--
. -:.ifi. .t UJ. Is i J Uft'U i'.,jNr-iH!.ur
Ycir J tf rt T ars t c!T f ia j ft t j&K) f ?r
roof frota ll re Testament of Infant Bap
tism Las tcn careoHy perused, anl if yon are
msl hoowt man, jou will fark or cr tha rash to tnj
tetit, Mr. . 11 ,: . 1 presume you will find the
vroof to plain, ind so toacb to lha point, lint i
committee of reference is not necessary ; Lot if
you are uuwuung to pay too nonj without, i
beg leayo to name Her. Ir. Edgar, Ret Dr.
McFerrin, and Dr. Winston of your church.
Now for theproof that infant baptism is taught
in the New Testament, u Be subject tor every
ordinance of man for the Lord's sake." 1 Pet.
4:13. Yours, &c, '-,. - . S. -
ISAILIglKSIEI, If, (P.
FUIDAT; BIARCQ 5, 1852,
Our readers will perhaps be surprised to notice on the
outside of iir paper of this week two articles which
we hare published before. A friend has kindly given
, us the paper on which to print a number of extra
copies for gratuitous circulation The papers thus
printed we wish to contain articles calculated to be
extensively useful. We wish, that all may know what
Baptists really. believe, j ' 7-- . .
Howell's Sermon on Baptism
We copy, from the Richmond Republican this ex
cellent, discourse. Our .readers will not
it a careful perusal. "
fail to give
Delivered by the Rev. Dr. Hotcrll, Pastor of
- Ikt Second Baptist Church of this cilyy the
Sth inst.yio a large and attentive eongrega-
THE EECOEDEE,
REPORT OF A SERMON,
gatinn, on the subject " V hat is tfaftismt"
- , It is useless for us to do more than invite public
will be read with'interest by all who know anything
of the source from which it emanated, or are at all
familiar with the subject of Baptism."
The Reverend gentleman, having announced his
text, 44 As many of you as have been baptized into
Christ, have put on Christ," pal. 3 chap. 27th verse,
spoke nearly as follows : I
Baptism is the prescribed form in which you pro
fess the religion of Christ. It is a rule of universal
application, that the public participation in the dis
tinguishing forms of any system of religion, human
or divine, has ever, in eve ry nature, been regarded as
the profession of that religion. -He who offers the
pTescribedsacrifices to idols, is an idolator. The man
who observes the prayers and ablations enjoined by
MfJinmmL iAa Mnhnmmeda'n. In vour baotism. vou
have professed and declared' yourself a Christian.
I his conclusion is sustained dv tne common sense
,aud reason of all men. It is the great truth affirm
ed in the text. " Ye are all professedly the chil
dren of God by faith in Christ-Jesus. For as many
of you as have been baptized into Christ have put
on Christ," have intelligently and publicly, made a
profession of the religion of Christ. He is the
. prince of life, and you have put on" his dis
tinguishing livery. He is the captain of your salva
tion, and you wear the uniform of his army. None
ntprori trio Ranrtnarv an members of the churches ia
apostolic times, without such personal prof ession ; and
. all who made it were firmly united in the Redeemer.
. ' By one Spirit ye are all baptized into one body.
There is, said Paul, neither Jew, or Greek, there is
, - ---neither bond nor free, there is neitherpinale nor .fe
male, for ye are all one in Christ Jesus'." . Baptism is
. therefore your formal profession af the religion of
Christ. " As, many of you as have been baptized
into Christ, have put on Christ."
, In the consideration of this subject three inquiries
; present themselves : 1 What baptism 1 2 Who
are to receive baptism ? 3 What are tlu advantages
. and privileges which haptixm confers 1 To the first
, - K of these, I shall devote the present discourse. And
1 before I commence the argument, I beg permission
to make a remark respecting pur brethren of the sev
eral pedobaptist denominations around us. To dif
fer with them on this, or any other subject, gives
me no pleasure. " God knows I feel for many ifthem
- with whom I have the pleasure of an acquaintance,
V "the sincere regard, both as men and as christians.
.Most gladly would I concur with them in sen:iment,
i j were k possible to do so, and at the same tirae please
and ober the Saviour. In this discourse, therefore,
v and in any others with which it may be my duty to
follow it, nothing is further irom my uuenuon man
the design to foster a sectarian spirit, or to widen the
breach, already too: capacious, between the christians
. 1 1 T. r . MM ...tonflA 4 A ..AM
. piuiperent cnurcnes. n ishui my pipusciuicu
.sure.or condemn otters. It is the right of every man
in our happy country a right of which Baptists in
all ages, and in every nation, have been the firm and
unwavering advocates to decide, and act for him
self in all that oertains to reliffion. He is accounta
ble to God onluAov his opinions, and his practice
My purpose is topffertoall who. are present here,
the required explanations for myself, arid" my bretft-
ren, for what has been considered unnecessary sin
"erularity, and to defend the reasons for our proceed
ings in regard to. the ordinance of baptism. With
these preliminary observations, and soliciting your
candid attention, and your earnest prayers, that we
may all be led to the knowledge and belief of the
' ' truth, as it. is in Jesus Christ, I proceed to the drs-
: aussioh of the first inquiry,
d MAX A3 JIAr 1 LDaU. Z
' ; To this question I have given mature, protracted,
j and anxious investigation. I have had before me
the light of the Bible, and of every period of the
v christian-church. My object has been to determine
my personal duty and obedience to Jesus Christ.
.- . J 1 . - VL .1 .1
lX)ng since l nave amveu at me seuieu, tne uuwa-
- "! x vering conclusion and the more'I study it,the more
, " v I am confirmed in the assurance, that the immersion in
nalrtf a true-btleiever in Christ, bu an authorized
4 a - minister of the Gospel, in the name of the Father, and
f- of the Son. and of the Hal u Ghost, is christian hapt ism.-
7 - This is- christian baptism. -This aone is christian
W baDtism. For the sake of more perfect definiteness,
"v . - however, !, assume that immersion is necessary to bap-
t ism, anu wneremere no immersion, mere ts no oap-
tism;J ' The truth of this proposition is proved by the
- . r- ninirnf the word emnloved by the hofv Soirit in
'it" L.'Je to describe the ordinance ; by the metaphor
' ical sense of the rite, and by the facts cand doctrines
(which baptism was instituted to represent and to
teach. .
j -s . , That' immersion is alwaus necessary to christian
. I-; mrn'M bu the trns nf thj tmrd used in . the
i 'V JJible to drxribethe ordinance. , 4? 1 ;
' The word employed invariablv. in some one or
other of its forms, is baptizo. To ascertain the sense
- - of lias word we necessarily, have recourse to the
v 4. Lexicons. What do they teach t Take un Schre-
Tilius. Robinson, Donnegan, Groves, take up anVa
iTicon or ait oi uieta, sou yu wtu una mat mey
the ,word to dip, to twwerse, o bathe, to uM
1 wnerse. to suuc, 10 warn; anu maapnortcanu. to be
-olunffed ; into a flood of calamities and afflictions
V But no wlere do you find in a single instance, that
lchx means either to sprinlde or to povr If then the
-' se'r. of the wt :1 is decide the form of the action
bat-U nis ta dip, or to immerse and since neither
. . . ? 3 - , -.1
aprniji nor peering is ; ever usea to oenne tne
.word, neither sprttiamg no pouring ever conveys
- KS meaning. . it is impossioje mat sprinkling- or
.pouring can he baptism. Permit roe there, and at
once, to set at rest the fanciful notion that baptizo
is a -eneric word, and, denotes, without respect to
mcJ:, cr illusive of all modes, ;any application of
"watr. I will do this, not only by f proving the per
fect d iieness cf the "word, which will appear more
fully i .re: ' ;r, t also by the highest pedobaptist
authority Aeric Professor Chas. Anthon, of
Columbia Collet, , i is an Episcopalian. He
has edited rost c our classical achool books, pub
lished A C :al Dictbaary, &c: Dr. Parmly of
Itu.
hm iiul l'-.t i nti'init lht ' word fc4iJ
.t;.i... ,i i t'lV.yrTniM. Lmm .1. r.-
'jlitBn to
.rM.tu n ! t.a. iwtr of Mth MMkiR.
a much the ore a iha othrr-and that ttfrf thol
which the word was taken, has ted you to the same
conclusion P 4 I
Dr. Anthon answers in these words, ander date
Col. CoUesre, March 27, 1843.
There i no authority whatever for the ciapilar
remark made by the Iter. Dr. bpring, relative to the
force of baptizo. The primary meaning of the word
is to dip or to immerse j and its secondary meanings,
if it have any, all refer in . some way or other to tne
same leading idea. Sprinkling &e. are entirely out
oi the question I
This (and much more to the same effect might he
presented) silences forever the supposition that the
word is generic indefinite, and irrespective of mode
or inclusive of all modes means any application of
water bv immersion, or sprinklinx, or pouring.
- Let it be further remembered that baptism is itself
exclusively a figure, a symbol aorw, a mode. JNow
if you take away the form, or mode, nothing is left ;
you take away the thing. Baptism, therefore, inva
riably denotes mode, and nothing but mode.
Whence, I may now ask, how we get the word
baptizo ? It is derived from the root bapto. These
two words are therefore considered by many as sy-
nonomous. This however is. plain! u a mistake.
Their pr'mar? meamW is thesarAe, but sameness
proceeds no further. .Derivatives in pnuoiogy, are
always, as you must be aware, designed to modify
their primitives, and thus to express what is intended,
more defim'telu than the sense of the primitke would
admit. Were it not so. what would be the use of
derivatives 1 They would in any language be a
profitless encumbrance. ; Such is the exact difference
between bapto and baptizo, a difference that naturally
and materially affects the question at issue, and ought
to be maturely considered. JBaptote never in a sin
gle instance, applied to the ordinance of baptism. I
desire that you shall especially note this fact, since
meanings are often brought from bapto, which you
are told belong to baptism. This is not true, since
it is another word, and not of the same meaning.
You hear men talking of baptism as meaning to smear
and to dye ; and of the baptism of a lake with the
blood of a frog. In every one of these and all simi
lar cases, the word is bapto, which is never used
to express christian baptism. Baptizo is exclusively
u?ed when a christian baptism is Spoken of ; and I
here deliberately assert, and I know what I am about,
thai in the whole Greek language, baptizo has no
meaning, which as Prof. Anthon says, may not be
resolved into dip, or immerse.' If the truth of this
declaration is disputed by any scholar, let him bring
me the passage by which it may be disproved, from
the Septiutgint, from the New Testament, from any
of (he Greek classics, or from Greek Fathers. If I
am wrong the passage can be produced, and the fact
proved ; but it never has been done, and I know very
well it never can be done. The meaning of. baptizo
never can be expressed by any act short of immer
sion. Arid here 1 must express my surprise to find
that on this subject, some'of our pedobaptist brethren,
whose learning and religion would seem - to justify
the expectation of more candour, are in the habit of
misrepresenting Dr. Carson. In his learned work
on baptism, he arrives at the results I have now sta
ted ; afteT which tluy make nim say, in tne as
sertion that baptizo means exclusively to immerse he
knows thai all the Lexicons and commentators are
against him. I have within a few days past, re-examined
his work, and find that he says no such thing.
His language is this, p. 79 edt. 1823
Baptizo to the utter exclusion of bapto, is applied
to the christian rite. . Bapto, rlhe root, 1 have shown
to possess two meanings, to dip and to dye. Bapti
zo, I have asserted, has but one signification. It
has been formed on thttidea of the primary meaning
of the root, and has never admitted' the secondary.
Now, both these things have been mistaken by wri
ters on both sides of the controversy Baptists and
Pedobaptists.1 It has been generally taken for
granted that the two words are equally applicable to
baptism ; and that they both equally signify to dye.
Both of them in a secondary sense are - supposed to
signify to wash, or to moisten. I do not admit this
with respect to either. I have already proved this
with respect to bapto; the proof is equally strong with
respect to baptizo. My position is that tt always sig
nifies to dip; never expressing anytmng out mode, rsow
as I have all the lexicographers and commentators
against me in this opinion, it will be necessary to say
a word or two with respect to the authority of lexi
cons." In this opinion ? In what Opinion of Dr. Carson
is it in which he has the lexicographers and com
mentators against him 1 It is 1st that bapto is not
equally withbaptizo applied to the christian rite but
this fact is now given up to Dr. Carson by all scho
lars ; 2ndly that baptizo has not the secondary mea
ning of bapto, to dye or color, 3rdly that baptizo has
no secondary meanings; and.4thly, that it means mode
and nothing but mode. Do not the lexicons all de
fine baptizo ia its primary sense, to dip, to plunge,
to immerse 1 Certainly they do. Their here they
agree with Dr. Carson. Do they ever define this
word, to pour, or to sprinkle! Never in a single in
stance. Here also they all agree with Dr. Carson.
In what then were they against him 1 In the alleged
secondary and remote meanings, which they admitted
and Dr. Carson denied. These are the facts. What
do they amount to 1 They relinquish nothing what
ever. Dr. Carson was a good, a great, and a learned
man. : He has passed from the world. I trust these
facts will protect his memory against any misrepre
sentation hereafter, such as that which I have here
been called; upon to correct.
1 now remark that ,the word employed to express
baptism is thoroughly definite anjd unambiguous, and
that word which of all others most fully and perfect
ly conveys the idea of immersion, and fixes it as the
baptism appointed by Christ. Such is the rich vari
ety, copiousness of the Greek language in which as
every one .knows, the New Testament is written, that
a different term is used for every conceivable form
of the application of water for any purpose, whether
frofane or sacred, as raino, rantizd, cheo, enchco, nipto
ouobapto, baptizo, pluno, agnizo, catliairo, and others.
Some of these wordsjexpress different actions; and oth
ers the same action with regard to different objects; but
all are employed to describe the use of water for dif
ferent purposes. It is inconsistent with any reason
able conceptions of the wisdom and benevolence of
God. to presume for.a moment, that in his holy word,
respecting the teachings of which it is so necessary
that we should have correct ideas, that the Holy
Ghost did not use words with the utmost precision of
import. When God commands it is necessary, if we
obey him, that we shall know what he means.
Among so many words in the most perfect language
ever spoken by man, is there not one definite enough
to describe the action of baptism in such a manner
that we shall certainly understand precisely what it
is which is enjoined, and thus avoid the heart burn
ings and litigations, which have so long agitated and
divided the people of God ! Did the Holy Spirit in
dictating his revelation, design to leave upon our
mind an indefinite impression J This would have been
the case nad he, as our redobaptist brethren tell us.
intended to confine baptism to no particular mode.
That he did not so design is ; certain. If he had he
would not have adopted darftso lest immersion should
have been understood as the action demanded ; nor
would he have employed cfalest ponrinsr should
have been supposed to be that action prescribed : nor
w&aid haTe chosen raino lest sprinkling should have
been Dresumed oblhratorr. He would certainlv have
given us some word having reference to the effect
rather than the action. Was such a word at com
mand? Most certainly it was. At once our thoughts
recur to agnizo to purify and kathairo to cleanse, in
any manner of applying water. But Jehovah did
not adopt an indefinite term : he did not therefore,
command an indefinite action. vThe word he adop
ted always convey the idea ot immersion ; conse
quently God will regard immersion only as christian
baptism. . z- . ' ,,-
We may be assisted in our investigations as to the
sense in question if we look into the various ancient
versions of the scriptures into different laneriaires.
and ascertain how the words which relate to baptism
ar know it ; that it Uthe trorl that couU lure ojwj i:laa a few year tit, i mi stjutitoaai.
been trWlcd by our atior, having ttch a varieiv UUiKUm em m n U pu< w r-r, t
antoauitereryont'sfiewt tn4 rutto?ii. Jlay'l c redilie that it wouUl m fare tro HfliratrJ i
amk vnttlf tMr kniwlpt!-e of tht lanaian fmm om tmt or another I thtt aumctotlf tf ri T
have been there, rendered. Beginning with the SyriactB. J. 4. 3. 3 employs it. Speaking lof the
! aawwf , H i a fw k f-?t thit ' f
Ca2retMi4.ii tha Nt I wnli
U iit rfwkit.
ia I1 tdf Lif b. it i tr lrre4 Its' fr li;f5
tiiUtrJ lf- Uk& u la a4
mvh la a ixtanra v a mm4 ttf
tf trit t w fwnr.
Imk j!a. if von ulrase. into our comma rerm
This was made ywi are aware. evcluMrrly by IVdo
baptists. Examine it carefully, and then trll me
whether the tramiaton diJ not regard the word in
question as perfectly fixed and definite.- Uow did
they prosecute their work ? He question is worthy
of your examination. You can readily, look info it
yourself. You may, by the help' of a concordance,
easily find every passage in the Bible. in which the
won
ds dip, pour, sprinkle and wash occur in English;
and then
ten if yon know even the Greek letters, and a
little of the erammar, you can see the form and know
the sense of the corresponding Greek.' words- in the
New Testament, and the Sept u agin t translation of
the Old. I will briefly state what you will find to
be the results.. . . .
1. In the English Bible you will findth yvord dip
in a multitude of passages. In all these with one
single exception, the original Greek word is either
bapto or baptio. This one exception is in Genesis
37:31. in which it is said that Joseph's brethren
took his coat, and dipped it in the blood of a kid.
Here the word translated dipped is iMOLtJSAN.'which
means stained, smeared, or daubed Mark if you
please, the precision of the original. Tap; "idea in
this place, is not to dip, but to smear or. dfaub, and
the Seutuagint so expresses it.
2. You will learn that the word sprinkle, iti some
of its forms, may be found in many passages, and
never in a single instance is the original word'bapto,
or baptizo. It is raino, or its derivative rantizo, and
some others. Here again you see the careful par
ticularity iathe use of words by the inspired writers;
and especially that the translators never rendered the
word which means to baptize, by the word sprinkle.
3. The word pour you will find of very frequent
occurrence in our translation, and not in one single
instance is the original bapto or baptizo It is when
pouring simply is intended, invariably cAea and its
cognates.
4. Wash often occurs, as you will see, where re
ference is had not to the whole, but to a part of the
person, as the eyes, the face, the hands, the feet, and
other parts of the body. Not in, one case of this
kind is bapto, or baptizo found, but the word is al
ways nivto. When wash, with the signification of
jj- o " - -
bathe occurs, the original word is always lone. The
penitent woman is said to have washed the Saviojir's
feet with her tears. The Greek word here is not
bapto, not nipto, not hno, but brecho, which means to
wet, or to moisten. In three passages however, two
in the gospels, and one in the epistles, i. e., Mark 7 :
4, Luke 11 : 33. and Heb. 9 : 10 we have the word
wash denoting to dip ; and here we have in the ori
ginal, either the verb baptizo, or the noun bajttimos.
The language of our version is this: "And when
they come liom the market except they wash they
eat not. And many other things there be which
they have received to hold, as the washing of cups,
and pots, and brazen vessels, and tables." And " He
fChristl went in; and set down to meat fwith a
l'harisee) And when the Pharisee saw it, fte mar
velled that he had not first washed before dinner."1
These are the two passages from the Gospels ; and
the commentators agree that these washings so far
as the persons were concerned, were immersions. Dr.
Adam Clarke for example, a Methodist, referring to
them says. 41 They simply dipped or pUinged them
It. e. their hands into the water." But with resrard
to furniture, the purifications of cups, pots,: tables,
couches, and other articles, what shall we say ? We
are told that these tables psnpriallv. wptp lnr.
wooden structures, or benches ten or twelve feet lon-r.
and two or three broad and could not have been im
mersed. On this subject, I remark that these'gcntlc
men'gratuitously, to make out their case, depart from
the best authorities on Jewish antiauities. These au
thorities tell tio that the tables, fitc, "were Weces" or
leather spread but on the floor, from which the peo
ple are in a croucning posture, as they now, do in
many places in the east. These surely, could easily
have been bathed, or immersed. But however this
may have been, I will give you the very words of
the law of God in the premises. The Jews professed
to be governed in their obediency by his law They
did then, in the case, what the. law commanded them
to do. And now what was that ? The law is re
corded in Leviticus 11 : 32, &c thus: " Whatsoev
er vessel it be which is polluted whereiuany work
is done, it shah be put into water, and it shall be
unclean until the even, so shall it be cleansed ' by
being put into the water. The same law in Numb.
31 : 23 is repeated and amplified. It is thus ex
pressed. " Event thins ftables. and all! that mav
abide the fire, ye shall make to go through the bre,
ana it snail De clean ; yet it must be punned by the
water of separation. ,And all that abideth npt the
fire,'-ye shall make go through the water."' Such
was the washing of furniture, cups, tables, or couches,
and all other articles. It was done by immersing
them either in fire, or water. The law of God de
manded this, ahall our friends suppose it ,was no
done and construct an argument loo upon this sup
position 1 They surely were immersed! Thus w
have at once, disposed of two of these passages which
have been presumed to be doubtful. One other re
mainsthat contained in the epistle to the Hebrews.
Its reading is as follows : " Which stood only in
meats and drinks, and divers-washings diaphorois
baptismois2LX& carnal ordinances imposed on them
unm tne time ot reformation." Upon this text, how
ever,:! need say very little, since it is given up to us
Dy most oi our nrethren. It is translated by the most :
learned Pedobaptists themselves, among whom I beg
you to examine Grolius, Whitby, McKnight, and
others, thus " Divers immersions, andj ordinances
concerning the flesh." '
This rapid survey of our present version shows
that the translators, Pebodaptists as they were, did
not conceive themselves at liberty to violate the
principles, I have now sketched. "The words used
in the original both of the Old and New Testament,
were employed with great precision. Out ofseveral
hundred instances, they did not, but in three, cases,
even attempt to render baptism by any :othenrword
than to immerse, in these three they use the word
wash, with the idea of dipping. But never in a single
instance, did they render baptizo, in the' Greek'. by
sprinkle or pour in English ! It is impossible there
fore, that sprinkling, or pourinar. or anv tlnW else
but immersion, can be baptism: because ibe 'Word
used by the Holy Spirit to describe the babtism en
joined upon you by our Lord Jesus Christ-f always
means immersion, whether used by writers, classical,
or sacred ; because-even eur translators of the com
mon version of the scriptures, although all pedobap
tists, never rendered it as synonymous with.eprinkle
or pour y and because, to baptize, and to sprinkle, and
to baptize and to pour, are altogether different ac
tions. Immersion therefore, and immersion only is
Christian baptism. So much for the sense of the
word.
2. VVe now proceed to the second branch of . the
argument. That immersion in water Is essential to
Christian baptism, is also proved by the metaphorical
sense of the ordinance, i Upon this part of the snh
ject you. need be detained but a very few moments.
A metaphorical baptism is defined by Lexicograph
ers, as we have seen, thus "oppressed, or over
whelmed with affliction : plunged in a flood of afflic
tion." , Regarding such baptism our Saviour said to
some othis disciples AL-Ut. 20 :'22, Mark 10: 38
"Ca ye be baptized with the baptism that! am bap
tized with 1 Dr. Lightfoot, a Presbyterian divine,
in exposition of this passage remarks " Baptism
among the Jews, as it was performed in the coldest
weather, and the persons were kept under the water
for t ome time, was used not only to express death,
oui me mosi cruei sma oi aeath." The intimation
of the Redeemer is thaf he should be overwhelmed in
calamities. This was the baptism described. Again
in another passage he saysconveying the same idea
L4ke 12: 50" I have d .baptism to be baptized
WHhJand how am I straitened until it be accomplish
ed P He alluded to the approaching scene of Gethse
raane, and Calvary, : In these he was "plunged in a
flood" of suffering. JSuch is the metaphorical bap
tism of the Bible. The word occurs in the same
sense in'foe classics. Josephus also, in his wars of the
t-t4im Urn Ar.-Ai';if4'bv k I tt ri T ; w
jll - 'f irtrta trtMl u $' en fi a4 HUii't I
I It-thrr -rb rr t ! iiMmt qJ" I J
i.,iif.fhllukItfCKtfiiMtsf;wJifrf y. i rrrtm 1 -l
Ik. . .. 1. 1 !,..- ..i. - . tmm i,f ?r ar-1 1 tb"ftf.r rt-na k, ia th CM l4,-i.
i he brad of a tl.tl.L tr a ti.iirat f
m Imw t!at
it cannot, ImntrtMOft rait l adequate
th. Lira. Tb mrtiinhoriail of cwanw. likfK
ftom the titcni baptism. TVy t wimble each
tfthrr. If 'Ks then there can be no literal taj.nm
without tfnmertioa.
3. Wt now proceed, in the Hnf ft&t to trove
that irnmen-ion i ewenlial to C briti.a b.iptim, by
the great fads and Jtvtrinet which taptUMB was de
hiued to represent, and to tear h.
Baptism was designed principally to rtpremd and
commemorate the lurntf and retvrrertn.n of Jn
Christ, as the Lord's Supper was his sufferings' and
death. , Upon this point the proof from the word of
God is full and explicit, "flow," asks an apostle,
Shall we that are dead to tin, live any longer there
in t Know ye not that so many of us as were bap
tized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death r
rCbrist died for our sins, and was buried, and rose
again; we by faith in Christ, are dead to sin.l
LL 11 l ' . I . t 1 a ! . ,
- sncrejore we are ourieu wnn nim oy Dapusm inio
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. For if we have been
fplanted together in the likeness of his death, we shall
be also raised in the likeness of his resurrection
In other words; as Christ was buried in the grave,
so we are buried in the water Of bap ism ; and as
Christ arose and come out of the grave,'so we arise
and come out of the water of baptism. Our repre
senting his burial necessarily brings us to represent
his resurrection. " For if we have been planted to
gether in the likeness of his death," buried as he
was, we shall also arise in baptism " in the likeuees
of his resurrection." Knowing this, that our old
man" sinful nature " is crucified with him" cru
cified in the body of Christ who bore our sins upon
the cross "that the body of sin might be destroyed,
that henceforth we should not serve sin. Now, if
we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also
live with him, knowing that he being raised from
the dead, dieth no more." We also, if we are indeed
dead wilh him to sin, and alive with' him to righteous
ness, die no more, and therefore live to the glory of
him who died for us, and rose again. And as a man
when he is buried, leaves all the scenes and pursuits
of his former life, so having been buried in baptism
to our old life of ein, wll live a new life of holiness
by faith in the Son of . God. These are the great
facts, as stated by Paul and the other apostles, which
i . , ' i. . V '
napusra was uesigneu to represent anu commemorate.
They are among those amazing acts of our Lord
Jesus Christ, by which he redeemed us from death
and thegrave. These acts, God intended to keep
ever before, us, and they are therefore stt forth anew
in every instance of christian baptism. Such bap
tism can therefore never take place without immer
hdn. ' But christian baptism also teaches us great arid
important doctrines. You teach by pictures so here
Carson, p. 25. " Baptism marks in a figure, the way
in which we become partakers of the benefits of
Christ's death. This is by our being, by a divine
constitution, one with him. His death is a proper
atonement for us, because we die with him, so that
in reality his death is regarded by the law of God
as our death. This is not necessary in all cases of
substitution. To have a debt di.charged by another,
iherejs no necessity to become one with him. But
it is not so in crime. Justice is not satisfied unless
the criminal himself suffer. And by the divine con
stitution," that makes believers one wilh Chrit, theb
aic all considered as having died with him. The
criminals have suffered, since he who suffered is one
with them. These are .the gloiicus doctrines held
forth itfour baptism ; (taught as by a picture) our
union with Christ in his death, his burial, and his
resurrection. I now remark that this union mutf
appear in our baptism or it is no baptism. I will
sustain mis iact ny me argument oi an Apostle mm -
nel, on a colaterai topic.
The Corinthians celebrated as they imagined, the
Lords Supper ; but Paul tells them plainly, that that
ceremony was not the Lord's Supper! But why
They ate and drank together, the bread and the wine.
Vet it was not the Lord's Supper. It was not Be
cause they departed from the original model in the
form of its administration. In that form used by
them, could not be discerned the Lord's body his
sufferings and death. This destroyed the ordinance.
So Pedobaptists themselves regard similar desecra
tions now. The Papisls administer the Lord's Sun-J
per in wnat mey can tne mass. Atler various su
perstitious ceremonies, the Priest gives the people the
wafer, and he himself drinks the wine. Do our ne
liobaplist brethren believe that this is the Lord's Sup
per? Would they participate in it as such 1 . Cer-
tainiy not. iow ii tne L,ord s supper is vitally vi
tiated when it does not show the Lord's death, and
therefore is not the Lord's supper; it is equally true
that that is not baptism which does nor show his bu
rial and resurrection. Can his burial and resurrec
tion be shown by sprinkling, or pouring? Never.
Sprinkling and pouring can therefore never be bap
tism. Immersion is essential to baptism.
These deductions might, were it nccessarv. he
strengthened by many other arguments equally con
clusive. VVe might adduce the constantly recurring
declarations, that in the days of the Apostles, bap
tism was administered in rivers, and in other places
wheie therewas "much water and we might re
fer to the fact, that in its administration, thev went
down into the water, and came up out of the water,
none oi men is necessary, or observed in spnukling,
or pouring. All these and numerous other facts ren
der if possible, the certainly still more certain, that
wnere mere is no immersion, there is no scriptural
baptism: Bnt time does 'not permit : and I nroceed
to observe, that we are sustained, singular as the
fact may appear, in the conclusions now snhmiited.
by the best and most learned pedobaptist ; writers
themselves, of all classes. Do you demand the proof
uj una assertion i iou snau nave it, and to any
extent you desire. ,
i he immortal Martin Luther, as quoted by Dr. Du
Veilon Acts, 8, 3 remarks" The term baptism
is a Greek word. It may be rendered a dipping, as
when we dip something in water, that it may be en
tirely covered with water. And though that custom
be utterly abolished among the generality, for neith
er do they entirely dip, but only sprinkle with a lit
tle water, their children nevertheless they ought to
be wholly immersed, and presently drawn out again.
For the etymology of the word seems to require it.
The signification of baptism is as just now stated
that the old man of our nativity which is full of sins,
which is entirely of flesh and "blood, may be over
whelmed with divine grace. The manner of baptism
therefore, should correspond with the signification of
baptism, that it may show a certain and plain sign
of it." What Baptist could better have expressed
his own sentiments than it is here dons by the most
distinguished of the reformers. To this day, although
practically rantists, all the best German critics main
tain the Fame doctrine. Another example. The
great John Calvin, the father of thi PKh VtAliin
church, in his Institutes of Religion, as translated by
baptize signifies to immerse, and it is certain that
immersion was the practice of the ancient church "
In several other places this profoundly learned man
maintains the same important truth. , Particularly in
hisommentary on John 3 : 23, and, on Acts 8 : 33,
he says " From these words we perceive how 'bap
tism was administered by the ancients for they im
mersed the whole body in water." I could multiply
hundreds of instances of similar pedobaptist testimo
ny, hut I forbear. ;; ;.
4. But it is necessary before I close this discourse,
that I should refer even if it he but very briefly, , to
somepfy'ecf a which have beep urged against the
conclusions to which you have now been conducted,
j The prepositions with which baptizo is connected
in scripture, are supposed by some to turn aside the
force of the word and forbid -the idea that baptism
was in ail cases by immersion. Indeed we are told
that there is a rule in Greek it hai lately been dis
covered that in ail cases in which motion into an
Object ia expressed, the preposition eis is doubled, oc
curring in the sentence in connection with the verb
and also with the noun ; and if the preposition is
found but once in the sentence, then the motion is
only to, and not into.-v The argument founded upon,
vvi, - vu. iut u. o4d remarcR- 1 ha --t
- 4 - , - huiu
ft U I -! t!rf wiit
11 t. '
tJ if that t'-f -t:,t
ft. a im ; m
-4 tl?M ri 4 I-5 t ta
! there i Mch r.V ia tW lrk Utign?, iktrai.
t in tmrxiM Mr red. It w true iwt in the if
mme ficHemly it U mi dmtbled. N the
timi i nuurUtnr duubtrj ia sentence U h .
but i rootKtft tmtt a tf.ii'r. w4 iaertrr ptrj
by mn prepwitksa ? Certainly it i. And mo alo it i
in Greek. Dues the occasional occurrence f wca a
form constitute a ml I Surely not. I raa ejve yoo
fifiy instances in the New Testament, in which mo
tion into the object is certain, ant yet there is but
one pre position ia the aentenr e which expresse it.
In Mati. 9 : 17, it is said Neither do men put new
wine into old bottles elt the bottle break Lc. Here
ts but one ew. Jcmis said, fcc, Matt, 26: 32 41 1
will go before yoa into Galiilee,, only one preposi
tion. Again John 13: 5, "He poureth water into a
bason, and began to wash his disciples feet" only
one eis. You must see that there b no snch rule.
I remark, in the second place, that to me it appears
that every one mast know, who has thought, or read
at all on the use of prepositions, that their meaning
b subordinate to that of the principal words in the
sentence where they occur. If it is said only of your
friend that he went to the river, we should have no
proof that he went -into if. But if it is said he went
to the river,' and bathed, we at once know that ,he
went io the stream. So in relation to from, tend
out of. " Were you informed thai a gentleman having
beer immersed, came from-the waterr you would not
doubt his having been in the water. So much in .re
lation to the preposition eis connected with baptism,
and which so fully expresses into. Respecting- en,
and ek, and apojthey do not, and in the very nature
of things they cannot weaken in the slightest degree,
the force of the word usedby the inspired writers to
describe the form of baptism. It is still - immertion,
and nothing but immersion. -
2. It is alleged that Paul must have been baptized
in the house, and standing upon his feet, and there
fore could not have been immersed. But why such
a supposition as this? Acts 9; 18 22: 1(5, Annanias
said to-him : "Arise and be baptized' ' and he
arose, and was baptized." But does Luke say he
was baptized in the hou.se and standing ? Certainly
not but only that he arose as a. preparation for bap
tism. The rising was one thing, and baptism was
another thing. This is a common form of expression.
Christ said to his disciples, ' Arise, let us go hence."
He said to "Paul when stricken with blindness on the
rood to Damascus: " Arise, and go into Damas
cus." this objection also is as you see, utterly base
less, '
3. As an other objection to our conclusion it is al
legcd that the three thousand persons baptised on the
day ot jen'icost, could not posibly have been im
mersed for two reasons; The first is' that there was
not a sufficient number of administrators to have
performed the work in one day ? and the second is
that water in sufficient quantities could not have
been found in Jerusalem, and its vicinity.
Let us briefly examine hoth these reasons. Regar
ding the former, a little simple arithmetic will work
wonders. Three thousand persons divided between
the twelve apostle's, would give to each apostle two
hundred and fifty. I find by my 'own experience
that, proceeding with the utmost deliberation, I usu
ally baptize three in a minute. But suppose the
apostles baptized only two in a minute, they would
have baptized the whole in a hundred and twenty
five minutes thafris, in two hours and five minutes.
If they baptized three in a minute, the twelve apos
tles alone baptized ttie whole three thousand in one
hour and twenty minutes. But let it be remembered
that besides the twelve, there were present seventy
disciples authorised to baptize, making in all, eighty-two
administrators. Now divide three thousand
between eighty-two ministers, and you give to each
about thirty-six, ail of wliom couSd have been bap
tized wilh the mo?t perfect deliberation, in less than
fiftem minutes. This1 case then, presents not the
least difficulty. But suppose it did present an tn
suverable d'flieuHv, and it coald be broved that thri
1 thousand, instead ol being baptized in fifteen min
utes," could not possibly have been baptized is a whole
day. What then? The argument lies against the
statement of Luke that so many were baptized, and
notagitinst immersion, as the mode of their baptism.
But how so? I answer every ona knows who
has witnessed, or administered the ordinance, that in
a given time, as many, and with the same ease, can
be immersed as can be poured upon or sprinkled.
But the idea that so mnny could not'have been bap
tized on that day is wholly fanciful.
2. The second reason consists in the supposition
that water in. sufficient quantities could not have been
obtained in or about Jerusalem, to baptize so hi any
persons. What! A city with at that time propably
inore than a million of inhabitants within whose
walls was annually collected nearly the whole nation,
.i i- , . .
vviiose religion required uauy .ablutions ; a city in
which in a million of inhabitants bathed every day,
nnd not with water enough to baptize three thousand;
a city in the midst of which, and near it, were six
immense reservoirs with easy descent, expressly for
K...I.; f .1 i r ti . t i i ...
udiuuiK purposes as me puui-oi ueuiesaa, Hie King S
or Solomon s pool, the upper pool, the pool of Si-
loam, tne pool ot Mezekiali, ami the lower pool
of Gihon ; all within a few minutes' walk, and two
at the place where the conversation occurred, some
covering tour acres or ground; a city which al
though on high grounds, was surrounded hymonn-
tnms, anil consequently, as are all such places, well
supplied wnu water; tnatsucli a city should not con
tain water enough to immerse a few hundred people
is a nream, wnicn u would seem, never could have
found admittance into any but'a distempered imagi
nation. No my brethren, for any such purposes there
never could in the holy city, have been any want of
an abundance ot water. And I will state here, once
for all, that men have, never been known to live, they
never will live, where there is not an ample supply of
water lor all domestic and religious purposes. Hence
all those fanciful suppositions that water for baptism
cannot be found irr great deserts, such as Zahara,
an1 at the poles, have nothing to do with the ar
gument. Who lives permanently, in the lands of the
Zahara, or amid the thicked ribbed ice of the poles?
Wtiere there are no resident people there is no occa
sion for baptism.
3. It is again objected, that baptism could not al
ways, have been administered by immersion, because
the Jailor of Phillippi must have been baptized in
the house, where this form of the ordinance could
not have been observed. Let it be admitted for the
sake of the argument, that the Jailor was baptized
in the house and what then ? Do we not know that
in all eastern houses, prisons as well as others, baths
. i -.1 i e i - .
were invanauiy iouna, ior religious anu other pur
poses ? - This fact has heen again and again demon
strated. There was not the least impediment then,
to the baptism of the Jailorf and his family in the
rooms of the prison. But why suppose that the
Jailor was baptized in the house ? Does the narra
tion justify the conclusion ? , Let us look at the pas-
sage, Acts 16, 2934. They were you remember
in the inner prison when alarmed by the earthquake,
and attendant events" Then he the Jailor called
for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and
fell down before Paul and Silas, and brought them
out here they left the inner prison and said, sirs ;
what must I do to be saved ? And they said, be
lieve in the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shall bereav
ed, and thy house., Now they were out in the pas
sagesf ' And they spake unto him the word of the
Lord, and they spake the word of the Lord to all
that were in his house. Here we find the Apostles
in the Jailor's house, or the part of the prison where
lis family resided. A.ndhe the Jailor took them
"the Apostles and washed their stripes, and was
iaptized he and all his straightway. And when he
brought them, into his house.-. This is the second
time the Jailor brought them into his house. , They
therefore took him and his family out of - his hoae
to baptise them, and after the baptism returrW-
And he set meat before them, and s rejoiced, believ
ing in God, with all his' house.? -? The f Jailor "was
therefore, not baptized in ; his house. ? This event
occurred at midnight. ' If sprinkling Or pouring was
ever used in baptism,' this was a proper occasion for
it, and if certainly would have been done there in
the house. . But they went out of the house to bap
tize them. Why 1 Most surely because immersion
and not pouring or s'pfinklingi was required. This
whole narrative is therefore inconsistent with the
idea thaany thing but immersion" can ever be re
garded as baptism.. -. .
' 4.' Some figurative ; allusions found in' the scrip
tures to baptism, are thought to have an important
bearing on the subject. VVe tefer to them, briefly.
" The long suffering of God," says Peter 1 Pet.
' ' .
. 1 i't' ? till , i
6 . i .
ti, T .
ti-Wb lht .--f IWn lrmk I "' sw,i.' ,
hnvilfl'?. the (vrrfVti. t Jf
lis the Aik, Uim tw tttntvt,- t. t.
wa i iear? UUm lmmrikm " ?
l Ilk the t&at H fftrmU J
was Ia f c ttmb, m Wtt i4al tdU IT,
were tUeJ in the Af k. 1 1 tuf W
mi t! wrtat tor, aad ih4 as nt8t ir :
f prir.Vlin? of tie nia apoa the Atk 11
HnoriinR of the rah um tie Ark
baptLitn. it wa tle Ark tick bani "W
the people in the Ark, And thirdly,
presentation This undoubtedly is the tre
tion ofthe passage. It is admitted to ln.!
by recobaplistsci the highest antf oti y. v?
ii forbids the no ion that any can ever be ipJL
I autism but such an immerion as incloses tu f
body in water as thoroughly as Noah and K
were enciweaia tne ath.
Another passage of sitnilar character, 2 Cj
"Moreover brethren I would not that re .Will f
ignorant- bow that all oar "Fathers were
clcud. and alt passed-through the hm. 9n,i
bait!w! 'onto Mosea irt ihft rlonJ nl
The argnmeBtonstrncled from thia text is, tW
Hebrew Fathers were all baptised, but tbalther
notV necessary to baptism; Bpt does thisarn,!
state the fact? "A moment's Vefleciinn ;n t.J;
... .. . - -"iin;t
conymce.juu uiai u uues not. in wnat were ajl 4.
fathers baptised ? Li the cloud," and in the ,
ilpw were, they baptised! By passing trotM n
sea, and under the cloudy Is not the likeness ft-
fignre bears to, immersion about as near as it could k
and still remain a figure 1 Dr. Whiiby on this pa
sage justly remarks "They the Israelites tL
covered with the sea on boih sidesEsod. 14 2
so that both the clond and the aea had some rewi.
blance to ; our being covered ..with water in bar-tito
ineir going-into-ine sea resemoiea tne ancient no
ner of going into the water, and their cominjotiioi
tbeir4nsing out of the water."
S. Another figurative allusion requires oar attfg,
tiori . Il is the; baptism of the Spirit. The Snmi
said to have been poured oiit ojion the people a I
Pentecost, and Its recepiiorj was the baptism of tia
Spirit. It is therefore ronclu.leJ that pourin witff
on a person .may be baptism.' Xet ns exainme ft(
narrative,' AcN 2, 14. "They were all with 0
accord, iit one p'ace. Ami suddenly there caotn
sound from heaven maik it was a soundl abfi
rushing mighty iwinf, an I it fjhe sound filled all &
house where tbey were silling. And there appear
unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, awHtntu
likeness of fire; sat upon each of tbtm. And thfy
were all filled witli the Jloly Ghost, and begaal
speak witn olfigr tonrnes as the Spirit with whid
they were fillejtj gave them utterance. Is this tie
action. the 'pouring out of the: Spirit, into them, ml
they are filled with it, which is to he imitateJ iiia
baptism of, water. If so, then netthcr sprinkling oot
immersioni nor even pouring is baptism. But ihe in
ter must be poured into the candidates until they are
filled, with! water, as the disciples were filled with the
Holy -GhOft ! Into such absurdities those who ok
stinately pursue error are always liable, to be W.
The simple and plain truth on this subject is, thai the
baptism of the Spirit is the act of putting men onin
the influence of the Spirit ; 'and the -baptism of watij
is the act of jportin men under the Water. . VVe as
buried with him in Haptism;- wherein we are alsnrisra
with him,' through the faith of theoperdtion of GoJ,
who hath raised him from the r ead."
Tlie notion pretty ' generally prevails, I belief
amon'our Pedobapti jbretbreii, that bapiifrnj?
signed to represent the wprk of the Spirit in rejentn.
tion. John leaches 11s, otherwise. Speakiii'fifthe
work of redeihption. He says thaf to its truth ed
efficacy, there are three that bear record in heaven. the
Father, the word or Son and the - Holy Ghost, ami
these ihree are one. And to the same great fact.
There are three that bear witness in earlh ; tbe Spirit,
the water, and the blood, and these three agree in one
By the Spirit, the water, and the blood, all the con
mentatorSj agree in understanding the Holy Spiri
baptism, arid the Lord's supper.. The Holy Sprrt
bore testimony to the truth and efhVacy'of redemption,
at penticos-t and blili "does so in every recurring con
version ; baptism bearing witness in representing h
burial, and resurrection, -the Lord's supper in rfjw
setitihg his suffering and death All three azree inone
testimony.- Those who make baptism an embka
of work of the Spirit in regeneraliori err eregiofi
since ' ; i '-
1. Baptism is a concurrent witness with the Spirit
of the sufficiency of Christ, &c.
2. If baptism were a. witness to the Spirit, tliea
one of Christ's. witnesses would be removed..!'
3. If baptism bears witness to the Spirit, then one
witness bears witness to another witness.
4. If baptism bears witness to the work of tbe
Spirt in regeneration, then John was wrong, Christ
has but ftfo witnesses. The other bears witness to
the Spirit.
5. If baptism hears witness to the Spirit these three
witnesses do not agree in one testimony. " ,
But John was right ;fan-l if so, it' follows that al
that doctrine, which makes baptism a sign ami seal of
the work Of the Spirit in regeneration is wrong,
can only lead men into hurtful errors.
None of these figurative allusionj therefore, be
at all our conclusions. Indeed, tbej-have plainly a
contrary effect.
Snch, I believe, are all the objections to onrafS
ments on the subject,. considered of any weiji''1"
treated tbem calmly and fairly, and instead ofca,n?
any doubt upon tbem, they actually strengthen i"
confirm the Conviction that immersion and unm106
alone is christian baptism. ' :
These briefly, are our reasons, my brethren, for j
firm belief that the immersion in water of a true
liever in Jesus Christ, by an authorised admini.trt,fi
I
In the name of the Father, and of the Son J r
. . . ... . ' . - in iS
Holy irhost, and this alone, is christian rapii"
conclusion, we have seen, is amply sust1'0
meaning of the word, by the'metanor'ca' ".v.
baptism, by the great facts and ,n Z Z
ordinance was designed to reesent and teacD' . J
the places, and cirenmstae attendant upon it ?
ministration. We b?' in addition to our Vrl?
the promises, aWxam,ned the stiongest
to our conc!o-'8 and we find them wholly iesU
of force, "ideed Ihey add to the assurance ibat
opiniflf'are immoveably true that they evtT
b shaken. ,
It remains only that we make a brief practical 1
plication of our subject, in two respects, and
done. 1 , '. -
1. Ira the first, place, you who hare not ba 1
mersed have never been baptized at ah.
!' I do noV hy the plain 'Cstateraent af ?
fact, mean to shock yrur or to " reproach J
simply, and with afTectionate deference j8 $
iJrue and importanT A man wn onuci .
reaf state of the case, will not reply to; 1
jority of the learned world disagree with 09,
motle of baptism taught in the Bible; nor 10 .ij
priety of the practice of exelosive immersio
question of majorities has in cases of .rei:B t
meno forcelH, If the opinions 0 " B,aioritre
tight, then yon all be papist: since they f
we obtain a spiritual saltation in JQ Vv
whose reprice! ion from the dead k-:.