IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 /. 
 
 ^ J^>^. 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 m 
 
 |<0 
 
 m 
 
 M 
 
 2.2 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 
 1.25 
 
 1.4 
 
 |l.6 
 
 
 6" — 
 
 
 ► 
 
 <p 
 
 ^ 
 
 V] 
 
 /a 
 
 ^ ^ ^ osT* 
 
 A 
 
 °% '> 
 
 V 
 
 //a 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 
 Corporation 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
 L 
 
CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHIVI/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions 
 
 Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
 1980 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notas/Notas tachniquas at bibliographiquas 
 
 Tha Instituta has attampted to obtain tha bast 
 original copy availabia for filming. Faaturas of this 
 copy which may ba bibliographically uniqua, 
 which may altar any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 / 1 Coloured covers/ 
 "^ ' Couverture de couleur 
 
 I I Covers damaged/ 
 
 
 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Couverture endommagde 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaurie et/ou pellicul6e 
 
 □ Cover title missing/ 
 Letit 
 
 titre de couverture manque 
 
 I I Coloured maps/ 
 
 D 
 
 Cartes gdographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured init (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli6 avec d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La reliure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distortion le long de la marge intdrieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout^es 
 lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas 6t6 filmdes. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppldmentaires: 
 
 L'Instltut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la mithoda normale de filmage 
 sont indiquAs ci-dessous. 
 
 I I Coloured pages/ 
 
 7 
 
 n 
 □ 
 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommag6es 
 
 Pages restored and/oi 
 
 Pages restauries et/ou peiliculdes 
 
 I I Pages damaged/ 
 
 I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages d6color6es, tacheties ou piqu6es 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages d6tachdes 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of print varies/ 
 Quality in6gale de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary material/ 
 Comprend du materiel supplementaire 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont 6t6 filmies A nouveau de fa^on d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 Th 
 to 
 
 Th 
 po 
 of 
 filr 
 
 Orl 
 bei 
 th( 
 sio 
 oti 
 firi 
 sio 
 or 
 
 Thi 
 shi 
 
 Tir 
 
 wh 
 
 Ma 
 difi 
 enl 
 be) 
 rigl 
 req 
 me 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 
 
 
 
 
 14X 
 
 
 
 
 18X 
 
 
 
 
 22X 
 
 
 
 
 26X 
 
 
 
 
 30X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12X 
 
 
 
 
 16X 
 
 
 
 
 20X 
 
 
 
 
 24X 
 
 
 
 
 28X 
 
 
 
 
 32X 
 
 
The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 National Library of Canada 
 
 L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grAce A la 
 g6n6rosit6 de: 
 
 BIbliothdque nationale du Canada 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol ^^ (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 4t6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire film6, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprim6e sont filmis en commen^ant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont filmds en commenpant par la 
 premidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole -^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 filmds A des taux de reduction diff6rents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre 
 reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 d partir 
 de Tangle sup^rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la m^thode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
.,Kll*r>if4^ 
 
 
 
 
 S.S^iS^..:^:^-:'-' 
 
 
 
 ^' ■ ■'Mi 
 
 
 L.4.^..^ 
 
 
 IS 
 
 Ifc IS: 
 
 
 __-;-'V.^^%.; 
 
 vmsi- .'-.';«" ,s>'f:v!i 55 
 
 
J\ 
 
i 
 
 CgJc\, l)uncjdL^- Clorkj 5. John < 
 
 » cum plo • 
 
 WHY I WAS 
 
 IMMCPSED. 
 
 BY A PPC5BYTCRI7W, 
 
 
 TORONTO : 
 
 The Standard Publishing Company 
 
 17 Richmond St. West. 
 
T''«»i3!^' 
 
 V 
 
 "1 
 
AUTHOR'S PREraCE. 
 
 
 There are those who may take exception 
 to this little pamphlet being issued over the 
 nom de plume it bears; they may claim that 
 the views it advocates forfeit the right of the 
 author to the name Presbyterian. I trust 
 such is not the case. I have maintained the 
 name on the pamphlet because I love my 
 Church, and believe that there is within her 
 fold room for those who may differ with her 
 on this question of Baptism, since the differ- 
 ence rises from a desire to be loyal to the 
 teaching of the Bible, even at the expense 
 of disagreement with her standards. My 
 Church has always stood for the authority 
 of God's Word; its commendation rather 
 than condemnation must therefore rest upon 
 those who bow to what they conscientiously 
 believe to be its teaching. What follows 
 this is written in no controversial or com- 
 bative spirit; but with that diffidence and 
 humility becoming one who is young in 
 Christian experience and without the learn- 
 ing resulting from a course in a theological 
 seminary. My Bible, and I humbly believe, 
 God's Holy Spirit, have been my only 
 teachers in the study of this question. If 
 what I have written does not commend itself 
 to my readers as being in harmony with the 
 Word, let them forget it. My purpose and 
 
' ^\i "I ■■'• " m ,' 
 
 hope have been that perhaps some who 
 may be, as I was, seeking God's will about 
 Baptism, will find help towards a solution of 
 their difficulty, in the same way as I did. 
 Let me, in conclusion, say one word to my 
 readers. Hear both sides of the question. 
 Go to your pastor and get his views ; but 
 test all by the Word. Let what God says, 
 in the light of your own prayerful, sanctified 
 Spirit-guided common sense, settle the mat- 
 ter finally, " That your faith should not 
 stand in the wisdom of men, but in the 
 power of God." — i Cor. 2:5. 
 
 S.JOHN DUNCAN-CL\RK. 
 
 June 3rd, 1897. 
 
 > 
 
y 
 
 WHY I WAS 
 IMMEPSED. 
 
 BY A PRESBYTERIAN. 
 
 The question of baptism always interested 
 me, even from the days of my boyhood, 
 when I began first to enquire for myself 
 concerning the reasonableness of the faith in 
 which I had been brought up. For some 
 years the question remained an open one in 
 my mind, until at last I decided to settle it 
 one way or another for all time. Born a 
 Presbyterian, and growing up under Pres- 
 byterian instruction, every influence from 
 without tended to confirm my assent to the 
 doctrine of infant baptism. Such influences, 
 however, found opposition from something 
 within that always refused finally to acknow- 
 ledge the scripturalness of the dogma. 
 Eventually the long-impending conflict was 
 precipitated, and for the sake of those who 
 may not yet have settled this question, I 
 want as briefly and clearly as possible to set 
 forth the arguments that convinced me of 
 the truth that the baptism of believers, and 
 that by immersion, was alone valid. 
 
 To my mind, the first question to be an- 
 swered was, who, according to the Scrip- 
 tures, are eligible for baptism ? Turning to 
 the Shorter Catechism, than which a more 
 concise and simple statement of Christian 
 truth cannot be found, I read, " the infants 
 of such as are members of the visible church 
 are to be baptized," and in proof of this 
 statement three Scripture passages are 
 
nrrr 
 
 quoted, viz. : Gen. 17 : I0{ Acts 2 : 38; i Cor. 
 7 : 14. Now it is but fair to presume that 
 the compilers of the Catechism chose the 
 very strongest passages in God's Word to 
 give as authority for their claim, and that if 
 a candid, prayerful examination of these 
 passages finds them insufficient for this pur- 
 pose, the doctrine of infant baptism will at 
 least be negatively disproved, since it will 
 be left without scriptural foundation. The 
 first of these passages I will deal with later 
 in the argument. The other two we will 
 look at now. Acts a : 37, 38 reads, " 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 is to you, and to 
 your children, and to them that are afar off, 
 even as many as the Lord our God shall 
 call." The contention from this passage is, 
 that the use of the word " children" conveys 
 to unconscious infants the privilege of bap- 
 tism. Disregarding for a moment the simple 
 explanation that ** children" is used fre- 
 quently in the Bible to mean " descendants," 
 and granting that in this case it means or 
 includes new-born babes, let us see what 
 such an admission involves. First, it com- 
 pels one to take the position that infants, 
 having repented and being baptized, become 
 partakers of a promise assuring remission of 
 sins and the indwelling of the Holy Ghost. 
 * Even suppose that babes are capable of 
 possessing the blessings thus conferred, I 
 fail to see how the little ones can in any 
 sense be said to repent. And yet if the ful- 
 fillment of one condition — baptism — is 
 claimed for them, the same reasoning will 
 
certainly involve that of the other — repent- 
 ance. But if this were not enough to show 
 the untenable position occupied by those 
 who thus interpret the word " children," 
 surely the last clause of v. 38 relieves the 
 question of all doubt. The three classes, 
 '*you," "your children," "them that are 
 afar off," are all limited by these concluding 
 words, " even as many as the Lord our God 
 shall call." Now, so far as human observa- 
 tion is concerned, there is only one evidence 
 of election or calling on the part of an in- 
 dividual, and that is his personal response 
 to, and acceptance of, the call. When such 
 evidence is given, then baptism may be ad- 
 ministered, and the promise received. This 
 surely is the simple teaching of the passage. 
 What then is meant by children ? Primarily 
 just what is said. Children who by repent- 
 ance and faith give evidence that they have 
 accepted God's invitation may be baptized, 
 and receive the promise. Secondarily, the 
 word may refer to descendants, indicating 
 thus that the promise was not intended only 
 for apostolic times. 
 
 The other passage needs but brief notice 
 I Cor. 7 : 14, reads : " For the unbelieving 
 husband is sanctified in the wife, and the un- 
 believing wife is sanctified in the husband ; 
 else were your children unclean; but now are 
 they holy " (same word in Greek as sancti- 
 fied). From this it is claimed that because 
 the children (unconscious babies or intelli- 
 gent boys and girls, the claim is as fair for 
 one as the other) are called "holy," they have 
 a right to baptism. The same reasoning 
 would confer baptism as a privilege upon 
 the unbelieving husband or the unbelieving 
 
■■ 
 
 wife, since each is also called " holy." But 
 no one would have the hardihood to claim 
 that the verse authorised this. How, then, 
 can it be used to support infant baptism ? 
 
 Now let us take the passage in Gen. 17: 10. 
 recording the establishment of circumcision 
 as a rite among the Jews. It is claimed thar 
 baptism in the Christian Church takes the 
 place of circumcision in the Jewish nation, 
 and that it is contrary to New Testament 
 teaching to make the application of baptism 
 under grace narrower than that of circum- 
 cision under law. Thus far we may agree 
 with the contention ; issue must be taken, 
 however, when the claim is made that this 
 parallel between circumcision and baptism 
 involves the baptism of infants. On the 
 contrary a little honest thinking will suffice 
 to convince the unprejudiced mind that the 
 parallel rather involves the baptism of be- 
 lievers. 
 
 The Jews are God's earthly people, their 
 inheritance is terrestrial, all their promised 
 blessings and future glory are bound up 
 in the possession of Palestine. Consequent- 
 ly an infant born of Jewish parentage be- 
 comes by natural birth entitled to the na- 
 tional privileges of this peculiar people. 
 Natural birth, therefore, gains for him the 
 sign and seal of such title, the rite of cir- 
 cumcision. He is a Jew because his parent? 
 are Jews, and he is' circumcised because he 
 is a Jew. 
 
 The Church is God's heavenly people, our 
 inheritance is celestial, all our promised 
 blessings and future glory are bound up in 
 the possession of a spiritual kingdom. But 
 natural birth entitles no one (John 3 : 6^ 
 
 I 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
I 
 
 7 
 
 7) to the privileges of this spiritual king- 
 dom; why then should it gain for one the 
 sign and seal of such title, the rite of bap- 
 tism ? One is not a member of the heaven- 
 ly people until one is born again ; but then, 
 when through the Spirit's work of regen- 
 eration one has become a '* babe in Christ" 
 (i Cor. 3 : i), the true " infant baptism" be- 
 comes legitimate and valid. Thus the paral- 
 lel is complete, and we find that the argu- 
 ment from circumcision becomes indeed a 
 strong bulwark for the truth of believers* 
 baptism. Nor can it be claimed that this 
 interpretation narrows the application of 
 baptism under grace in comparison with the 
 application of circumcision under law. Citi- 
 zenship in the Jewish nationality was a mat- 
 ter of sex. Citizenship in the heavenly peo- 
 ple knows neither male nor female. Cir- 
 cumcision was as straitened as the law; 
 baptism is as wide as grace. Who dare 
 make it wider ? 
 
 This is the negative side of the question. 
 I hardly think these unsupported passages 
 can be fairly held as sufficient authority for 
 the statement that " the infants of such as are 
 members of the visible church are to be 
 Baptized." 
 
 We must now turn our attention to 
 the positive side of the question, and see 
 for ourselves what is the reasonable deduc- 
 tion from all other existing evidence. 
 Let us begin by going back to the insti- 
 tution of Christian baptism by our Lord. 
 In Matt. 28 : 19 we read: " Go ye, therefore, 
 and disciple all nations, baptizing them into 
 the name of the Father, and of the Son, and 
 of the Holy Ghost." Again in Mark 16 : 16, 
 
 ■* 
 
 ii 
 
I ^ 'Mi" 
 
 ,' '}:< ■" I |I!."'*"'T'^'«WIJT" 
 
 " He that believeth and is baptized shall be 
 saved." These are the only recorded ut- 
 terances of our Master upon the question. 
 Can infant baptism be directly or indirectly 
 inferred from them ? Or on the other hand 
 is not the baptism of believers the only bap- 
 tism to which they give the least authority ? 
 There is no room for debate or argument 
 in these words of Christ. What they mean 
 they say, and we can safely leave them to 
 speak for themselves without further com- 
 ment. 
 
 Our next field for investigation must be 
 in the prlactice and teaching of the apostles. 
 How did they in the light and teaching of 
 the Holy Ghost understand and interpret 
 these words of our Lord ? The answer 
 should practically settle the matter. 
 
 Examination of the apostles' practice re- 
 corded in the Acts and Epistles fails to dis- 
 cover a single instance of infant baptism. 
 Exception will be taken to an argument 
 based on this, on the ground that in the 
 early Church days, when there were few be- 
 lieving parents, baptism in the majority of 
 cases could only have been administered to 
 adults on profession of faith. Admitting 
 this to be a proper objection, I ask for only 
 one case of infant baptism to pro t that be- 
 lievers' baptism, as recorded in Acts, was not 
 the invariable practice of New Testament 
 days. Within three years of Pentecost 
 there can have been little short of 10,000 
 believers. Had none of these 10,000 any 
 babes ? If they had, were any of the in- 
 fants baptized ? Not a single instance is re- 
 corded. I think it is at least fair to claim 
 that apostolic practice, so far as recorded, 
 
 10 
 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 11 
 
 iiiUh 
 
HI I I J\wmffifrwm»^ ,11 I I 
 
 ■■« 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 does not support the theory of infant bap- 
 tism, while it certainly does confirm the 
 truth of believers' baptism. No doubt the 
 much-used argument based upon the baptism 
 of households will occur to my readers. 1 
 must ask a little patience. It will be dealt 
 with presently. 
 
 The teaching of the apostles must next 
 claim our attention. The three following 
 passages are from the writings of Paul: 
 
 Rom. 6 : 3-5: ** Or are ye ignorant that all 
 who were baptized into Christ Jesus were 
 baptized into His death ? We were buried 
 therefore with Him through baptism unto 
 death; that like as Christ was raised from 
 the dead through the glory of the Father, 
 so we also might walk in newness of life. 
 For if we have become united with Him by 
 the likeness of His death, we shall be also 
 by the likeness of His resurrection." 
 
 Gal. 3 : 27: " For as many of you as were 
 baptized into Christ did put on Christ." 
 
 Col. 2:12: "Having been buried with 
 Him in baptism, wherein ye were also raised 
 with Him through faith in the working of 
 God, who raised Him from the dead. And 
 you being dead through your trespasses and 
 the uncircumcision of your flesh, you, I say, 
 did He quicken together with Him." 
 
 It needs little study to see that in all these, 
 Paul speaks of baptism as a rite involving 
 not only intelligence, but also spiritual in- 
 sight on the part of the subject. He also 
 shows that the sequence to baptism is such 
 as only a believer in Christ could realize. 
 In the three churches to which the letters 
 containing these passages were addressed, 
 there must have been baptized infants, if in- 
 
 II 
 
 mm 
 
fant baptism were an apostolic practice. Can 
 the " all" of Romans, and the " as many" 
 of Galatians be held to include such infants 
 in the " newness of life/' and " putting on of 
 Christ" taught in these verses as consequent 
 upon baptism ? Yet they must if there were 
 any baptized babes. But the verse from 
 Colossians is conclusive. " Through faith 
 in the working of God," certainly implies 
 faith on the part of the one baptized, or 
 else language has no meaning. Such faith 
 of course is not possible in the case of an 
 infant. So much for Paul's teaching. What 
 conclusion is an unprejudiced mind forced 
 to by these passages ? Surely that a candi- 
 date to be eligible for baptism must at least 
 be old enough to grasp the meaning of the 
 rite, and exercise a personal faith in the 
 working of God. 
 
 One other passage we must notice as we 
 pass from the subject of apostolic teaching. 
 We have already seen how clear is the lan- 
 guage of Peter on the day of Pentecost, and 
 how absolutely it excludes the idea of in- 
 fant baptism; now let us just glance at that 
 apostle's only other recorded deliverance on 
 this subject. In i Peter 3 : 21 we read, 
 " Eight souls were saved through water, 
 which also after a true likeness doth now 
 save you, even baptism, not the putting 
 away of the filth of the flesh, but the inter- 
 rogation of a good conscience toward God, 
 through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." 
 Here the ceremony of baptism is linked with 
 the idea of the saving power of Christ's 
 death and resurrection, a thought which can- 
 not be intelligible to a babe. We will come 
 back to this passage presently when we con- 
 
 12 
 
 iMHiiMi 
 
sider the symbolism of the rite, and its pro- 
 per mode of administration. So far I think 
 we have seen that the strong tendency of 
 Scripture teaching favours the truth of be- 
 lievers* baptism. We have tried to meet 
 fai. r every argument on the other side, and 
 have honestly faced what is claimed to be 
 their most conclusive evidence. It is for the 
 reader to say whether we have proven our 
 case. One argument alone remains to be 
 met, and that is the one based upon certain 
 cases of household baptism. 
 
 Let us imagine a somewhat parallel case. 
 For example, a household in which there is 
 an infant of days, is said to have united on 
 a certain occasion in prayer. Are we forced 
 to conclude from such a statement either 
 that the baby joined them in the exercise, 
 or that the story is not true ? Do we not, 
 using our common sense, and judging from 
 our experience of what infants can do, re- 
 ceive from the statement the impression it 
 was meant to convey, viz. : That all in the 
 household capable of praying joined in 
 prayer ? Shall we not use a like amount of 
 common sense in drawing our inferences 
 from the cases of household baptism men- 
 tioned in the New Testament ? And if we 
 are to judge fairly and sensibly of who are 
 included in the word " household," we must 
 not overlook any information that will give 
 us any light on the question. There are 
 three lines of thought that will lead us to a 
 right decision, i. Apostolic practice in the 
 case of individuals, which we have already 
 seen was invariably the baptism of believers. 
 2. Apostolic teaching as to the meaning of 
 baptism which we have also seen is unanim- 
 
 13 
 
 _. 
 
ous in its requirement of intelligence, 
 spiritual perception, and faith on the part 
 of the subject. 3. Any case of household 
 baptism in which the details are given us. 
 There is but one such case, that of the Phil- 
 ippian jailer, and the Bible leaves no shadow 
 of a doubt that his whole household believed 
 before they were baptized. Read it for your- 
 self in Acts 16 : 3$, 34, " And he took them 
 the same hour of the night and washed their 
 stripes ; and was baptized, he and all his, im- 
 mediately. And he brought them up into his 
 house, and set meat before them, and rejoiced 
 greatly, with all his house, having believed in 
 God." (R.V.) 
 
 All these considerations, carefully and 
 prayerfully weighed, convinced me that the 
 New Testament and the apostles had no 
 idea of infant baptism. That the simple 
 and unmistakable teaching of the Holy 
 Spirit was that anyone repenting of sin and 
 believing on Christ might and ought to be 
 baptized, but only these. 
 
 The second question for consideration, 
 having settled who were eligible for baptism, 
 was what is the scriptural method of admin- 
 istering the ordinance ? In settling this 
 question there are several points that claim 
 our study, i. What do the word baptize and 
 its derivatives mean ? 2. What was the 
 custom followed in early Church times ? 
 3. What is the symbolic meaning of the rite ? 
 
 The first of these points is one around 
 which has been waged a fierce battle in the 
 theological world. We can begin by grant- 
 ing to the other side that the Greek word, 
 which in our New Testament is simply angli- 
 cized without the faintest attempt at trans- 
 
 14 
 
lating it, is used sometimes in the classics, 
 perhaps once or twice in the New Testa- 
 ment, where a word meaning poured or 
 washed might have been used instead. When 
 we have admitted this we have practically 
 allowed all that any can claim, and yet not 
 weakened our own case in the least degree. 
 An examination of any authoritative Greek 
 lexicon, such as Grimm's, Liddell & Scott's, 
 etc., will give us as the primary meaning of 
 " baptiso," to immerse. All authorities agree 
 on this point. In cases where the word 
 may be used in any other sense, it is simply 
 because the idea it represents is intimately 
 associated with that of immersion, such as the 
 practical consequences of " pouring " or 
 " washing." But when the word is used 
 alone, without qualifying circumstances that 
 would render its primary meaning impos- 
 sible or improbable, it is only fair that it 
 should be translated " immerse." Let us 
 suppose that the proper mode of baptism was 
 by " sprinkling " or " pouring " ; is it not 
 a proper question to ask why, if such is the 
 case, did not our Lord and His apostles in 
 speaking of the rite use either of the Greek 
 words that unmistakably signify these things ? 
 Yet in not one case is the ordinance de- 
 scribed by any other word than " bapHzo" 
 It is not the method of tlie Holy Spirit to 
 use language without special significance. 
 Every scriptural word is employed because 
 of its absolute fitness for the idea it is in- 
 tended to express. Why, then, did the Holy 
 Spirit use the word "haptizo" if He really 
 meant "rantizo" or "cheo"? The discus- 
 sion of this point need scarcely be carried 
 farther. The open mind will readily see that 
 
 15 
 
to get the idea of sprinkling out of baptize, 
 the word has to be forced, and the spirit of 
 scriptural interpretation violated. 
 
 The second point concerns the custom in 
 early Church times. For the custom of New 
 Testament days I simply ask. you to read 
 such passages as Matt. 3 : i6; Mark i : lo; 
 Acts 8 : 38, 39, where the details of the ordin- 
 ance are given. Does the language in these 
 cases, so far as it indicates anything, favour 
 the idea of sprinkling or immersion ? I leave 
 the question for you to answer, fairly and 
 without prejudice. In the last passage, re- 
 cording the baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch, 
 it has been claimed that, in the country tra- 
 versed by the eunuch, enough water could 
 not have been found to permit of immersion; 
 but Dr. Thompson, author of " The Land 
 and the Book," a standard work, speaks of 
 a stream in that neighborhood thus : " A 
 fine stream of water, deep enough in some 
 places even in June to satisfy the utmost 
 wishes of our Baptist friends." It is inter- 
 esting to notice in passing that had sprink- 
 ling been considered sufficient for the pur- 
 pose, the eunuch would have probably had 
 sufficient water in his chariot to perform the 
 ceremony, without stopping his whole caval- 
 cade. It is impossible to suppose that, on a 
 long journey such as he was taking, he would 
 be dependent for two or three drops of water 
 upon a chance stream. That the practice of 
 the early Church was immersion every au- 
 thority of any importance readily con- 
 cedes. John Calvin, Luther, Melancthon, 
 Adam Clark, Dean Alford, Dr. Schaflf, Dean 
 Stanley, John Wesley, Neander, Pressense, 
 
 16 
 
form a chorus made up of what may be 
 termed the opposition, that, with unparalleled 
 unanimity declare immersion to have been 
 the practice of the early Church. We can 
 safely leave this point in the hands of our 
 opponents; further argument is Unnecessary; 
 their frank testimony has settled the question 
 beyond dispute. 
 
 The third and last point to be considered is. 
 What does the ordinance symbolize ? A 
 little study of such passages as Rom. 6:4; 
 Gal. 3 : 27; Col. 2 : 12 will show that its 
 spiritual signification is the union of the 
 believer with his Lord in death, burial and 
 resurrection. Of tiiis union it is intended to 
 be a seal to the believer and a sign to the 
 world. The question then arises, Which 
 ordinance best symbolizes this fact, sprink- 
 ling or immersion ? There can be little diffi- 
 culty in arriving at an answer. In immersion 
 the subject goes under the water, and for a 
 moment is as near to death as any one in a 
 normal condition of health can well come. 
 Out of this watery grave he rises gasping 
 for the breath that in but an instant more 
 would have been lost forever. Who can say 
 that this is not a striking picture of the won- 
 derful truth it is intended to represent ? 
 Sad, indeed, was the day when, for conveni- 
 ence* sake, the Church gave up this beautiful 
 and solemn imagery, with its deep spiritual 
 significance. What idea does the rite of 
 sprinkling convey ? Often in my boyhood 
 have I watched the ceremony, and wondered 
 whax its meaning could be. I could only 
 suppose that, in those little drops of water 
 descending on the infant's head, some mys- 
 terious grace was conferred upon the uncon- 
 
 17 
 
' v" "> ' 
 
 ■»?^^i^p^^ 
 
 r 
 
 scious babe ; and my supposition is shared 
 by thousands, who have a superstitious faith 
 in an otherwise meaningless ceremony. It 
 was thus, indeed, that sprinkling and the 
 baptism of infants came to have its origin. 
 Not till 200 years after Christ is there any 
 mention of it, and then it is opposed by 
 Tertullian. Like many other heretical ideas 
 that entered the Church within a century of 
 Pentecost, there came, probably later than 
 this, however, the idea that baptism was 
 essential to salvation. Thus when a man 
 was converted on a dying bed, and was too 
 sick to be immersed, the question arose as 
 to what should be done. To meet the diffi- 
 culty the plan of pouring or sprinkling was 
 adopted. So you see the practice of pouring 
 or sprinkling had its origin in the dangerous, 
 unscriptural doctrine that baptism was essen- 
 tial to salvation, or, in other words, bap- 
 tismal regeneration. It was not long until 
 this error led to the baptism of infants, since, 
 if the ceremony was regenerative, logically 
 the earlier the individual was brought under 
 its influence the better. To such an extent 
 was this dreadful teaching carried that in 
 some cases the life of the mother was sac- 
 rificed to secure the regeneration of the 
 unborn babe with a few drops of water. 
 
 But I have said enough. Such considera- 
 tions as these overcame all the prejudice of 
 my early training. I was convinced that it 
 was not a question of much or little water, 
 but one of man's way or God's way ; not a 
 question of .convenience, but one of obedi- 
 ence. Only they who obey fully will.be 
 blessed fully. I wanted all the blessing God 
 had for me, therefore I was immersed. 
 
 i8 
 
'Twmr 
 
 W 
 
 f