Newspaper Page Text
386
Original.
[For the Christian Index.]
BAPTISM AND ITS SUBJECTS.
The positions which wo undertake to establish in refer
ence tolhis subject arc these :
I. 1 but Baptism is immersion only; and
11. ‘I hat Believers only are the subjects of Christian bap
tism.
In proof of the first position, I refer:
Ist. To the meaning of the word employed in the scrip
tures to designate the rite. “Jt must be supposed that a pro
per word was used—one which exactly defines the nature of
the ordination.” If then the meaning of that word can be
ascertained, all doubt ought to be removed. The word is
Inplizo, which has been merely transferred to our language,
by changing the Greek for Roman letters, and altering the
termination.
What then is the meaning of the Greek word ? I reply,
it. means to dip or immerse. The idea of water is not in the
word. It is as applicable to every fluid as to water. Indeed
ais applicable to any thing that is penetrated. “It denotes
mode and nothing but mode.” The word occurs in the
Greek translation of the old Testament, and is faithfully ren
dered dip in our version. 2 Kings 5: 14. Naaman went 1
down and dipped bimselt seven times in Jordan. Mere bath
ing in a liver is called baptism. What mote do we want
then, to teach us the mode of this ordinance of Christ? if
Mine was not another passage of scripture to throw light on
the institution, as far ns respects mode, is not this, to every
teachable mind, perfectly sufficient ? Wo might here pre
■■ ‘ iit in addition to the above, tin: ample concessions of a bun
<O. l l Pt dobaptist divines, that this is the meaning of the word,
and that immersion was practised by the apostles, and by
.succeeding Christians for thirteen hundred years, from the
cotumencemui! ol the Christian era. A presbyterian minis
i r, Prof. Campbell of Scotland, one of the most learned
Greek Scholars and Biblical critics of modern times, says,
the word, both in sacred authors and in classical, signifies to
it j>, to plunge, to immerse. It does not signify to pour or to
.sprinkle. When the Greeks wish to denote these they have
< tGr wm’ds to express them. Now surely the Greeks un
iter i.r-d tb ‘ir own language; and they have from the be
,r;iiiing until this day, practiced immersion. But I need sav
no more in reference to the literal meaning of the word, ii
signifies to dip and nothing else. To baptize is to immerse.
ti. ’I lie figurative use of the word is a second argument in
favor of our position. In a figurative sense baptho is used
in the New Testament to signify overwhelming. Thus, “I
have a baptism to be baptized witli, and how am I straitened
till it bo accomplished.” That is, lam about to he over
whelmed with sufferings, and I am greatly distressed in the
ivo!y used to.-signify a burial. Rom. 0: 3, i
‘l. Col. 2: 11. it set ills too plain fur argument that bap
fsir is here compared to a burial, in which the believer bet
ing dead to sin, is buried in baptism, and from this emblematic!;
grave, lie rises again to anew and spiritual life. The figure
*- i |'f- beautiful and impressive, if baptism is immersion, but
ii lias no pertinency if any thing else is baptism. Hence
baptism is immersion only.
■ I 1 lie places se lected for the administration of baptism,
furnish another argument. Doubtless any one reading the
accounts of John s baptisms in the Bible, and having no
l.nuwle ‘ go cd the controversies upon the subject, would come
to a right conclusion, concerning baptism. John was bap
tizing in Jordan w here the river was sixty or eight! Let wide.
And the reason for selecting a spot near to Salim is express,
ly assigned, “because there wis much water there.” The
case of the Ethiopian may be cited. ‘See here is water,’ &c.
I. I lie practice of the Christian world lor many centuries!
•i.lords additional testimony that immersion only is baptism.
On this pomt there is overwhelming evidence. A popish,
w l iter states that for 1300 years was baptism generally and
ordinarily performed by t lie immersion of a man underwa
ter, and only on extraordinary occasions was sprinkling or
affusion permitted.'’ \Ve have already alluded to the Greek
church, in the English Episcopal church, immersion was 1
practiced until the bi ginning of’the seventeenth century. —
Blither desired to introduce immersion into his church.—
Alter speaking of baptism as n symbol of death and resurrec
t.on, he says, “On this account, l could wish that those who!
are to bo baptist and, should be completely immersed into water,
according to the meaning of the word, and the signification
of ;!ie ordinance.” Such is the evidence of the practice in
early ages.
Now in proof of my first position, that baptism is immer-1
cion only. I have urged, the meaning of the word both
literal and figurative, the places selected for the adminis
trar.on of the ordinance, and the practice ol the Christian
world, for many centuries.
Wo will now consider the secomi position.
11. That Heir'vers only are the subjeels of ('hrislian bap
tism. Our inquiry here, need not be tedious, if we are
uninfluenced by prejudice, we must entirely concur with
that profound thinker, Dr. Carson, when lie states, that the I
; postal.*; commission, obviously points out the proper subjects
ot baptism. “Go ye, therefore and teach ail nations, bap
Using them, &e. Matt. 29: 19. The word correspond
ing to teach, “ hero it first occurs in this passage, signifies to
c.seiple or make scholars. The persons then whom this
* tininission warrants to be baptized, are scholars of Christ,
h iving believed in Inn for salvation. This is confirmed inlj
t ie commission recorded by Mark, “Go ye into all tiie world,
a.id preach the gospel to every creature. He that believ
etli and is baptized, shall be saved, and lie that believeth not !
shall be damned. Here the persons whom Matthew calls
disciples, Mark calls believers. According to this com-!!
Uiissieu, none are warranted to be baptized but disciples otjj
Cl ft %nvtp.
believers. It is impossible that a command to baptize be
lievers can be extended to include any but believers. No
j, command, no explanation can bring unbelievers into the
commission. Talk not then of the Abraliamic covenant, and
of circumcision ; of a baptism or any other New Testament!
ordinance must be found to correspond with these, it cannot!
be forced into the baptism commanded in this commission.— !
“I would gainsay an angel from heaven who should say that
this commission may extend to the baptism of any but believ-!
crs.” His ascertain would imply that the same persons!
may be at the same time, both believers and unbelievers. I
I Here then, we may stand entrenched, and defy the ingenuity
of earth and hell to drive us from our position. The com
mand of Jesus to every believer to be baptized, stands en
graven in indelible characters in this commission. Till the
trumpet sounds for judgment it cannot be effected. Heaven
and earth will pass away boforc it will cease to be a duty for
believers tube baptized.’’ Who is he that dares to substitute
infant baptism for the believers V 1 Who ever he
is, he makes void the law of God by his tradition.
.So conclusive is the conclusion upon the subjects of bap
tism, iliut if there were nothing else in the Bible in reference
to the subject, we should be sure that believers only are tire
subjects of Christian baptism. And
2. The New Testament shows that the apostles under
stood the commission just as we do. On the day ol Pente
cost, after Peter had preached the gospel to the multitude,
“They that had gladly received his word were baptized.”
At Samaria, “when they believed Philip preaching the things
concerning tiic kingdom of God, they were baptized, both
men anil women.” To the question of the Eunoch, “what
doth hinder me to be baptized ?” Philip replied, “if thou
belie vest with all thy heart thou irmyest.” Peter said res-!
pecting Cornelius and his friends, “Can any man forbid wa
ter that these should baptized, winch have received tliej
Holy Ghost as well as we ?” To the question of the Pliil
ipian jailor, Paul answerc<L “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ
and thou shall be thy house, “The subsequent
verses state, that he and all his household, having believed,!
were baptized. It is asserted of Lydia, that before she was
baptized, “the Lord opened her heart that she should attend
to the things which were spoken of Paul.” Crispus the
chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all
j his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing, believed 1
and were baptized. In every case of baptism reedVdcd in the
Scriptures, some facts are stated which assert or imply, that
the persons baptized, were believers. From the baptism of
whole families we can by no means infer the baptism of in
fants. Many households are now baptized by baptist minis
ters, which contain no infants. There is on the other hand
not a single example in the New Testament of the bap
tism of an infant, or one word which fairly implies it.—
I he fact that our Saviour blessed little children lias nothing
ito do with their baptism. Children may be blessed without
being baptized. VVe know Jesus did not baptize them, for
he never baptized at all.
3. But as infant baptism cannot be found in the New
Testament, its advocates endeavor to find a cover for it in the
Did. Their position is thus stated: “The Covenant with
Abraham was a spiritual covenant, and that as such it inclu
ded infants, that they were accordingly circumcised under . i
the old dispensation ; that baptism is a substitute for circum
cision, and that consequently infants are to be baptized.”i
Now, wo deny the truth of every part of this argument. —
We deny that there was any such tiling as a church among
the Jew : —i. e., a separate body of true saints. The whole
Jewish nation was considered us one political body, and the
rite of circumcision was a national mark of distinction,
“which ail male Jews whether pious or wicked, were requir
ed to possess. Male infants were cireumeisee not because
I their parents were pious, but because they were Jews; and the
Jews were required to circumcise their male servants,
whether born in their bouses,or bought with their money, be
ause these servants were now members of the Jewish nation.
We again deny that there is any proof that baptism is a subs
titue for circumcision. Not a word is said in the New Tes
tament which justifies sueli a conclusion: aud to infer such a
substitution isa dangerous license, which virtually overthrows
the authority ol the Bible.” Multitudes who bad already been
■ circumcis’ and, were baptized by John and the apostles. Why
this, if baptism was merely a substitute for circumcision? The
only proper answer is, baptism has not come in the room of
circumcision. Make what we will of the Abrahainic cove
nant, it atibrds no grounds for infant baptism. \V hat analogy
1 can there be between the circumcision of a male Hebrew
child, and the baptism ofa female child of a believing Gentile.
If baptism is a substitute, then the whole example must be
carried out—none but male infunts must be baptized—and
all male infants, and male servants, must be baptized, what
ever be their age or character! Do any of our Pedobaptist
’ brethren thus practice? No! Then they, themselves do
not believe that baptism is come in the room of circumcision.
4. There is another argument of great imnortance with
tis against infant baptism. It is inconsistent with one of the
fundamental principles of Christianity—that every man is
held responsible for his own conduct and must be justified
! by his own individual faith. The piety of the parent can
not serve the child, and the piety of the child cannot avail
! for the salvation of the parent. But infant baptism is found
ed on another principle. It the faith of the parent,
entitles the child to become a visible member of tile family
jof Christ. “Here is a very dangerous doctrine, the true re
suits of w hich may be seen in the popish indulgences, w hich
are granted on the ground that the merits of one man can be
transferred to anothi r.”
Infant baptism was probably introduced into the church
about the commencement of the third country, in connex
ion with other corruptions which even then began to prepare
jjthe way for jiopcry. A, superstitions idea respecting the neccs-
(sity of baptism to salvation lead to the baptism of sick persons,
tand finally to the baptism of infants. Sponsors, holy water,
{the sign of the cross, and a multitude of similar ceremonies,
were soon introduced. The church lost her simplicity and
i purity, her ministers became ambitious, and the darkness
{'gradually deepened into the long and dismal night of papal
ii despotism.— Knowles.
“Thus have we seen Irorn the most impartial exnmina
i tion, that infant baptism had not, in the word of God, an
J inch of solid ground on w hich to stand. The apostolic com
: mision commands the bapttsmof believers and of believers
only. No lawful interpretation can introduce infants into
that commission, or give authority to dispense with the bup
tism of believers. No instance of the baptism of an infant
is to be found among the documents of the apostolic practice.
A child may perceive the insufficiency of the argument from
Jthe householders. “The abrahamic covenant bus no bearing
“on the subject.” Infant baptism violates individual liberty
and a fundamental principle of Christianity—justification bv
j individual faith. It is a relic of popery.—Baptism we have
! shown to be immersion by a strength of evidence which we
believe none will be able to overturn.
Bet the children of God renounce the traditions of men;
a let them submit w ith humility and gratitude, to the ordi
nance ot Christ. In keeping his commandments there is
j j great reward. “Why will ye call me, Lord, Lord, and do
loot the things which 1 say ?” IOTA.
—
[For the Christian Index.]
WESTERN BAPTIST ASSOCIATION
ij Dear Dm. Baker , — 1 send you a copy of the Minutes of
.the above named Association. 4uu will perceive by it, that
i{ goad deal of work has been cut out, as the Tailor’s say,
and that the denomination, in this part of Georgia, is in a
.growing condition, —over 500 added last year to the churches*
jin the bounds ol this body. The minutes are very well ar
ranged by the Clerk; yet there are s *eral typographical
(| errors, notwithstanding the brother had the work done in
ij “Charleston, S. C.’ Some of these errors are very ruinous
jto the sense of some of the actions of the Association. The
I resolution on page 7tb of the Minutes, contain a very impor
i taut omission of two words, viz: “three, and,” which should
lx: inserted between the preposition “to” and the article “an.”
file resolution would tie n convey the truo sense of the As
sociation, anil would re ad as follows:
i “Resolved, l hat the 7th article of our Decorum be so al
tered as to read : ‘No Church in the Union shall have moro
than two delegates, until they shall have seventy-five mem
bers, and then they shall be entitled to three, and an addi
tional delegate for every fifty members alter the first seventy
five.’ ”
In the report of the Committee on Publications, page 9,
hue 17 from bottom, thorn is a in ilu> puuoiuuiioo
[and in a word. The word “order” should be “older” and
‘thecomma after it should be omitted
At page 12th, line Bth from top. the semicolon ofter“others”
should be placed after “also.” This improper position of the
semicolon, makes havoc of the sense.
Again, on the same page, “Talbert and Reese” should be
,Talbert X. Reese, or Talbot X. Reese,
j Again, page 15th, line 4th from top, the comma after
‘•school''’ should be omitted and inserted after the word “op
portunity,” in the next line. This would give the sense
which our worthy brother, the Chairman, intended.
I noticed in the Minutes of the Flint Rivyr Association for
last year, printed at Penfioid, a degree of typographical ac
curacy and neatness which I could wish the Minutes of the
Western Association couid boast of. Bv-the-bv, 1 am not
friendly to the practice of sending our printing out of our
State, and from our brethren who are able, very able, to do.
the work just good enough; and much better than those who
are not identified with us in religious sentiment and feelin".
AN OLD BAPTIST. 0
[For the Christian Index. 1
“THE BIG HEAD.”
There has been a great deal said about w hat, in common
parlance, is called “the big head.” Not being skilled in
’ the matter, the writer is unable to say whether there is really
an enlargement of that member, or whether there is ouly a
morbid action of the brain ; whether the muscles on the ex
i tenor are inflamed, or w hether all these symptoms combined
constitute the disease in question. However, the disease is
either very prevalent, or there is a good deal of quackery on
the subj* ct. Or it may he that the doctors of this complaint
find it to their interest to examine the heads of those whom
they suspect of being afflicted with this dreadful maladv,
through magnifying glasses, and thus mistake the seeming
enlargement of the head for real disease of that member.—
Or, more probably, they are themselves so afflicted with the
disease as to confound their sense of discrimination, and liko
a person afflicted with Jaundice, they are ready to conclude
that aL whom they meet are diseased, when, in fact, nobod v
is diseased hut themselves. There seems to have been doe
torsof “the big head” in the time of the Saviour. Men who
were so benevolent that a mote in their brother’s eye gave
them more uneasiness than a beam in their own. And there
appears to be a goodly number of this class now.. If any
one have the hardihood to dissent from their opinions and the
frankness to declare it, no course of fasting and penance
can, in the ir opinion, save him from an attack of the disease.
“He’s a gone ease!” “Perfectly incurable!” And thev
would as soon think of going to Cuba in the dog days, as to
think of passing their neighbor's without reminding them of
the fact. But the patient, “poor man, there’s no use in say
ing any thing to him. about his condition.”
Such is the cant of little minds and of little heads with re
gard to those who may honestly differ with them. It is the
l spirit of intolerance in chains, only growling and showing
[.December