¥m IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 1.1 11.25 no ^^" 2.5 ■tt Bii 12.2 2.0 lU 140 U 11.6 ^ Riotographic Sdences Corporation 23 WIST MAIN STMiT WHSTiR.N.Y. 14SS0 (7I6)«73-4S03 •4^- 1^ V^X ^^2 ^^^ 6^ 6^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technicaf and Sibliographic Notes/Notes tachniques at bibliographiquas T The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significant'y change the usual method of filming, are checked below. Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur □ Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagde □ Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurie et/ou pellicul6e D D D D D Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque □ Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) D Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relid avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge int6rieure Blank leaves added duiing restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouties lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas dt6 filmdes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplAmentaires: L'institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il iui a At6 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 methods normale de filmage sont indiquAs ci-dessous. I t Coloured pages/ D D Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes Pages restored and/oi Pages restaur^es et/ou pellicul6es Pages discoloured, stained or foxei Pages d6color6es, tachetdes ou piqu6es Pages detached/ Pages d6tach6es Showthroughy Transparence Quality of prir Quality in^gale de I'impression Includes supplementary materii Comprend du materiel suppl^mentaire I I Pages damaged/ I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ I I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ I I Pages detached/ rrpT Showthrough/ r~| Quality of print varies/ I I Includes supplementary material/ 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 M film^es d nouveau de faqon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. T P fi This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ca document est fitmd au taux de rMuction indiqu6 ci-dessous. 10X 14X ItX 22X 26X 30X y 12X 16X 20X MX 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: United Church of Canada Archives L'exemplaire filmi fut reproduit grAce A la gAnirositi de: United Church of Canada Archives 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. Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin. compte tenu de la condition et de la netteti de I'exempiaire filmA, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. 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. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim6e sont filmte en commcngant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidk-e paye qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustratt. .. soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires or'ginaux sont film6s en commen^anf: par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en tei minant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — ^^^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. 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 thtt upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film6s d des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cliche, 11 est film6 d partir de I'angle supirieur gauche, de gauche d droite. et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diacTammes suivants illustrent la m6thode. 1 2 3 1 2 9 ^ .4 y y ■ f e BIIKIAL IN BAPTISM: i \ "i A COLLOQUY, IN WHICH TUB CLAIMS OF RITUAL BAPFTSM IN ROMANS VF. '\ 4, AND (K)J/)SSI ANS II. 12, ARE F.XAMINBP* AND SHOWN TO m VISIONAHY. By REV. T. L. WrLKTNSON. TORONTO: W 1 L L 1 A M ?> K 1 (} S 78 A 80 Kino Htukkt Kact, 1 8 8 2. BURIAL IN BAPTISM A COLLOQUY, IN WHICH THE CLAI1£S OF EITUAL BAPTISM IN KOMANS VI. 3, 4, AND COLOSSI ANS II. 12, ARE KXAMINBD ^AND SHOWN TO BE VISIONARY. By rev. T. L WILKINSON. TORONTO: WILLIAM BRIGGS 78 1 80 Kino Strrit Ea»t. 1882. Po, rr\ JAN 2 9 1949 INTRODUCTION. The writer has long been convinced that the great central but- treas of the immersion theory, supposed to be found in Rom. vi. 3, 4, and Col. ii. 12, was a purely imaginary support, useful to the theory in question only because the passages were misunder- stood and misinterpreted ; and he has been equally sure that by a correct exegesis of the passages, the fallacy of the immersion interpretation could be made perfectly plain, though in none of the many books we have read on the subject have we found a satisfactory exposition of these texts. We have, therefore, at- tempted something of the kind ourselveS; feeling that it was a duty we owed to the world and to God to do what we could to anest error. We have put our thoughts in the form of a dialogue, the better to exhibit and illustrate the unsoundness of the immersion view. In putting replies into the mouth of a supposed immersionist, we have scrupulously avoided misrepre- senting their teachings on these passages, and have by no means carried the exposure of those teachings as far as we might in justice have done. The replies, from beginning to end, are the best we could devise in support of the Baptist argument, and we flatter ourselves that they are, on the whole, as pertinent as almost any immersionist could have given. At all events, we are quite willing to let the most intelligent of that class have an opportunity of doing it better if they think they can. Iv INTRODUCTION. The article was first published in the Iconoclast, a little monthly paper edited by the writer, and copies sent to the offices of every respectable Baptist paper published in the Province, so far as we could ascertain, but up to the present date we are not aware that any exception has been taken to our presentation of their case by any one of them. If we have succeeded as fully as we think we have in placing the interpretation of these beautiful passages on a sounder basis, and in rescuing them from an erroneous and perverted application, we have our reward ; and we trust that other brethren, who also love the truth, will aid in its dissemination by introducing this tract to the notice of their people. We have put the article in this cheap and convenient form in order to facilitate its circulation. May the Divine bless- ing accompany it is the prayer of The Author. Acton, March, 7882. DHjV^ BUEIAL IN BAPTISM, A COLLOQUY Between a Piedo- Baptist and an Immersionist, as to whether the Burial with Christ in Baptism mentioned in Bom. vi. 3, 4, and Col. ii. 12, is Literal or Spiritual In Two Conversations. CONVERSATION I Question. Without desiring to be inquisitive, my friend, I would like the privilege of asking you a few questions on a subject of considerable interest to the Church of God. Answer. With pleasure, sir, I will answer any questions I can, if by 80 doing I can contribute either to the profit or enjoyment of others. Q. Please accept my thanks for your kindness, and be good enough to inform me if it be true that you interpret the language of the Apostle Paul in Rom. 6. 3-5, where he speaks of the believer's baptism, etc., to apply to the outward rite. A. Certainly, that is what I believe. Q. And on what principle do you so understand it ? A. On the principle that the outward rite, in its physical aspects, symbolizes the spiritual conditions for which it stands, and which it is designed to represent. Q. And are the physical aspects of ritual baptism designed to repre- sent death, burial, resurrection, planting, and crucifixion, as described in this chapter, vs. 2-6 ? A. I don't hold that they represent either death or crucifixion, but I do hold that they represent burial, resurrection, and planting. fi m RIAL IN BAPTISM. (4. Anl on what |tiiiicli»l« «l<) yoii rejcMt the doath and cjuciifixion from the domain of tliis ritf, whih" letainiiif^ the burial, n'Hurroction and phiiitiiig '\ A. On tlio principlo ^hat the apostlo lanted in the earth it is covered up with the earth. So when a believer is baptized he is covered up with the water. Q. And does the water in this case correspond to and symbolize the earth ? A. Why, sir, to tell you the truth I never thought of carrying the symbolism beyond the mere act of covering, nor did I ever hear it pushed to such extremes before. Q. That is no proof, however, that it is not perfectly legitimate to do so. Nor can I see how you are to avoid the conclusion that, if, in baptism, the covering of the body in water represents the covering of seed in the earth, the water must represent the earth, and the believer the seed, otherwise where do you find the analogy ? A. I admit that your position looks somewhat plausible, only I had never heard it applied in that way. Q. Well, then, according to your theory, we have the following elements introduced into this ordinance: — The water represents Christ, his death, his grave, the divine Spirit, and the earth, while the person being baptized represents a candidate for baptism, a corpse, and seed- corn. Do you believe that such confusion of ideas could have emanated from God? A. I prefer not to sit in judgment on what God has written. Q. But if you find what God has written to be absurd according to one principle of interpretation, and perfectly consistent according to another, would you hesitate about sitting in judgment upon the two modes of interpretation ? A. Well, no, I suppose not, n that case. But I am not yet con- vinced that this is a case in po it. Q. I do not expect to maku you see the consistency of my mode of intsrpretation, until I have shown you the inconsistency of your own. For this purpose I will refer to but one more question at present, and then leave the further prosecution of the subject for a future cohvcrsa- tion, which T hope you will grant me A. Certainly, with pleasure, after I have given your present ques- tions some fuller consideration. Q. Thanks. Well, the question is this : If planting means covering up, how does it come to be applied to the resurrection in verse 5 ? For you will observe that the apostle says, " If we have been planted to- / BURIAL IN BAPTISM. u gether (covered up) in the likeness of his death, we shall be also (planted together, or covered up) in the likeness of his resurrection." A. Well, I confess that that always did puzzle me a little, but I find that the revisers have removed the difficulty by rendering the verse, "If we have become united to him by the likeness of his death, we shall be also by the likeness of his resurrection." Q. Well this new rendering will render another question or two im- perative. You understand "the likeness of the resurrection" to be the removal from the water as from a grave, I believe ? A. Oh, yes. Q. And will you tell me how the putting into the water can be " in the likeness of his death," which was not by drowning but by cruci- fixion, and to which fact the apostle alludes in the very next verse, " Knowing this, that our old man was crucified with him," etc.? ^. As I only recently noticed the rhange made by the revisers I will need to consider this question until our next conversation. / CONVERSATION II. Qicestion. Well, my friend, 1 presume you have been thinking over the questions propounded in our last conversation on the subject of '• Burial in Baptism." Answer. Yes, I have been thinking some about the matter, and read- iog some, too, but I fail to find anything in any book I have read about the water in baptism representing Christ, and death, and a grave, and the earth, and about the candidate representing a corpse, and seed com, etc., and I have come to the conclusion that you have been try- ing to force an interpretation upon these words that Baptists never in- tended should be put upon them. Q. But is there anything unfair in drawing conclusions from a man's premises providing such conclusions are plainly deducible from them ? A. Undoubtedly not. But I am not convinced that your conclu- sions are plainly deducible from Baptist premises in this case. Q. Are you rot aware that the conclusions were mostly drawn by yourself in answer to my questions ? 12 BURIAL IN BAPTISM. A. That I do not deny, but my admissions were inadvertent, and without due consideration. Q. Very well, then, we will look at the matter again, and see if we can disf.over wherein your admissions were defective. Did you not state in our last conversation that the immersion of a person in water reseDibleeing, represent a corpse. Now, will you tell me how you can have a burial without a corpse ? A. You misapprehend the matter altogether. It is the body of sin that is buried, and not the candidate. Q. Then the Vxxiy of sin is the corp.se, and the candidate must repre- sent the body of sin. In what way does that improve your case ? A. You can interpret it as you plea.se. I simply claim that we never intended any such construction to be put upon our interpretation, and I cannot be responsible for it. Q. Well J suppose we allow that the candidate represents the bod)' of sin and not a corpse, is it unfair to infer tiiat the element in which it is buried corresfwnds to a grave ? A. I don't care to be pressed with such questions. The subject as you present it is entirely new to me, and I jtrefer not to be annoyed with it. Q. I regret such a decision-, since you so kindly granted me this interview, promising to answer any ([uestions I wished to propound. I should be glad to go over the entire ground previously traversed and satisfy you that I forced no unfair admissions, or conclusions from you. But as you do not seem to relish such a journey I shall be happy to hear from you on some new points. I suppose you have noticed the phraseology in Col. 2. 12, where the same fonn of words is used by this same apostle, to describe the same process as in Rom. 6 : 3, 4? A. 0, certainly I have. Q. And do you interpret both on the same principle ? A. Unquestionably I do. Q. Well, you have no doubt observed that in v. 11 we are said to be BURIAL IN BAPTISM. 18 ** circumcised Nvith the ciroumoision made without hands," etc Now, allow me to inquire in what way this j-rocess is symbolized by any Christian ordinance ■ A. Why, I never heanl of ^uch a thing. Nolxnly pretends that circumcision is symbolize«l by any Christian orJinance. Besides it is quite clear that it is sjdritual circumcision that is s^xtken of, for it is effected "without hands,'" and involves the " putting off of the body of the sins of the flesh." Q. But circumcision was a literal rite under the old disi>ensatiou. Would you inform me, therefore, what style of language the apostle uses when he speaks of a spiiitual process under the name of a visible rite ? A. The langiiage is undoubtedly figurative. Q. And what style of language is employed in v. 13 where the apostle speaks of ' ' the uncircumcision of the flesh, " and the being " quickened together with Christ," etc. ? A. Why, I presume it is figurative also. Q. Yet you think that in v. 12, when we are said to be " buried with him in baptism," and " risen with him in l^aptism," the apostle is sf>eaking of literal, or ritual baptism, and that the allusion is to the putting of a person into water and removing him from the water, and this you defined in our last conversation as the language of symbol. Now, will you please inform me why you think the apostle employs the language of figure in v. 11, and in v. 13, but wedges in a literal process between ? A. I cannot be supposed to know why he does so, but it is sufllcient for me to know that he has done so. Q. How do you know that he has done so ? Is there not such a thing a^ spiritual baptism of which this may be an instance ■ A. I suppose there is, but I have never heard this spoken of as spiritual baptism. Besides the allusion to the mode of baptism is so plain na to settle the matter in the minds of all reasonable people. Q. Is it not possible that you first made up your mind, without in- vestigation, that the burial meant immersion, and then inferred that immersion meant burial, and so have inadvertently fallen into the practice of reasoning in a circle I A. 1 don't think I have. & u BURIAL IS BAPTISM. Q. Well, you remember that in the pa»sage in Romans we are saiJ to be " Ijaptized into Christ." Would you infonn me, from the word of Goeing "quickened," in v. 13, was a spiritual proi^-ess, descril^d in figurative language. Can you assign any reason why the same thing in v. 12 is not a spiritual pro- cess, described in tigumtive language ? A. Well, no, except that th« resurrection in v. 12 is ascribed to baptism. It is !>aid that we are "buried with him in baptism whenin also we are risen with him." Q. But, on the supposition that a spiritual baptism is meant would you sav there was any difficulty in accepting the figurative theory ? A. No, I do not think I would. Q. And do you see no difficulty in trjing to adapt the language of the apostle to your mode of interpretation, when you have to skip from the language- of figure to the language of symbol, and then back again to the language of figure, both here and in Romans .' A. I confess I never noticed the difficulty until since you called my attention to it. Q. And would that, or any other difficulty present itself to your mind if you adopted the theory that it was spiritual, and not ritual baptism of which the apostle si)eaks in these two places f A. No, except that I cannot see how we ai-e buried and raised with him in spiritual baptism. Q. Is there any greater difficulty in seeing how we can be buried and raised up by a spiritual process, than to see how we can be crucified and die by a spiritual process ? A. Why I cannot say that there is, in point of fact. m 16 BURIAL IN BAPTISM. Q. And is it any harder to perceive the one without a visible repres- entation than the other? A. No, I suppose not. Q. And wliat would you designate a visible representation of a crucifixion ? A. I presume it would be called a scenic, or dramatic representation. Q. And is it any less scenic, or dramatic to visibly represent a burial and resuiTcction ? A. Well, I suppose not, but it never so occurred to me until you called my attention to it in our last conversation. Q. And do you think Christ ever intended to institute a Christian ordinance on the principle of a drama ? A. Really, your questions are difficult, and I must give them further thought, though it does at present seem improbable. Q. Well, I will not pursue that point any further, but allow me to ask again, What is the difference between the " being dead in sins, and the uncircumcision of the flesh," and the "being quickened to- gether with Christ," in v. 13? A. Why, I should say they were the opposite of each other. The former describes our state by nature, and the latter our state by grace. Q. Again, you said a short time since that spiritual circumcision .vas the opposite of uncircumcision, and now you say that "being quick- ened " is the opposite of uncircumcision. Will you tell me then what is the difference between spiritual circumcision and "being quick- ened ? " A. 0, of course, as they are both the opposite of uncircumcision the)' must both be the same thing Q. You also admitted that the "quickened" in v. 13, and the " risen " in v, 12 were the same. Will you, therefore, tell me in what respect the being " risen " in v. 12, and the being circumcised in v. 11, differ from each other ? A. Well, I presume that on the principle that "things that are equal to the same thing are equal to one another," the resurrection and the circumcision must be the same also. Q. Once more. As the circumcision in v. 11, you say, is the same as the resurrection in v. 12, and the latter is ascribed to baptism, what is the difference between circumcision and baptism ? In other words : As BURIAL IN BAPTISM. 17 in baptism we are said to be "risen with Christ," and this is the opposite of *' being dead in sin and the uncircumcision of the flesh ;" and circumcision is also the opposite of "being dead in sin and the uncircumcision of the flesh," what difl'erence is there between baptism and circumcision ? A. Really, I cannot answer your question, thoTigh I have always supposed that there was a wide and essential diff'erence between them. Q. If, however, you admit the principle that like causes produce like efl'ects, and you find two eff'ects the same, what would you say of the causes ? A. I suppose I should have to admit that they were the same also. REMARKS. Dear Reader, — We have thus, by a careful process of questioning,, endeavored to illustrate the absurdity of interpreting the language in Rom. 6: 3, 4, and Col. 2: 12, as applying to ritual baptism. You may depend that there is nothing of the kind intended. We have also shown the absurdity of understanding the words "buried," and "risen," etc., as having any reference to the mode of baptism, or the visible act of putting a candidate into and removing him from the water. Such an interpretation could only have been adopted, and can only be maintained, by a very superficial and careless examination of the passages in question, and a gross violation of the well-understood rules of interpretation. Whatever may be the true mode of baptism, certainly there is no clue nor reference to it here, and all the arrogant claims and assertions that have been based upon these passages must be swept aside as the "baseless fabric of a vision." We have, also, very clearly identified circumcision and baptism in Col. 2: 11, 12, as one and the same thing. Whatever diversity there may be in the outward forms of the two ordinances, in their spiritual import and effects they are assuredly the same. We have thus completely demolished the great central prop of the immersion theory, and exhibited the essential oneness of the seal of the Abrahamic covenant under the two dispensations, and conse- quently, the oneness of the covenant. And if the covenant be the ^fW,-' " 18 BURIAL IN BAPTISM. same, then are those who are ontitled to its be' "fits the same, viz.: Abraham's seed. But, " If ye be Christ's then are e Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise (or covenant.) " Little children are Christ's, therefore they are Abraham's seed, therefore heirs, and there- fore entitled to the divine seal or pledge of the covenant blessing. The blessing of Abraham, of which circumcision was the seal, was justifica- tion, or righteousness. And Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, " That the blessing of Abraham might como on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ." Hence "the promise is unto you (Jews) and to your children, (Isaac, at eight days old, and all the rest of them) and to all that are afar off (Gentiles.) " And if the infant children of Jews were included in the promise, by what rule are we to exclude the infant children of Gentiles, unless divinely authorized to do so ? But these very condensed remarks we must leave the reader to elabo- rate at his pleasure. ^■m mK ^