,—
I will plunge you in the stream;
Up you'll come in garments white
Holy as a saint of light.
Come to me each son and daughter!
Here's the "gospel in the water."
O ye blinded generation,
Won't you have this cheap salvation?
Won't you have your sins remitted?
Won't you be for glory fitted?
Will you follow creeds, confessions,-
Bow to Presbyt'ries and sessions,
ORATION.
207
'Till you're doom'd to death and slaughter?
Here's the "gospel in the water."
Here's regenerating laver,
Here begins the reign of favor,-
To the kingdom I will take you,
And a holy subject make you:
Come along, for if you tarry,
Soon I'll send you to old Harry!
All who are not born of water,
Shall be doom'd to death and slaughter.
But to you who have consented,
With my views to be contented,
You are in the "reign of Heaven,"
All your sins are now forgiven-
You are sanctified and holy,
Purified from sin and folly;-
You are freed from death and slaughter,
By the "gospel in the water."
Move along my subjects, hearty-
Blaming ev'ry sect and party,
Crushing creeds, opinions, isms,
Breaking churches, making schisms,
Bringing in millennial glory;—
Move along, for I'm before ye.
Free yourselves from ev'ry trammel,
Follow nothing but-A CAMEL."
INDEX.
Preface,
CHAPTER L-John's Baptism,
CHAP. II.-Baptism administered to Christ,
CHAP. III. The design of Christian Baptism,
CHAP. IV.-Infant Baptism,
CHAP. V.-Infant Baptism continued,
CHAP. VI.-Utility of Infant Baptism,
CHAP. VII-History of Infant Baptism,
CHAP. VIII.-The Mode of Baptism,
CHAP. X.-Baptism of the Eunuch,
CHAP. XI.—The Baptism of Paul,
CHAP. IX.-The Mode of Baptism continued,
CHAP. XII.-Mode of Baptism continued,
CHAP. XIII.-History of the Mode of Baptism,
CHAP. XIV,-Buried by Baptism,
Page.
3
5
13
20
33
44
59
69
77
92
105
109
113
120
125
132
141
147
152
159
CHAP. XV.-Born of Water' an 1 the Spirit,
CHAP. XVI.-Baptism in reference to remission
of sins,
CHAP. XVII.—A Summary View of the Mode of
Baptisni,
CHAP. XVIII-Regeneration not Immersion,
CHAP. XIX.-Campbell's Translation,
CHAP. XX.-Mr. Campbell as a Controversialist, 174
CHAP. XXI.—Mr. Campbell and the Apocalyptic
Frogs,
Questions on Baptism,
The Oration,
190
200
205

1

UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
3 1951 D01 245 470 J
WILSON
ANNEX
AISLE 74
3
2
QUAWN
EXTAWN-I
4
QUAWN--
1

0123456
0123456
0123456
654321
A4 Page 8543210
AIIM SCANNER TEST CHART #2
4 PT
6 PT
8 PT
Spectra
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",/?$0123456789
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:”,./?$0123456789
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:',./?$0123456789
10 PT ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?$0123456789
Times Roman
4 PT
6 PT
8 PT
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:'../?$0123456789
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?$0123456789
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?$0123456789
10 PT ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?$0123456789
4 PT
6 PT
8 PT
Century Schoolbook Bold
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?$0123456789
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?$0123456789
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?$0123456789
10 PT ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?$0123456789
4 PT
6 PT
News Gothic Bold Reversed
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:'',/?$0123456789
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:',./?$0123456789
8 PT ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?$0123456789
10 PT ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?$0123456789
4 PT
6 PT
8 PT
Bodoni Italic
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?80123456789
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?$0123456789
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?$0123456789
10 PT ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;:",./?$0123456789
ΑΒΓΔΕΞΘΗΙΚΛΜΝΟΠΡΣΤΥΩΝΨΖαβγδεξθηικλμνοπορστνωχ ζ=7",/St=#°><ΕΞ
Greek and Math Symbols
4 PT
6 PT
8 PT
ΑΒΓΔΕΞΘΗΙΚΛΜΝΟΠΦΡΣΤΥΩΧΨΖαβγδεξθηικλμνοπφροτυωχψί=7",/S+=#°><><><=
ΑΒΓΔΕΞΘΗΙΚΛΜΝΟΠΦΡΣΤΥΩΧ Ζαβγδεξθηικλμνοπόρστυωχψίπτ",./St##°><><><Ξ
10 ΡΤ ΑΒΓΔΕΞΘΗΙΚΛΜΝΟΠΦΡΣΤΥΩΧΨΖαβγδεξθηικλμνοπορστνωχ ίΞτ",/St=#°><><=
White
MESH HALFTONE WEDGES
I
|
65
85
100
110
133
150
Black
Isolated Characters
e
3
1
2
3
a
4
5
6
7
о
8
9
0
h
B
O5¬♡NTC
65432
A4 Page 6543210
A4 Page 6543210
©B4MN-C
65432
MEMORIAL DRIVE, ROCHESTER, NEW YORK 14623
RIT ALPHANUMERIC RESOLUTION TEST OBJECT, RT-1-71
0123460
மய
6 E38
5 582
4 283
3 32E
10:
5326
7E28
8B3E
032E ▸
1253
223E
3 3EB
4 E25
5 523
6 2E5
17
分
​155自​杂
​14 E2 S
1323S
12E25
11ES2
10523
5836
835E
7832
0723
SBE 9
OEZE
1328
2 E32
3 235
4 538
5 EBS
6 EB
15853
TYWES
16 ELE
14532
13823
12ES2
11285
1053B
SBE6
8235
7523
◄ 2350
5 SER
10 EBS
8532
9538
7863
ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, ONE LOMB
PRODUCED BY GRAPHIC ARTS RESEARCH CENTER