% [MAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) / O 4is <lj* #? ^ 7 '^. #^%' '^^ t/u « 1.0 I.I 1.25 '"rillM IM '" '^ ill 12 - 1^ lllllio 1.4 1.8 1.6 V] <^ /i s^. /a ''c^l "^^ 6>. V %, "^71 M Photographic Sciences Corporation #> <r V <v \ \ '<h V o\ '^<S' 'W ''^^ 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTEr.N.Y. 145B0 (716) 872-4503 //% CUiM/ICMH CIHM/ICMH f ^ Microfiche Collection de f microfiches. :\ ;V Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The tc t The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filrring. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. D D D Coloured covers/ Couverture ae couleur □ Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagd* □ Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicui^e D Cover title missing/ Le titre de coi!verture manque □ Coloured maps/ Cartes g^ographiques en couleur □ Coloured ink (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/ Relii avec d'autres documents Tight binding may causa shadows or distortion along interior margin/ Lareiiure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distorsion 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 ajouties lors dune restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela itait possible, ces pages n'ont pas iti filmies. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl^mentaires; L'Institut a microfilme le meilleur oxemplaire qu'il lui a ete possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-^tre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage sont indiquis ci-dessous I I Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagies □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages rr taurees et/ou palliculdes E Pages discoloured, s^a Pages ddcolor^es. tach ined or foxidO/ tachet^es ou piquees □Pages detached/ Pages detachees «/ Showthrough/ Transparence □ Quality of print varies/ Qualite inigale de Timpression □ Includes supplementary material/ Comprerd du materiel supplementaire □ Only editi Seule ddit edition available/ ition disponible D 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.. cnt m film^es A nouveau de facon a obtenir la meilleure image possible. The pos oft filnn Ori{ beg the sior oth( firsi sior or il The shal TIN whi Mar diffi enti begi righ reqi met This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqui ci-dessous. IPX 14X 18X 2X i /' ' 26X 30X 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks tc the generosity of: Harold Campbell Vaushan Memorial Library Acadia University The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and ragibility 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. AM 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. 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: L'exempiaire fllmA fut reproduit grAce h la g6n6rosit6 de: Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library Acadia University Lea images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettet6 de l'exempiaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimde sont filmds en ccmmenpant 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 commandant 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 *a dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole — »- signifie "A SUIVRE ", le symbols V signifie "PIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre film6s d des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est filmi d part«r de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 I ■%: H If 2-r A 3 A JJJLL1:5A1J1. ON THE ACTION OF BAPTISM, BETWr.EN T. H. BLENUS, of the Christian Church, AND W, E. ARCHIBALD, of the Presbyterian CInirch. Held at Rawdon, Hants Co., N. S.. October S8th. 1878. Rki'orted bt ^\ . H. FRY, Corporal, 97th Regt. HALIFAX N. S. VKINTKI) BV J. BCKUOYNE, " RJ: OBTER A TIMES " OFFICK. 1879. .# wimmimmm J. CHALONER, DRUGGIST, -. - ST. JOHN, N.B. Carriea on ^^RAiiOK ESTABLISHMSIIT ■ In DIGBY N.S. (opposite Post Office) and will l>e happy to mipply ovistom^m in want of FANCY BRUSHES, ETC speo:alties .- Vfgit&Ue ud Tlown SMds, 0klo&«^8 AiUias Dyes. sHitt J. CHALOJ^ER, ' ^^^i Cof . Ring and Genu^n S«r««^ St. Jot o, ». B m NO AGENTS! NO COMMISSIOirs I ! Iv fZll2^T "^^^P^^yf « Agents or Caovassew at a ' -h commission has bceastrict- 1™ T«%f?.!^ "*' it hftviag prored very ansafcfacto,, both to ourselves and oostdm- erB. jia ntture we will sell our PIANOFORTES AND ORGANS ^T NET "W^nOLES 4.1.6: PRICES. frwt^ir purehasers. In this way buyers of Pianos and Organs will save from twenty to guarlJSe? ^ "* ^"""'^^ '''^^ "'' "°^' ""''«""'' ^"^ »^«"«' satisfaction can S withtst ot^s^rrSiif """* ^-^^-'^''^^ *« be had and at the lowest prices oonsislent BUhnT.'iri'^h ^^'^f^ ^i"*^ k\7 *" "'^' ** ^ ''""^y '*'°*" »^^^»n<^« «« «o»t of manufacture, f™«S« '"''* '■^•"'*''"' P*""'*^' ''*' «*« ""^'^ ^''J^^^ t« a"«w a reasonable time for pureW.* "''^' ""'" ^'''"''' ""*^ ^'■^*"'' /'•'-•« ''/■«^*«'»«. a* '-rarest port or station to the* sM^.ffJK*" ?^*^*'""S by "i"' "^f '«'y "P«n getting as fine an instrument as if personally Sarnl »^ themselves. Any Or|an or Piano not found exactly as represented oa« be :;sss-^rt'^/Ks.e?>ss:"''' ^''"^'^ '^^^^^^<^^^^--^^^^^ wu?^*"*-^"* ^*"" **"" l^"^ ^'beral pahonage accorded us hitherto, we can only say that wc with ,SI ""° ""'' '" °" *" 'boroufehly satisfy our oustomers ia all tWdealings ^ JjAN DRY & Wj, M King Street. St. Jo hn. M.M. __ A DEBATE 13 T t ON THE ACTION ■^■^'^' /' ^ BETWEEN V.' XTX^ T. II. BLENUS, of the Christian Church, AND W. E. ARCHIBALD, of the Presbyterian Church. Held at Rawdon, Hants Co., N S., October 28th, 1878, Reported by W. H. FRY, CoRronAL, 97111 Reut. / /; mmsBm PREFACE. The leatlei neetl simply be iiifoiuu'd that the loUuwing is a di.scus.sion held by T. H. Bleiuis, of Chiistiaii Cluucli, an I W. E. Aichiljakl, of Pi-ashyleiian Church. Tne .several speeches were reported as uttered, and with hut slight alterations arc given an delivered ; no new arguments have intention- ally been inserted in the revision, or any departure from the original plan of discussion. The debate is puljlished at the urgent request of many who were present, as well a.s, many who were not. The disputants each claim to be alike i^incere and conscientious, in what he has brought forward and it is now committed to an enlightened public. A candid unprejudiced reading, and consideration of arguments o n both sides, is requested. T. H. BLENUS. W. E. AKCIIIBALD. ■ REr>ORT M l.y leiian 11 l)iit ition- 1 plan f who claim d and idicetl ^ .D. OF A MEETING, ASSEMBLED AT IIAWDON, HANTS COUNTY, N.S., BEFORE WHICH THE QUESTION : "Does the word Bai^tto, as used in the New Testament Scrii)tui'es, in con- nection witli the ordinaiu;e of baptism express imniei'sion in water, in the sense of i)utting under and drawing out of the water," was debated. ME. T. H. BLENUS, Affirm.vtive. " W. E. ARCHIBALD, Negative. " J. MINARD, M. D., a.s Moderator. The Moderator announced that each of the disputants would he allowed to speak for half an hour, arHrniative leading. Order having been calleil, Mr. Bleiuis rose to address the meeting and. spoke as follows : Mr. Blenus: — Mr. Moderator, Ladies and Gentlemen :— I am called upcm, in the first place, to j)lace before you the proposition which we have met here to discuss to-day. I alfirm :— " That the Greek word Baptco as used in the Scriptures, in con- nection with the ordinance of ba]>tism, n\eans to immei'se in water in the sense of putting under the water and bringing u]. out of tlie water." Mr. Archibald :— I deny that it does so. Mr. Blexcs : — I am pleased to-day to see so many here. There are various reasons I might give why I am ideased, suHice it to say as an especial reason j that it is always a jdeasure for a speaker to have a large and intelligent audience to address. It is much more so on this occasion when the theme is so important a one— a subject connected with the word of God— I know there are many persons, and no doubt there are some present here to-day who disapprove of discussion or controvei-sy on the word of God. We do not oui-selves believe in controversy in connection with the word of God that has any other object in view than the eviction of truth and the exposure of error. Such we hope and trust is our object to-day. Now, we may say many things to-day and use many terms connected with the original text of the scriptures etc., that many of you 110 doubt, will not be able, at first, to understand. We expect to explain as lucidly as possible every term thus used. I shall have to read and quote, from various authors, the most illustrious and well-known commentators, but in all this I shall endeavor to explain myself in as few and simple terms as is consist- ^(c.(o'^(. />( ^_- (3.) ont with poi-si.icuit y. I slml], in the fii-st-place, take up the word Bitttko—nov^' I alhriii : — (I.) Tlmt liai)ti/o is nut a ra.lical but a derivative word tliat is, it ih a word derive<l from uiiotlier woid, and the woitl from which it i.s derived is callwl the stem or root woitl— for Ex., take the root word (Up— we have the derivatives diitper, etc. The root of Jktptho i.s nipto, and is never in the New Testament ap- jilied to the ordinance of baptism. In tlie common version Bujito is translated both in its simi»le and com- l>ound fonn, ahmijs by the word di}). (4.) We also find that Baptizo is not once translated by— </</«, stain, or colour. (5.) Jiaptko with its derivatives i.s the only word used in the New Testa- ment to indicate the ordinance of baptism. Now these foregoing facts are indisputable, and on this question are vol- umes of eviilence themselves. Again, Baptto indicates a specific action, and consequently, as such can Imve but one meaning. Bapf^zo, being a derivative word from Bapto receives its meaning from that root. Now, according to the usage of aU languages, both ancient and modern, derivatives legally inherit the sjiecific and not neces.sarily thiifujurative meaning of the root, for instance, take the word dip as before used and we have as devivative^— dipped— dipper— dip-needle— etc., and wher- ever we find the radical or root syllable we find the radical idea. Now I shall next call your attention t.. the word Bapto. It has some 700 flexions besides numerous derivatives -we shall simply take the indicative mood throuo-h one tense and through one pei-son ; Bapto-ehaptou-Upso-elKipsci-^hiphon-kipho hbaphu-MapheuK Its deri vati ve.s are Buptizo and its regular fiexions are more than 700 including all of mood, tense, participle, person, number, gender and case, and from these spring Baptismos—Baptis-ma-Baptids—Baptistees-Baptmnai —Baptmmu-Baptos-Baptidee-ivn-Bapha-Bnphikos-BapMs. Now these different words with their several modifications and flexions number about (2000) two thousand, and through them all we have the root-syUable, and hence the retaining of the root meaning. ' Now, for the sake of com2)aiison, let us take another Greek word, Raino—l sprinkle— it has nearly as many fiexions and derivatives a.s Bapto— y\i. -.—liaino —Baimmai — Rantko^Bantlsmos — liantisma-Iiaiiteer— Bantis—Rantos— with their some two thousand flexi..ns and these all exhibit the root Rain or Ran and with It the root-meaning qmnkk. Now it is phUologically impossible to find the root Ran m Bap— ox Bap in Rim, and just a^ impossible is it ig find s^inkle m dip, or dip 111 qmnkle. There are men here, no doubt, who have the power and means of examhiing these statements-and I, for mv part, am perfectly will- ing that this should meet the critical eye that it should go before our best class- . l)oth ical scliolni-H, wlio have perlmj.s f,'ivon it far dcpper lliouglit, aiul who have ex- amined it iiK.io minutely than 1 have, and I am positive every mipiejudieed scholar wiU tell you the same as I have already tt.ld, and have yet to tell you. In ancient times, the Greek grammarians were accustomed to present the verb to their pupils, arran},'ed as trees. Thoy took as the root of the tree, the rmlical wonl, then next they represented its nearest derivatives hy the stems, branches other ramifications, and so on, thus showing, by means of "root, trunk and branch the total assimilation of the derivatives to the ndical form. Now, it would be impossil)le, as you all know, to find— in their i/rimitive forms— an oak tree glowing out of the root cf a fir, <.r a fir growinj^ out of the root of an oak, aj.ple blanches from a poplar— in its fii-st state— and so it is with words through all their inflexions from the radical form. You can, I know, perceive, from what 1 have said, the wonderful order running through all this arrange-' ment, and can easily imagine that there is a meaning in it all. We will, now, leave Bapto, the root,— having shown that Baptizo is derived from it, and how its meaning must, according to the usage of language, be re- tained — and come to Baptizo itself. My first argument will be based upon the Greek Lexicographers, the most ancient, the most learned and the most competent witnesses in this case. I will only quote from the best of those. I do not deny that there are many learned men at this present day who are ecpially as h-arned and to whose opinions weight must be attached, and whom we must acknowK dgt; as standard authorities, but J. wish to commence from the fountain head and work down to our own dav. Now, yoii will know from exjierieiice, that when one wishes to find the mean- ing of a woid, with which he is unacquainted he wiU turn to some standard author— by stamlard author I mean ouv. who has studied the usage of his lan- guage and whose accpiirements have made him master of it. Surely this is, and must be, a strong argument in my favor. Philology is the most inductive of all sciences and by its aid we can unravel language otherwise inexplicable. With regard to, standard authorites I would also add ; that the meaning of a word is ascertained by the usage of those writers and speakers whose" knowledge and acquaintance have made them masters of their own language. From these vouchM's we get most of our knowledge of Holy Writ, and of°aU that remains of ancient literature and science— in this controvei-sy I shall only quote the most ancient, the most famous, and the most impartial lexicographers. I shall begin ^itli : — Walderus, A. D. 1537, he gives as the meaning o( Ba],ti;:o-^mmerse; he gives this as a first specific meaning. Just here I would like to ask i: it <loe,s not seem strange indeed, that Jesus Christ should have spoken— as some would try to make us believe— in such ambiguous language that when he gives a speciP^c command he uses a word that means— immerse, dip, sprinkle or pour ? I think no one will thus thoughtfully dare to impeach the Saviour. I believe that the Saviour cmld, that he wmcld, and that he did find and did use a word with a specific meaning for a specific action. — 6 I shall next (|u»)te : — Stopht'iis, A. D., 1572. hujtli::o—-iinn4:r.ie, siihineiy,; hiiri/iii vnter, httlm in mikr. Scapula, A. 1)., 1579. limit Lij—immersc, sithmenjt; hurij In vater, vash, hatlu: Oe()i-g« Pasoi-, A. D., 1637. Bujithj—Biqrii:., mcye, kUh.. Leu«(U'n, A. D., 167 1. Bnptto—Bajitke, menje, hithe. Hchk-'mmv, A. D., 1791. Bairiko—Immene, dip, plumje in vnter. DoniU'gan, Inim^m repmtMij into a liijuul suhmciyi-, mak, mtmite. Pai-son. Immerse often, suhnietye ; liniicf mointcn-'i'rd. I wUl nowsummun Liddi'll mid Scott, ].uiliai.s, il„. m,..st wi.U-lv used stand- anl Greek Lexicon fu the world Ls that ot Liddt-ll and Scott— a.s the lueuuiiiy of Bupti::o they give : — (I.) To dip re)hKiteiUif~mik~fHiflu:. (2.) Ihvir imtir. (3.) Bni>tiz>'. At one time this Lexicon had partly as a meaning of Ihe woid Bnpti::o—m(nst,'v,mil bedew, hut scholar have comp.iled them to throw these out, l.eiii- unal.le to Hustam them l.y a single cpiotati..!!. I would just reuiark li.-iv that vou will notice my (|uotations are princii-ally from those- who are iMdobaplisls." I M'ill next (piote : Greenfield, who says, Bnjitto means immerse -inmmie-~mhnmyf~sink-vxish — cleanse — kt^tice. Next we come to ;-— . Robinson, who gives its meaning as, immerse~sink,umh,ck(um h,j xmshimi-vush ones' self, hithe — kipti;:e. We next will quote the celebrated Charle,. Anthcu, LL.l)., an Episcopalian flinl professor of Latin and Greek, for years in Columbia College, New Voik. He iiayHBaptizo- Primarily, means Dip or ///umxse— Secondary, if it has ami re- fers to the same thin". I have here the co])y of a letter written by this sam.' Trt-fessoi' Charles Antho,,, to Dr. Parmly, of New Vork, on this subject. I will read it :— „., T, „. "CoLUMmA C*)i,Li;.;i:, March 27th, 1843. •' My Dear Sir, — / ' tj " Tliere is no authority whatever for the singular remark made by the Rev «' Dr. Spring, relative to the force of Paptizo. The i-rimarv meaning of the " word is to dip or imnurse, and its secondary meanings, if it\nr kuUiny, all " refer in some way or other to the same leading idea-s]n inkling etc., are'en- " tirely out of the cjuestion. I have delayed answering your letter in the hope " that you would call, and favor me with a visit when we might talk the matter " over at our leisure. I presume, however, that what I "have written will " answer your purpose. " Yours truly, Charlks Anthox." lie in imftr. h, hdthf. isc'd stiuul- ' luvumiiy iptlze. At unaliUf to ,t VI) II will niilc — unsli 1.11(1 — iraah iscojinlian cw Voik. IS (1111/ IV- V Chailo? 843. tho Rev, iig of the I aiuj, all ., are en- tlic llOpt' 10 matter tten will )N.' The Dr. Spiing referred to in tin,* letter of Charh« Anthonn hml mmlc the remark that lUii^tLo had no detiuite or .listinct meaning that it meant to s^ivkk — immnm—iumr and had a variety of other meanin^x. We now pa^s on to, Rev. George Campbell, D. D., PrcMdent of MarindiaU College, Scotlan.l. lie is a Pre,sl)ytcrian, ami in hi,s " Prelimina.y Di.s,sertatiou to the Gospels "—declares that the original Greek word Baftixo mean.s immim, immersion. W(' next Hiuumon one of the most leoraed the most authoritative, and the most distinguished Presbyterian preacher of his day, the justly honored ThomoH ("halm:'rs, l).\)., LL.D., who boldly, scholarly, and indei)endently in his "Lec- tures on the Episth- to the Ri.mans," ex].resses himself on Rom.>JI. 4 thus— "The original meaning .,f the word baptism is immersion." You will notice our niof/e (.f warfare is <lesigned to have some weight in this di.scu.s,sion as we are turning the very best aud most powerfid guns in the Pedobaptist camp upon themselves— smiting their backs with their own rod— (luoting not LiUpu- tians of the present day— but men who.so erudition have handed their names down to posteiity. Lastly,— at least foi' a time— let me call your attention to the Rev. Moses Stuart, 1). 1)., Professor for years in Andover Theological Seminary— a congie-- gationalist. He says—" BaiHo and Biipti-o mean to di)* plnm/c or immerse into an u liquid,'' (see "mode of Bap. pp. 51.") also in his " Biblical Repositoiy " f"i' '833, ]). 298, he says, " Bapto, Bi'.ptko, means to dip i)lunge or inuuerge in- to any lit^uid all kximjraphcrs and critics of any note are ayreed in this.'* I shall now briefly notice and call your attention to some of the most illiis. trious of the ancient classical authors— those certainly must be reganled as comj>etent judges of their own language at the time in which they lived. This has already been done for us to a great extent l)y A. Campbell, Dr. Gale, of England ; Dr. Carson, of Ireland, and Professor Moses Stuart, of Andover, whose name, and from whose wjitings, I hove already fpioted. Time will only permit me to give a specimen of the classical, literal, and figurative uses of the word Baptirco and its root Bajfto. (I.) Plutarch, vol. X p, 18. "Then plmyinfj {Imptiwu) himself into the lake Co^iias." (2.) Stiabo, lib. 6. In si)eaking of a certain lake near Agrigentium says " Things that elsewhere, cannot float do not sink " (Iwiptizestliai) ; and in book 12. giving an account of a certain river he says— " If one shoots an arrow into it, the force of the water resist« it so much, that il will scarcely sink " (baptizesthai). (3. Polybius, vol. III., p 31 1, ult., here applies the wonl to soldiers passing through water as immersed (Baptizomenoi) up to tlie breast. (4.) Homer, Oil. I. 392. As when a smith dips or plunges (baptei) a hatchet or huge pole-axe into cold water viz. — to harden it. Herodotus, in Euterpe— when speaking of an Egyptian who happens to touch swine, says—" Going to the river, ho dips liiiuself (ebaphe eauton) with his clothes. " Xenophon, Anab. 11, 2-4 describes t)ie Greeks and their enemJ • . as sacrific- ing a goat— a bull— a wolf— and a ram and dip}mg (baptontes) into a 'shield (tilled with their blood), the Greeks a sword and the Barbarians a spear, in oi-der to make a treaty that could not be broken. Plutarch, Parall. Graec. Rom. p. 545. In telling of a trick or stratagem, resorted to by a Roman general, in order, to insure victory, says—" He set up a trophy, on wliich (lippimj his hand into blood (eis to aima— baptizas) he wrote this inscrii)tion etc., etc. Biodorus Siculus, ecUt. Heyne iv. p. i iS. AVhose ship being suuk or meryed (baptistheises). Plato, De.Repulj. iv. p. 637. Represents dyers who wisli to niake a per- manent coh.r as fii^t choosing cut wool, sorthig, and working it over, and then they plunrje it (baptousi) viz.- -into the dye-stulf. Plutarch, Overwhelmed with debts {hchcqHismeiwti) . You will notice by the foregoing quotations, that I have confined myself in general to the derivative word Baptto, as, this is the word that is used in the Scriptures to denote baptism and not ^rt^''"- As I told you at the outstart Bapto the radical word is never used in the New Testament in reference to the ordinance of baptism. I shall now ask your attention t.. the use of this word ao found in the Bible. Baptizo—is found I beheve but twice in th' Old Testament— first in II. Kuigs, V. I. and is there translated, " Then went lie down and dipped himself seven tmies in Jordan." This was the way Naaman went an.l obeyed the com- mand given to him by the prophet "to go wash (foHm?) thyself seven times in the Jordan." The sfcond time (Baptizo) is used in the 01.1 Testament is in Isaiah xxi 4, and IS translated " My iniquity overuMms me " (me baptizei). I anticipate, in the case of Naaman, that according to my respondents own wording of his position in this debate and in his letter to me, that he ha^ a dilH- culty here, that Naaman could not have done what the Bi'We says he did do, VIZ. :-Mip himself seven times '-as he would have us believe i7«^></;vo if it does mean to immerse means to go down and stay there. Still the Bible say? he dimmd himself seven times, and I believe it- In the apocryphal books of the 01.1 Testament Ba^ tko is used but twice, in Ju.l.tli chap. xii. 5, it is said "she went out by night and n-aslml (ebaptizeto) hersell m the camp at the fountain of water." Did she go the botfon. Jl stay there ? Did she sprinkle herself ? (which in it«elf would be a ricUculously Impptns to luton) with as sacrific- to a 'iliielcl \Y, in oitler stratagem, Je set up a i) he wrote k or merged ike a per- •, and then 1 myself in ised in the lie outstart mce to the the Bible. ft 1st in II. ed himself I the com- n times in iah xxi. 4, Llents own has a (lilft- he did do, ptizo if it Bible say? but twice, baptizeto) >ttoni and liculously 9 absurd expression). No, the Scripture says "w.xdied herself," and uses the same expression as in the instance of Naaman dipping himself. wbo^t^i''"'^'' ^T'' '^' . ^^' ^'''''^ ^^'" ''^''■^^•■^'" ^ ^"^^''^'^ ^"«"«^ '^PO neh-on. lie who 1.S deans-d roin a dead carcase and toncluuh it again, what doth he profit l^r •' ^ 1 ""■'' r"'""^- ^'''''^''^ ''^ ^'- ^^'^'^ ^-^-^^-^- -X- '9, the 1 r "T 1 ''"•'"'^ ""*'' ^'' ^'^^^'^'^ ^'""'^^'^f "^ water-hence no ex;ep- tion, lia-^ been found as yet. r,.e!it"r ^^7^ f ^"^' ^ "iv^^ '111 tho ila.e. where l^apto is found in the Gieek heptuagn.t. It is f„und in Lev. iv. 6-;x-xiv.6-xiv. 51-xi. 32, and m these places it is,tra.,slated dip and ,dnn,,,e. In Num. xix. 18 ; Dent x^xiii S^nlt" '^'" "• '''' Sam. iv. 37 ; II. Kings viii. 15; Job ix. 31; trani I i/''^' "' ?'" ^'"^''^ '^ is translated r/,>, excepting once when it is ma ^e i ' t'''' ' "^""^ '''' ^^""^^ ^^'t^^^'^^^ ^"'^ l'^"'>g^<l' -r« vessels, mattresses and persons. x o j > Of the eighteen or, at tae most, nineteen times where Bapto occurs in So we see our l>edobap,ist friends will certainly feel somewhat cautious of ^^^^oirBa^;/:!;^^ ''""^^^^^^^ ^-^'^''^ OW Testament use of tl. In the New Testament, we find hapto with its compound emk.pto used six ^^Bni"' e.gh y times, ^a,,^/...^. fot.r times, Ba,ti.na twenty-two times, and Baptuk-e.. fourteen tunes, „a all one huu.lred and twenty six times. In the onniion verston^,,,. „,, end.,,, are always tr.n.lafed dip, Ba,ti::o is tw^c ^ ^a ed wasl, ^,,« i, t,,,ee tin.es translated ..././.,, ^.^ J,« and Z^o,- /«d t^'r'n ff l>^^t transferred and anglicized the irmer into 4- V ; 1 "' "^.^°,f '^'''•^■^- Tl'oy are never in any instance translated by a ) of the words, si,nnlde, pour or punfy. I call upon my respondent to meet tUdt he will noticf the arguments I have produced. Before I close this part of my argument-and having plainly shown to vou ^ .Hum Llackstone has truly said, in comu-Hiou with, the proper way of under- standmg the meamng of a command or law. See Blackstones, coni. Vol T. sec. ...The words of a law are generally to be understood in their usual and most [icneiji and popular use etc. Dr. Jonathan Edwar<ls, one of the greatest of American Presbyterian theo- oguuis, has truly said " In w. .rds capable of two sen.es, the natural and pt.p^ is the primary and therefore cujkt in the first place chiefly to be regarded '' To similar efTect, declare, Sherlock, I ». C-nnming as ' Dei. 'icc of his Pcdob-iotis The Moderator here called time iptism, examined'- voi. 3., Loudon 179 quoted in Booth's, pp. 253-256. 10 Mr. Archhai.d : — Mr. Chairman, I-adie.s and (ioutlenien :— Yuu have heard a great deal this afternoon ahout haptko being a derivative from /y«^>/o, but in a somewhat longer coat. Now in order to show the true i)o.sition of the.se words I wi.,h to draw your attention, for some moments, at least, to the writings of that celebrated .scholar Dr. Dale, I will not attempt during this discussion, to refer to any minor authority on this (juestion— this much controverted theme would, perhap.?, be :!i'>ie appropriate— but I will produce evidence of an undeniable character, for such all will admit Dr. Dale's work to be. He is recognized, by all the learned staff of America, to have settled this point for u.s. Not he alone but, other learned men will uphold me in the view of the (iuestion I am, at present, discuss- hvg. With regaid, to tliis book, from which I am about to read, it ranks with such works as "Edwards ujion the will," likewise we are also told by many of the leading periodicals of America that it is a marvel of research upon the subject dealt with. It is like Blucher at Waterloo— it just comes in to win- it is really an extraordinary l^ook that 1 will cull from, to .^how you that my rendering of hcqHto is the correct one. 1 will now proceed without further introduction, to the General Results of this work, p 360. (i.) That hapto and 6a;^hV.o are ahsohde c/iuivulmls, in OiW Gwor maintained through two centuries of controversy, but at length abandoned by all. (2.) That haido does not mean, to dije, is an error now left without a de- fender. It is instructive to remember that all cases of dijeing were once, controversially, treated as cases of jUjure hi which dipping was always present in fact or imaghiation. (3.) That ha2itir:o means to dip repcakdhj is an error thoroughly exploded. Lexicon.s still give this meaning, but lexicographers must take a great d pi on trust, or on a necessarily imperfect examination. Thoroughly develo2)ed usage is suiircnie. (2.) Other errors remain to be corrected. (i.) That, hapto piimarily, is sternly adherent to the modality of dippinfi throuijh all Us vsa/ic . . an error to be corrected. Why not accept, to moisten, to wet, to wash, without modality as well as to dye. These are the natural outgrowths of dip as are to color, to stain, to gild, to glaze, to temper to tincture, the legitimate language offspring of dye. (2.) That hapHr-o is but a rcapi)carance of hapto in a little longer coat is an error. Tliat any language should give birth to a word which was but a bald repetition of one oljvady in existence, is a marvel which may be believed when proved. Be.sldes, when the relationship be- 11 tween these wonls was siittlod it was altinuetl that hvpto liad but oiur and that a modal iiieaiiiiig ; this isnowahandoned, and an addition- al meaning without modality is admitted ; surely in view of so great a change, the relationship between these words calls for a review. (3.) That, baptizo expresses a definite act of anykind, is an error needing connection. The current of controversy has set toward the proof, or disproof of certain acts, to dip, to pluwje, on ^he one side ; to spr'mhle, to imir, on tlie other. The controvei-sy has proved to be both unsatisfactory and interminable. It would, still continue to be so, if prolonged througli three thousand years instead of three ■ hundred. The idea that any form of act is justly involved in the controversy,»is but a phantom of the imagination. There is no form of act inherent in bapti/o. It claims the agency of a baud of servitors whose name is legion. (4.) That any nvrd exjmssive of condition can be sdf-lmited, as to tJte/imn of tlieact effectinrj such a condition, is an error. Bapto t-econdary, de^manda for its object a dyed condition. It has no form of act of its own. It asks no specific act. It accepts and cordially affiliates with dip, or drop, or press, or smear, or sprinkle, or pour, &c., &c. Bapti.'.o demands foi' its object conditions: — {a) A change in its present con- dition, introducing it into a condition of complde intusposition. ThLs word, like bapto, has no form of act of its own, it asks for none, it accepts indifTcrently of any, of all competent to meet its demand, (b) It demands a complete change of condition, physical, or spiritual, competent to the task. Hot iron made to pass into a cold condition ; intf)xicafing wine made to pass into a unintoxicatinf. condition ; a defiled man made to jiass into a pwtfied condition ; a sober man made to pass into a drunken condition ; a wakeful man made to pass into a deeply somnolent condition ; are all exemplifica- tions of bajjtism ic'dhout intusuosition in fact, and without any evi- dence of intusposition by figure. The varied acts and agencies in- ducing these l)aptisms show that there is no limitation in these directions. (5.) That baptizo has any responsibilitij for the form of the act effecting prim- ary baptism, en- for //icmannkr of applying the agency securing second- ary baptistn, k an error : — Dr. Carson say-, 'to dye (baptein), by sprinkling is as legitimate as to dye by dipping.' Because, coloring matter ajiplied l)y sjiriiikling effects a dyed condition does bapto, therefore, mean to sprinkle, or has it anything to do with the mode of applying the color ? To merse — bai)ii::ein — to place in a condition of intusposition by shrinlding, is as legitimate as to do it by sinking ; but does baptizo therefore, mean to sprinkle, or has it any responsi- I ii 12 ^^^Z^" ""^ ''^ ''^"^' "'' intusposition was eflectcl. To ,ner.e i^y Sik J'; "? "'' " TT ""^ '""^^'^^^^^' ^^'^"S^-^ --i'^'-. 1« y well m : ; \- ''r ""'""^' '"• '-^"^^ --'^ t" I-'fonn one t^Ue^autv of |,ex^.nnn. .h,,^,e act l,y wlucl, tl.at uonaitiL i. claaas for itself is t^iU ' " a n^ ' ""r ^'r'./^'U-'^ ^^ ^^'-"'S that .11 it in meanin.^ ' ^ '^"^ ''' m.brulga.le gulf is lixc-a between tj.em t..i/«;" :;::«" f;;':,.r ■;';:;;.:"' -t^r "\ """■ "■ '"^ '-™-"^' -^ *i • 1 ' ■ *^^ ^^"'^* ^"^ Ininiorsiojiists and otliprs «iv „. . tins much controvortea ],oint. Dr. Gnio p n. .Hto- . I ^ ^ ' the very learne,! Dr. when he i W contrai^eN " ^ f V" ^'r'"^' """"" '^^ we fina ]nm wii( n" •— " Tlmncrli +l.„ • i- ■, '' '"^'''''S w >• i«6 Dr., ca,, declare .J,at ,1,,- ,v„r,l l,as ln,t one mea„i„« „ , „„,.« ,4 "- , , ', and yet .,„j- al„K»t will, the .„,„e lu-eatl, tl.at .I,e ge„i„ !rf n^ !, ' , ! ' ' *a,n, „e ave„ .„ ttan.late it ,.,. wet, W., ,„. dA I wi,n:':.e:r;n:,r: Farther, we have Dr. Ce.x who on p. 46 of his „orlc say,. --The i,l ., f .P,..n,. ts ,n eve,.,, instance conveyed." Then again Dr. cl;„n ^Z t" N in; rir whi'' '"'"" '" '"" "'•■"■ '^^-"'"^ --vthing !;;;; ;::■ e'" 1 ,': Hn Tr;, '°'''\ " '"""* »'«'"«"''" <liiV..in,n,e,.e, .1 l^n u l,a, any other tneann.g." Where ia mode .and noli ng bnt ,no,l from t ° :;rth vnd'r'nn' "',"""""' '■'■ '""■'■'"' •■ "■"'■ "» — ■■■ •" «-■"'■ i > . r uitJic ] i)K ca.von, even on tins j^oint, contmaidea lij^u. Ti) nieise I canditioii, into a state iat(i as ail}' 'ti:.o and its witli which iifonn one Jilirojji'iali^ itl iuipiTic- tnUitiun i.s I lid hfipfcM that all it reen tliciu loaiiiiifr of he Avoiild ^ and file ;reat f,'utia e. Now, say ujjon il ^Ja])tize iniaidiii" aittr'n by to j).i86 ;il>h'j,'e UK s lef rnod li is (h)) ; lage con- 1 you to ! id.\a of 5« !•• 55., niddo." o nienn- ' history lunici'so, lit 111 ode hat, Dr. ) ascend l)y it r ire 811 di I'll liiiU' 13 self for on p. 1 1, he say. :— « When k>]itko is apphed to an ohject lying under water, hut not actually dip]ied, the mode essentially denoted 1)y it is as truly expressed as it is in any other instance of its occurrence." You will notice this discrej.ancy, I leave you to ponder on it for youselves. 1 wll not attempt to waste the tmie of such an intelliyc-nt audience as the one I have the pleasure of addressing ; hut to the .lue stion. How, Dr. Carson, tan say that an object lying under water— notice the word lijiiKj i. e. mo^to/(/m— e.\])res.ses the mode of dip*^ l»ing, I am at a loss to understand, and it is another i)oint v.hich I must leave with you for solution. Again, Dr Fidler on p 29 of his work states :— « My position is tliat haptko means to immerse, it matters not how the immersion is eflfected." Furthev on, on p. 31, he says:—" Suppose a man should lie in a bap- tistry while it is filling, the pouring would not be immersion, yet an immersion would take plaje if he remained long enough." Here we have hnmersion pro- duced by pouring, but does i)ouring ever la-oduco dii)]iing or plunging ? No ! it never docs ; hence mode Aanishes. To the number of Baptist wrfters who have surrendered mo(k and taken refuge under the term imvierse, which simply e,\presses a change of condition may be mentioned Dr. Connnt, p, 60, He atiirms "that the idea of emersion is not included in tl-.e Greek word L.idkein:' Dr. Fuller says :— ' It matters not how the immersion is effected whether by ].ouring or otherwise." I have called your attention to the words used by different authors on this subject, viz. :— "immerse and dip," now just look at and examine them and you will easily see for youiselves that a gulf of immeas- urable width divides the words immerse and dip. Dr Conant, informs us that the act of immersion is not the meaning of the word baptkdn, for he uses seven terms to define it and these he acknowledges are only aground idea of it. For he states :— "It ajipears that the ground idea expressed In' this word is to put into or under water oj;' other ].eiietral)le substance, so as' to submerge, or entirely immerse, and that this act is always expressed in the literal a])plication of the word and is the basis of its metaphorical use. This ground idea is ex- pressed in English by synonymous terms, that is in the ground idea and the various connections where the word occurs, to hnmerse, immerge, sulmmje (Up, plunge, enibath wMm . What jiositiou has mode with Dr. Conant ? It lias none ; for the very terms which express such he states does not accur- ately define the word hiptbdn, but simply exj.ressing a ground idea, which can only mean condition. More authors could be quoted from, who would up- hold me in my view of the momentous subject now before this audience, but these will suffice. Having learnt what the most eminent baptist writer's have said ui)on this theme, and having shown yon that there is a difference in the words bapto and baj.li/ii, which if time would jierniit we could prove— conclusivelv prove— beyond all doubt the great unfathomable difference between them. I myself have (juoted from various Baptist authoi-s who have themselves acknow- ledge.! the difference between them. Now we will do well friends to proceed to the examination of fhi! difference between the words din .-ind immei-se. I casually veferred to this before but will now examine tliem in detail. 14 In Older that you may mh the tlillVronce bt'tvviH!n tlioiu, tiist lu'iiuit uu- to ask what is tlie Knglisli cujiuvaUiiit {or haptko ] Dr. Dale, j). 83, says : — that iiuniei'se simply " exi»reise.s coiuUtiou cliaracterizod hy imu'ss of position,*' and tliis may be .seen to liy the true import of the word from the following jta^sage found in Virgils ^Knied, Lib, 3.-605, "»Sj»rt?-^7e me influctns vadoquc immenjite ^mito.** ''Cast me in the waves and immerst; me in tlie deep." Here the word immerse simply expresses a chan<(e of condition, as a result from the action expressed by the verb, cast. Who will be Itold cnou'di to sav that the ^ CD t/ word nnmerse in this passage, means io dip ] The word immei-se as useil l)y Virgil in these lines, shows that there i> something fouml in the word dip which cannot be found in the word immerse. Doi-s the word immerse express the action ? No. It expresses simply and purely, that the person " was cast " into the water, and then he uses the word immerse to show that the pei-son is over- wlu'lnu'd by the water which are entirely two dijleri'iit things. Did the word mmmjitii take the person out of., the water? No. Fin- it is as much the i)art of the dippers contract to take out of the water as it is to put in ; which is not as we have seen included in the word hunursc. Never have I found dip given 08 a meanuig for immerse in any English Dictionary, I have .seen, and I have examined all the Standard Dictionaries such as AVebster, Walker, Johnson, Worcester, Nuttalls &c. On the other hand I have found immerse giviai as a meaning under dip and this I consider shows without doubt, that, that which is dii)ped is immersed, but that which is immersed is not diji]ied ; and this I main- tain proves that there is a wiile dilference l)etweeii the words dip and immerse. Dr. Dale gives .rjrse as the primary meaning of bajilizo, thus showing that there is a great gulf, M-liich i> fixed, bclweeu these iwo words dip and immerse, a gulf which cannot be bridged, and he proceeds to carry this reasoning down in the languages from which the res2.i-cti\e syn(.iiymes are taken. He takes, for example (Dale 213,) the word meiyc and the English e(piivalent mem ; mtn% not the word immerse, l)ut ma-se and thus by the i)rocess of reasoning developed in that work shows that the woidl)aptizo is quite ditfcreiit from the woi'd bapto and that (/i>and immers>:, are also essentially and ra.lically diflereiit. ]bit our object was not to distinguish between the.se two terms in a classical sense, it was to refer to the New Testament usage of the word bapti/o. If the N2W Testament cannot aflord us with an exjdanation of the term baptizt), then the word of God is incomplete, but if the word baptizo is illustrated and ex- plahied in scripture, let us take its interpretation and not the woikmanship of man. Further if the word of God does not explain ba^.tizo, I must acknow- ledge it is incomplete, but we do find that it is explained even as are the worls .sanctiflcation, justification, &c. There is no word of importance that is not ex- plained, at least, that I can find. The wonl of G0.I lays down definiti-ly the law and the testimony and it is by that we must abide. Permit meat this point to ask my bretliern here, what is the New Dispensation ? It will "reatlv 15 4 iK'iiuit lac t(t 83, says : — that IJosition,*' and llowiiij^ pai;saf,'(' xs a result from ito .say that tlie ivne OH used l)y ^^'or(| d\p which 'SO t'xjiri'ss the ■ mis cast " into person is over- Did the word much the jjart I ; wliich is not )und dij) },'iveu 3n, and I liave Iker, Johnson, ncrsc giviai as a t, that which is lid this I muin- and immerse. ! shoAving tliat and immerse, asoning (h)wu !n. He takes, mcrse ; mark, ling developed le Word hapto, ent. ]'.ut oiu' classical sense, pti/o. If tho I haptizo, then rated and ex- irkmanship of must acknow- are the words I hat is not ex- delinitely the lit me at this t will greatly depend u]ion what we will get as the meaning of tne word bajdizo as defined on the occasion. Thai is to say, the New Kingdom, a.s far a.s, I can learn from (Jod's Word, wius furnied when the disciples were indued with power from on High. When did that take ]ilace ? It was a few days after Christ had taken his departure from earth and ascended on High, and when we, are told in the New Testanu'Ut Scrii»tures, the disciples were in an upper chamber, waiting to lif endued with ])ower. And we are told that in order that they might he en- dued witli it till' word hni>t'i::o is used and my brother says that it means di]), tlien it stands to n'ason that the disciples must hnve been dipjied on ihe occasion. Weie they dijtped ? H" so who dipped them ] This (piestion is unanswerfible, as is also this om'. How could they be dipped sitting for we do not read that they arose when they were baptized. Fiiithcr, I have sliown you tliat there was a great gulf fixed between im- jueise and di]». But here the word imuurse is excluded just as well as the word dip, that is if we admit the word immerse to be synonymous with dip. Allow me to ask w) .'re are we t(d<l in the; passages before us that the sj)irit descended and tilled tlie house. We are not aware that it did so, as it was sim- ply the sound that filled the room. It may bo said, in this connection, that it is impossible to speak of the spirit being poured out ; to this I would just say tiiat nothing is im])ossible to CJiid. We are likewise told the Israelites were l)aptized ; Avere they diitped when walking on the dry ground \ What does Dr. Carson say on this subject ; "That they got a dry dip." Pennit me to ask you, who was able to take svich a large body as they were and dip them into a cloud, or the lied Sea / There are none able for the under • taking there is lu) proof that they were di})ped and yet we are told that they wvre baptizt'd. Were they immersed .' No ! Was the cloud overluiad I No ! For we are told that the cloud went behind in order that it might give them light l)ut the Psalmist comes to our rescue and say.; : — " The clouds poured out wattr." Ps 77,-17. Now, if the Israelites were baptized at all they were baptized Ity the ]>ouring rain. The point in question is were they dijiped, or were they not I Now, let us turn again t(j the New Tesiunnjut. Was Pari dipped when hai»tized ? If so could he have been di]ii)ed while standing ujjon the spot. Now, in, relation, to this \v(; are told that immediately there fell from his eyes as it had i»een scab's and he received sight forthwith and arose (ajtrtstos) and was bap- tized. Here it is said, " there is evidently something omitted by the sacred historian," let us see if Ave can solve it. Now, you will understand, that when- ever the action is not to l)e performed on the spot where the individual stands, then it is always expressed and is not left for us to supply and understand. For instance, Acts 9.-1 1, "Arise go into the street which is called straight and enipiire." Here he had to arise and go a-< directed, because otherwise he could not perform that which he was ordered to do, he could not exi^cute it on the si»ot. In like manner, we can read and exemplify the following text ; — Acts 9, I 16 39, " Then Peter arose and went witli tl.eni." Act-^ 10,-20, « Arise and get thee d.Mvn and go M-itl, tl.eni." Now I a.k could ],e preform the act indicated on Mie spot / No. In eveiy such ca.e wo liave the participh' aimstm us(m1, and in sucli a ca^e ,jo f„Uows it, tlius showing clearly that (here was a v.tI, following the preposition anastas in these ca.ses. Now, let us turn, to a few examples t.. show theacth.n pref..rmed on the sp-.t as we find in the ca.se of Ananias. " An,l the young man, arose woun.l '""» "I> an.l carried him out." Acts 5,-6. H. . we Hnd that they wound him up a person, ou the s,)ot, an.l carrie.l him out. Again, we fnxl in Acts 1 1,-28. there stood up one of them Agalnis and signitied." Acts n,-i6. "Then l-aul stood up and heckoning witli liis hand said." Now in each of these cases their is no verb following ananas either ex,,ies,.ed or un.lerstood, to show that the action was performed elsewhere, and this we .n.lt..|,e the cxse with the ].roceeding extracts and from this I maintain that m all such cases the action was preforme.l on the spot. Turn to Acts 22,-16, !nv\ 7V''i ^f\ "''''' '^' '^"^'^ baptized." If the inspired writer meant to .!> that laul left the room an.l was baptized, why not give some hint about it as n the other cases, you juight ask is it not implitnl i. baptizo. I answer ; No Ihat unless ,t is an action in itself it cannot im].ly that, ami we are sinipJv told iiiat Jie arose. ' Mr. Arcliibald here resumed his seat, time being called by the moderator. Mr. B lex us— «tk, , ,t to ,.sl„l,l,,l, au «isuu>o„l in Ws favo.- l.y ,,,liiii„,. I,ah-s ,vitl, D,» Con lajln,,. f,„,„ Dale'. C'la.™. BapU.n. My a,.g,„„..„l., I,„,,l „„ ,l„. ™ t ha, tr,e,l to «h„,v yo„ .l,at D,-. (!al,, !,„ „„t,.a,li,.,..,l l,i,„,,.|f 1,,- » ', „" U,.ly-o moan, to , ,,,, a„.l ,1„.„ tdliug us it al... ,„..a„. «, „.„>./,, ,„.'a„ , "^ law Mli ^ '^°"I'""«'"«'l"nt,ll'atSIr.A,d,il«l,i,u„stl,..|io„.„itl, -^ ^ ''"''^'^ ""'^'^K one and the .ame condition opposition. xm\ get thoo indicated on is(!d, and in Dllowing the uod on tile (we wound wound him A^ctH 11,-28. 6. " Thou I' exjuc'ssed nd this we iutaiu tliat Lets 22,-16, r meant to it about it iswei- ; No. ;iniiijy told lerator. ide a iiai'd Di(s. Con- itelligibic uu'anijig II' of. Hi. lyiny lii'.st , now how lidid man i of C'ale. ihuost the les on tlie ieye with :t of God. n dipped ent aiuh- 01' over- position. 17 Now if the spirit of the Apostles wa-« overwhuhned with the spirit of God would they not as regards their spirits he in a spiritually immersed condition ? Mr. Archibald will not deny this ; he lias labored hard to try to make you think there is a great gulf between the wonls dip— and imimrnc ; but in this he takes direct Lssue himself with the very best of the Lexicogra])hers— such as Stuart, Anthon, Schleusner, and many others. My respondent, has next referred you to what the Apostle calls the baptism of the Children of Israel in the cloud and ill the sea ; and has referred to it as a dry dip. Now, the .Scrii»ture informs us they were baptized intlts cIoiuIskwA in tlie sen, that is, the two things coml)ined to overwhelm or immerse tliem for this meaning of i'le word Baptvio, aea Isaiah xxi. 4, "My inicjuity overwhelms me," (me baptizei), here, Mr. Archibald, will find another dry dip. Again lie, I fear stoops to cpiibble on the idea of their being in the cloud, and says the cloud was behind Now, Paul says, baptized "m the cloud and in the sea." Mr. Archibald, has also quoted Psalm 77-17, to show, I presume, that the Children of Israel were either poured or sprinkled. Read the passages more carefully and you will see that Sinai, rather than the Red Sea is the place referred to by the Psalmist. Let us try and keep things in their proper places. The next circumstance he introduces is the circumstance that Paul was com- manded, "To arise and be bajjtized," and we are asked the question was Paul dij)ped / What would you tlunk if, on the other hand, I should argue that some, in fact, the majority of those who pour ask the candidate to kneel down — hence because Paul was commanded to arise he could not have been ])oured, there would be no aiguiuent in such (piibbliiig. But my respondent thinks he must have been ])ai)ti/,ed on the spot, because we find in the connection no account of his having left the room or jilace where he was and thinks that if Paul had left tlie room aii<l gone to the water — sonietliing would have been said about it — we feel thankful tliat Paul himself haa said something about it ; in writing to the Romans, he says, vi. chap, vei-ses 3-4, "Know ye not that, that so many of us as were bajitized into Jesus Christ were baptized into liis death therefore ite are buried with him by baptism into death etc." Being the aftimiative speaker in this debate, it was tlie part of my oppon- ent to notice and confute my arguments, but either unwittingly or otherwise he has avoidi'd taking issue (with but one or two slight exceptions) with the arguments pioduced in the introduction of this discussion. lie has (juoted for nearly the whole time of one speech from "Dr. Dale's Classic Baptism ;" to what purpose ! Not that it seems, to jirove any particular action, but rather to substantiate the idea that Baptko — the word used by our Saviour and his Apostles to convey a particular and specific action — is so ambiguous in its meaning and use, as to render an arrival at any detinite and particular meauing an impossibility. Now, as Jesus Christ must have intended some particular action to be performed by his ministers, and submitted to by the people in the 'jommainl to baptize them— it follows that he either did select such a word, or 3 18 that h(' could not, or that hi- wtuikl not— ( ..■rtaiiily iio In'lifVi'r in tlie Lord Josus Christ will for a momont entertain fitln-r (.f tiie last conclusions, to do so would be iniju'achin',' the love and j.ower of Ihe Saviour. I repeat therefore what I have already said, that I l.elieve that he could— thai he woukl find such a wi)rd and that he his iloiic it— and that Baptko U that word. I shall now )>ass on to Itrinj,' to your notice my next ar^'unient in favor of my position. Which sluU he the En-lish versio.M (if tin' Scriptures, hut par- ticularly of the. New Testament l»y English translators— and I have been privi-. leged to see a great number of them, some have translated tlic whole- some a l)ai-t of the original into the English^ There are in the London Ilexaiila, fusi ]iid)li^hed by Baxter iu 1841, the six most prominent English versions, viz. :— Wicklilfes, A. I)., 1380 ; Tyndale, 1584; Cramner, 1539; (Geneva, 1557; Anglo llhemish, 1582 ; Authorized, 161 1 ; besides these six versions, more than as many more of much recognized respectability, viz.:— Doddridge's, Thompson's, VV<'slcy's, Penn's ; the Anony- luous ; Campbell's Four Gospels ; McKnight's Epistles ; Stuart's version of the Eonians and Hebrews, besides some others (.f lesser fann;. Now, of these 14 versions, not including some others I might mention, not one has ever translated any word of the Bapto familv bv the words s^ymhk— pour or pur-'fy. I take this opportunity of calling my opponent to notice this argument. It is not based upt>n mere assumption nor bare assertions, nor yet iipcm the evidence of one individual-buf upon the ojunions of the ablest and best translators and commentators. Our .next argument shall consist in the mnin in examining the opinion of Home of the early Reformers. At the head of these, we must place Martin Luther. In the Snialcald Articles, as drawn up by Luther, he says,—" Baptism is nothing else than the word oUiod with immersi.m in water." Again he says, in Oj.., vol. I. 336, Ba])tisin is a (Jri-ek word and may l)e translated immers- ion, as when we immerse something in water, that it may be wholly covered ; and although it is almost wholly abolished, for they do not dip the children only pour a little water on them, they ought nevertheless to be wholly immersed and then immediately .Irawn out /w that the etymology of the word seems to demand. Washaif of sins is attributed to Baptism, it is truly indeed attributed, but tlic signification is softo^a.ud slower than it can express, baptism, which is rather a sign botJi of death and murrection, being moved by this reason, I would have those that M-e to be baptized to be altog.-ther oipped into the water as the Word • doth mean and the mystery doth signify. " Next, Calvin, Institutes, Lib. IV. sec. xv., "The word Jiaptko, signilies to immerse and iti.cc^itain tliat immersion was the i.ractice of the ancient church." Ill the Lord uns, to do HO nt tlierofore I find such a ; in favor of ros, but jiar- beeii privi-. ult'—somc a ill 1841, tlio I ; Tyndali', Autliorizi'd, i n'.cognized the Anony- rsiou of the lention, not Is Si^rhikle — notice tlii.s )ns, nor yet i ablest and : oi>inion of lace Martin — " Baptism Again lie ed inimer.-<- y covered ; ildren onh^ inersed and d seems to buted, but ch is rather would have s the Word • ■signifies to lit church." I 19 (JrotiuM, says:— "Thai thU light wus wont to b<- |K'rf..riMed by imnieMon nii.l not by poifusion, ap])far; bntli by the i.i..|.iiety «{ tin- woid and the places iliosen for its administiation, rtc We have also Alstodins, Witsnis, Bachlious, Ewing, Leigh, Bossuet, Vossius, Vcnenia, Bloom lield, Augusti, Buttman, etc., and all these with many others liear testimony to the moaning of the wonl Bap- ti/o. Before I dismiss this I will ipiote what Dr. Carson tells us the Edinburgh Reviewei-s says on his work : "They tell me that it was unnecessary for me to liring forward any one of the e.\ami»les to prove that the word signifies to <%-- that I might have commenced with this as a fixed point iniiversnUij aihiUteil." I remarked, when this discussion comnienceil, that I would (juote none but the highest authorities, and I see that my friend has not denied that the primary meaning is di]), but has (quoted Dr. Dale, to show that it luisa secondary mean- ing, which is, sometimes also used in this connection. How t-an we translate and trace the word according to the analogy of laws, t.s I have elsewhere quote<l, unless we take the ])rimary or fiifit signiticatiou of the word ? If allowed to take any word approximate to it and fly off at a tangent, we can, almost, insert any words that render the idiom, or other peculiarities, of a language comidete, and thus from the same passages often have directly opposite ideas. My next argument, in confirmation of my rendering of Baptlzo, is derived from the words used in construction with it. With the woi-d Bapti-M we almost invariably find the prepositions, in Greek, en and eh. Prepositions meaning in and into. While with the verb Itaino, to s])rinkle, we have the ju'eposition qn used ; this preposition means iqmi, but mark this, these woitls never interchange their jire- positions. Here we have a class of words that have a certain class of preposit- ions, and these are en and eis whh Ijapti::o ; e^n with liuino, and I wish you to keep this in mind through this discussion. Again, does the word Baiitho, as lias been asserted, convey in its meaning the idea of putting under water, without raising up again. I will just exam- ine this for a few moments and crave a patient hearing from you whUe doing so, I will take the case of Naaman, IL Kings v, 14. If the meaning of our friend is to be taken, Naaman the Syrian lo.per could not have done what the Scripture [says he did. " Then went he down and dippcsd (Baptizo) himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God." Now we are told, shortly before this, that he was ordered to wash (lousai), and then we read that he dipped, thus showing that the words wash and dip, here mean, the same thing. Also, in Judith xii, 5, we find "She went ont by night and wash- ed (ebapti/eto) herself. But we deem what has been already said and quoted on this point sufficient. Now again, we appeal to the w^ord of God — we find that baptism was first administered in rivers. The first baptist — iluring his ]»ublic ministry spent much of his time on the banks of the river Jordan. — "Thither resorted to him all Judah and Jerusalem and were baptized of him in Jordan confessing their sins." Notice, they were not baptized %i]ton Jordan, nor xdth Jordan, uur was Jurdati baptized upon them, but they were baptized r 20 m Jordan. Our Kn-lish in U l)iit tlic ndaptioii (»f tlu- (Jrcck ni. The RoiimiiH, lM.rrnvvf.l tlitir in hmx tlu- (Jnuks, ami we l.orn.wr.l i.iir (» from tlit fiomniis nn.l all thiw w/w arc of oiu- aiul thu samt- .signiHcalion and . ..UHlruction. Jn doe* not iv^ian-~at~with, or %, except Jiy fiyuiti. It is literally in. In the lious(" is not at the hou^e, W</i the lioiwe or hy the house, hut literally in the house. Now as llio preposition qn, does not brinj,' the Joidan upon them, and as eis and en place them in the river ; ek and a^o, is by necessity established as hel]»in<,' the bai)tized to emeryt- from the river. The (ireek preposition m meaninj,' in occui-s in the New Testament 2660 times. Of this immense number of times it is translated in our common Testa- ment 2045 times by the English wonl in. I might addheie that this ha.s taken an immense amount of time and trouble to tind out, but this is only one of an immense number of things which must be sought for and computed by those who wish to anive at the truth of anything. Now of this immense nuni- ber of times, it is in 2045 times translated by in. In the 4 Gospels alone, the Greek preposition m occurs 795 times, of these, it is translated by iwfy' 37'> times, and by to for into, more than one hundred times ; and of 273 times «,//« and without destroying the sense, it might be translated in these cases, into ■ thus makmg, in all, 500 out of 795 occurrences. It is wonderfuUv stran-e I «ay It earnestly and fearlessly, that with Pedobaptists, eis can mean in oUnto except when connected with ]Jnj,ti,o. Why change it here and tear it from its primary meaning? How would this sound? "The righteous shall enter at (for into) life eternal." " The wicked shall be cast at Hell ;" « Jesus went at Heaven." In fact, eis, will take a Pedopaptist into anything on the univei>*e except into water. " ' ' We will now pa^s on for a few moments to examine the ba])tisms of Ji.hn We are told that John bai)tized at Enou In^cause there was much water there* One would think that ought to silence every doubt or cavil on the ,,uestion Some have tried to establish the fact that there was not much water ther(> onl ' a few rivulets, and, at last, when forced to admit the possibility of 'poof collecting from the rivulets, they set about finding some use for the rivulets other than that for the ordinance of baptism. They even go so far as to '^ay' that : all the dromedaries and camels of Arabia, carrying tlu, people to Joaii'' tent, quenched their thirst at the rivulets, while the humane Julm always t nt a basin of Mater on his table for the j.urpose of baj.tising. That John i.itched his tent near to Enon for the sake not of baptising (as the Scriptures say he is there for) but for the sake of watering the caravans that flocked to his bai.tisn, Such nonsense! Does not the pas.sage of Scripture itself, refute this absurd talk. Does the scripture not read that John ha2tti::ed at Enon for a "iven ;mson-and we have no i.lea that he meant, therefore, any other reason : hence the baptizing ami the reason must fairly and honorably go together, i^olh hudata, the Greek for much water is used by the Apostle John hi his Mrithi.rs noles.s than five times, all requiring much mUa: The voice of God too "is 21 'lie RoiimiiH, lit Fidiuniis iictioii. Ill in. In tile L'lally in Ihf 11 tlipiii, mid <lal»lislio.l a,-i aiueiit 2660 nuon TeHtu- is liuH tfik»'ii only one of Jiiimti'd 1)y lU'iise niini- Is alone, the l>y into 372 } times nntu cases, into ; y strange, I u in or into .1' it from its ill enter at nis went at >e univei-se, ns of John, 'ater there. :' (question, then*, only y of pools he rivulets r ns to say, i to Jolui's .Iways Vent >hn i»iiclie(i OS say h(i is is l)a])lisni. this ahsiird )r a given son ; hence ither, '^olki is writings, lod too, is conipnrcd to the Hoimd of i>iany waters ; loes this mean little- livtilets ] Siip- pose, for (xample, that a niiljrr .nctii' a mill near a nvck or river liecau-f there was miiili watt-i, who Wdiild most honor llie miller's uiulirtanding and foresight, he that nllirms lie settled there for the siike of watering his Hocks, t)r for the motive ]»ower to drive his mill ? Tliere is another thing I would like ti> (iill ydur attention to. It is this, coiu'cniii'g the baptism of the 3(xx) on the day (d' Pentecost. It is alleged that I'eter could not imim-rse so many in on(> day. There is nut, the least diliiculty in the case. If I'eter were the oidy Christian 01: the spot before the l)a[ili/.ing commenced, it couhl he done in a lew hours. He could immerse ten or twenty, and authorize them to imniei-se others, and so on, till the whole was accomplished. Bui there were twelve apostles, and more than one hundred dlscijiles, hcTice this ol)j(T,tion vanishes. It is further alleged that a sullicient supply of water could not be olitained in Jerusalem, in which to immerse. J'ut the objection has no force whatever with those who are ai:([uaiiited with Jerusalem. This city was well watered by a great number of public and pri- vate pools. The brook Ke<lron, nls.;, was near it. Desides this we have the evidence of Jose[»hus who declared, in his histoiy, that there was a sulliciency td" water for one and a half or two millions. We will now turn to our Saviour's ba]ttism, Aiatt. iii. 16, "and Jesus, when he was Imjitized, went up straightway out of the water, -xc." The veib here in the original is anahaino, this is a compound of ana and iMiino — meaning going up, or mounling, being follovved by a}H) — it is strengthened and is consequently translated im(< Hj^ o«t 0/ Again, look at Mark i. 10:— "Audit came to pass in those days that Jesus came from Na/areth of Galilee aaid was Itapti/.ed of John iu (not n/) Jordan. (Here we have the preposition m for en, as in Luke xi., 7-10) — "And straightway coming out of the water, &c." Here also we have the verb anahaino — going uji, used again wiiii apn, as in Matt. III. 16. By aiese prepositions we see that Christ not only came to John at Joxtlan to be baptized, ])ut also that he must have gone down into, or he never could have come mi out of Jordan. " Those things were done in Betliabara, beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing." John l. 28. This text is fre([uent]y used as an argument against iniuioi-sion, by asserting that here W(! have J(din baptizing in a house. Now Betliabara is not a house at ail, but a town or village. See Judges \ 11. 24. " and Gideon K'nt messengei's throughout all Mount Ephraim, saying come down against the Midianites and take ))efore them the waters unto Betliabara and Jordan. Then all the men of E]ihraini gathered themselves together, and took the watei-s unto Bethalmia and Jordan." Here, then, we have an account that the eh Idren of Israel took the fords (jf the Jordan, the lower ford was at Bethal)ara. Belhalmra was a towni or villa<'e on the east Kank of the ford. It^ name niean^ "house of the ford." fi 22 In rolatioii lo iiauifrsioii I wtiild horo nlad^ souio fmoc<loto>j, the first of which was tiild some tiiue since by Mr. Knati", "n coniicction with liis own work. Aiuiiiinsi sunio caiididatfs for iKipti.qu and niem1)nrsln'p, awaiting fxainination, wa^ a young man fi'om the Emorald Isle. After hearing the exj.erienci's, and asking the usual in(iuiries of the others, our Irish friend was asked to relate, as near as he could, the Lord's dealings with his soiU, lie re- lated a very clear and satisfactory experience, including his impressions on land and sea, among civilized and uncivilized nations, which was listened to by the conuuittee with an interest manifested alternately by smiles and tears. Then came the (question from the pastor, " My brother, you aro aware you have presented yourself for membei-sliii), to a church which contemls there in but one physical baj)tism, and that is by immersion, ;iu.l that this ordinance is a pre- re(|uisite to the privileges of the Lord's Supper. Now, we wish to know if you lieartily and conscientiously agree with us in our views of baptism and conimuuion ? Said the candidate, " I do, sir, most heartily and sincerely. I have been sea-faring man since I was 1 5 yoais old, and I never sign the articles till I rea^j them and accept them." "But," continued the pastor, "you aro aware many learned and godly men, who have stiulied the scrii)tures all their liv-s, ^uactice sprinkling in place of immersion, what right hav^ we to set ui) our opinions on this subject in opposi- tion to their convictions and practices,— may not you and I be wrong in our Interpretation of l)aptism ? With the blood mounting to his face, as though we were trying to sjinnkle- ize him ; with a rich Irish brogue and trem1)ling with emotion, lie exclaimed : " You see that tumblei- of water on that table there ?" " Yes " " Well, when you can load a man down into a tumbler of water, and buiy him in a tund)ler of water, and then lea*i him up out of a tundJer of water, I will believe Jesus, my Saviour, may have been spiinkled or ba])tized from a font, but till you can do that, all the Doctois of Divinity in the world cannot con- vince me that s[)rinklingis bai)tism." "Brethren of the committee, have you any questions to ask upon the ordnances ?" " Nou \ " A msssionary once presented a bible to a young Indian, who possessed a fair knowledge of the English language, and exhorted him to read it, believe it. and obey its commands. The book was reci-ived and read as requested Some time afterward the Indian met the ]ireacher and said to him :— " I want you to go with me io the river, I want to be luptized," "I can baiitize you without going to the river" said the minister. "Where," enquired the red man." " Here," rei^lied the jueacher. Said the Indian in surprise, "I don't see how you can baptize me where there is no water." " We can have water brought for the purpose, responded liie minister. But the young man was ]»erplexed, 23 he could not uiidt'i'staiul how thiy wcie to baptize liiiii after, the water wa.s hnnight. The minister then explained to him that they could baptize him "by jiouring a little water on his forehead." •« Is that ba].ti.-ni " "Yes," replied the minister. Not yet ([uite satisfied, the young mau again rei)lied, " Well, if that is bai)tisni, you have given me the wrong book." Mr. Archiuaj.o : — It ha.s been stated by the gentleman on my right, that I ]iroduced some arguments in favor of a separation between /jV«jv/o an<l liiq^ko, without proving my assertions. Nom', I am not going to take u[» time by reading from the various authors, who substantiate what Dr. Dab; has stated to be the ditference of the te;ins. In his woi-k (Classical ]5ai)tism) are collected together all the authorities of importance within the last thousand years, he has taken all that the leaduig men on both sides have said with regaid to this, until he has jnoved conclusively that there is a separation between Bapto and Baptizo. So much for that, if more is reciuired of me, I can give it. It has likewise been said that any- thing short of a primary nuvaning of a word, is in % manner, useless with regard to a New Testament ordnance. Let us aitply the test In regaid to the Lord's Supi)er we have the word J)cqmon, which means, according to the classical usage of the word— the princii)al meal of the day. Is the word here used in its ininci- pal sense .' No. And so this argument fails. I must next turn to the Septuagint as your attention has been drawn to Naaman, and you have been told that Naaman went down avd di]i])ed himself in Jordan. If he did, he did it on his own responsiljility, for there was no such command given him; that is, ill understand the word ^f (Jod and the things directly pertaining thereto. Now, I maintain in the first ]ilace that Naanuui did notdi]), l)ecause he was not commanded to dip, and again I say he did nojt di]), for it was im[)ossible for him to dip himself. With regard to the first of these points, I affirm that Naaman was not com- manded to dip himself, l)ut sir, ply to wash and Elisha sent a messenger unto him saying ; Go and %msh. (Heb. Rakhats — to bubble up, to pour out, to wa-*!)) in Jordan seven times. No om,' will for one moment, doubt but that Naaman fully understood the instructions given him by the Prophet ; likewise all know that if he acted in anywise contrary to such, he could not expect to be cured Now, as I have stated before, Naaman was ordered to msh, — sim])ly to ivnsh — hhuself seven times in Jordan. In order to see this, turn with me to the word which is used in the Septuagint to express the Hebrew term, Heb, Rakhats, and we find it to bn loiio, to wash, tit wash the Itody, to wash oneself. Where, is the term di[> ? It is not given. Then where is the command to dip ( It is not to be found. A detailed explanation of this word might be given which w*uuld materially strengthen uiy point, but I luual reluctantly fyrbcoi- 24 from quoting various authors, whose works are within your reacli, to confirm my ]»oiu(, and show lr(»m the usage of lorn that persons were washed and yet Hot dij)pcd. AVe liave, amongst many others, llippocrate's Greek Lexicon, l»y Galen, who nved 164, A.D. We have this (juolatiou there, loini ou monon to louein, allakia to aion an which waj^ given as a medical i)rescri])tion, and here we fin'^ that Unto denotes not only to wash or bathe, but talso ainan to moisten, foment, pour, or sitimkle. And according to Erotianus, who was a Greek, and lived in the 2nd Century, giving the leading signiiication of aionan as to foment. Was this dip- ping I No. There is nothing w'lalever like it or contingent to it in this wcud. Thus in the evidence of men, t(j whom Greek was vernacular, and whose pro- fessional studies made them thoioughly ac{juainted with the writings of Hi])poc- rutes, wc arc sujijjlied with solid grounds for alii lining that, in the usage of that distingiiislied author, the sense (jf dipping did not behmg to hm, either directly or by implication. In the age of Homer, the vessel for bathing went by the name of annminthos, and among the Greeks, of a somewhat later age, it was called luidos. Occasional references are also found in the w'ritings of both periods t(j the act oi(joinij into the bath, and comivfj out] of the bath. Let us in order to show what was done in the bath, hear from the excellent dictionary of Greek and Roman auti(|uities published some years since, under the able superintend- ence of Dr. Smitli. He says, ' It would api)ear from the description of the bath admininistered to Ulysses in the palace of Circe, that this vessel did no'' contain water itself, but was only used for the bather to sit in, while the warm vxtterims being poured over him, which -was heated in a large caxddrcni or trii)od, under whicli tln' tire was })laced, and when sulhciently warm was taken out in other vessels, and ])ouredover the head and slioulders of the person who sat in fhe amminthos. Wliere is (lip])iug in the case before us / " From this pregnant instance the advocate for dipping may learn an instructive lesson. It is no proof of immersion, that a ]iarty is represenied as (joiivj into tlie hath, and coming on* of tlK- bath ! (Wi]s(m on Infant Baptism, 157.) This brings to my mind that if Naamau went into the water with all his clothes on to wash, would dipping effect it I According to the common acceptance of the term, it would not. Therefore I ask ; was he dijiped I I answer unhesitatingly. No ; he was not di|)pe(l, Neither dii we find in tlie whole Bible, a jOace where a person is need- ed to dij) in order to ] unify himself, nor of a person being dijjped, except in the case of Naaman and he was not, for as I have shown, he was not commanded to do so. There is no other instance in Sciipture, not even in the case of the lei)er, wheie a i>erson was cleansed by di[iping. Yuu who are familar with the Wfird of God, kncjw well how lepers were cleansed. You also keow that to con- stitute the act of washing, aeeurding to the ordinary usage of the word, there must be a rubbing process. Are we told that Naaman rubbed himself^ Even suppose, we admit for a monu'ut that he dipped himself I Further, with regard, to the word laiw, let us again turn to Dr. W. Smith's Dictionaiy of Anti(iuities; he says : — " Ou ancient vases, and ou which persons are represented bathing, we h, to confirm .slu'd and yet Y Galen, who ein, allakia to iinil that lovo ent, pour, or 'd in the 2nd rVas thi.s dip- in this word. 1 whose i)ro- [s of Hi])poc- asage of that ther directly went hy the r afie, it wa.s hot.h periods us in order iry of Greek mperintend- [)tion of the essel did no^ le the warm m or trii)od, taken out in n who sat in lis pregnant t is no proof coming ou* y mind that uld dipping would not. he was not rson is need- except in the commanded ' case of the ilar with the that to con- word, there sclf^ Even with regard, Antiijuities; bathiutr. we 25 never find anything corresponding to a modern l.atli,in which a person can stand or sit ; but there is always a round or oval ba-^in {Imterim) resting on a stand O'j^ostaton) by the side of which those who are batliiug, are repreocnted staiuling undressed and washing themselves." Here we read of bathing, but where, I ask, was the dipi-ing > In support „f this-lK'ar with nu^ a little further. I will again quote from Wilson on In- lant Baptism, 159 :~"An interesting wood cut was taken from one of the vases ni Sir W. Hamilton's collection ; and its v^dueis greatly enhanced by the fact that, in tliis instance, the word loutas, has insciil)cd on ittheterm damosia— puljhc, showing it to be no private concern, but one of the ordinary i)ublic 1)alhs of Greece." I might go on to show right down from the times of anti.puty, till a more recent age, that according to the (hwk custom, they did not dip themselves in order to wash, but in all cases tlte water was ajiplied. Now, let us turn to my second objection to Naiuuan being dipped, namely, it was impossible for Naaman to dip himself. AVIiat do we understand from the word himself ] Do we not understand that the whole person of Na^aman was dipped ? Surely we do. Then, I ask you, if he dipped himself, how could he hft himself out of the water, in order to dip himself into it ? I say it was utterly impossible for him to do so unaided. If he did lift himself up, he must have had some rope and tackle to do it with, had he such ] You may be led to say that a part is equal to the whole (laughter) and that he having dipped a i)art was entirely dipped. Again, I say it was utterly impossible for Naaman to have raised his whole physical form out of the water and dip himself into it. Tlius admitting this for a moment to exjilain it, let us picture the cir- cumstance, of his going to the waist into the water, then all from the waist down was immersed, was it not l Now, if it were already immei-sed, how could that half of Naaman 's body be dipped into an element it was already in ? All this may, however, enable us the l)ctter to understand the true signification of the term lahal, it is synonymous with Baptizo, and it is used as such in several places Let us hear wliat ]\Ir. Baines, who is considered to be a very good authority, says with regard to it. " Tlie Hebrew word tahal, which is rendered by the Greek word B(qHv:o, oiriirs ill the Old Testanuint in the fidlowiiig ]ilaces and in none other, and from a careful examination of these passages, its meaning among the Jews is to be derived. From these passages it will be seen that its radical meaning is not to sprhikle or immrrse. It is dip, ordinarily for the purpose of s])rinkling, or for some other purpose." * *** ■»# -x. -k. if. In Fiierst's Helnvw and Chaldean iicxieuii, we liiid the foUowiiii;- under tubal — to moiston, sprinkle. Secondary meaning — to di[i, immerse. Now, if We are to carry out what we have lu'ar.l from the olhei side, 2(i i I hamely, no .secondary meaning i.s of any value, we must abamlon the woixl dip, and take up moisten or sprinkle. Further, Furest states : — " The fundamental signification of the stem is to moisten, to besprinkle." According to Mr. Barnes it is dip anything you choose, into an element, to do something else, such as when the priest di]>ped into the blood, &c., or what- ever else it is in order to cany out the broad idea of lahil. You have also heard somewhat of Baptism by Purification this evening, and that it was accomplished hy JJaptu. Now, notice what is said in Mark's (-'r^pel vii, 1-5. We are there told that the Pharisees found fault with the di-ciples because they eat with " unwashed hands. " Let us now turn to our Saviour's baptism, we are told that He went into the water. I do not, for one nionuint, deny that He was in the water — far be it from me to deny such, although much can be said on l)oth sides. Now, per- mitting that He is in the water, how was He baptized ? 1 1 ask who baptized Him. Let John come to the rescue and tell us how he baptized Christ, and you are told by him that he bai)tized Jesus tvith water. Now, surely if John says he baptized the Lord with water, we cannot for a moment think that ho dipped him in the water. Is the word from which it is translated never rendered in ? Yes it is. Let us see how and wh.en en is translated by the word nith Wlienever the word en is used to mein or indicate time, it is translated t«, ns in the day of Judgement, there the word en is used for time, a\so in all cases of locality by in. With reference to our Saviour's baptism, how is this word to taken ? is it to be taken as a place/ then if it is, He was placed in such a place, respective of motion; but there is nothing whatever in the passage indicative of motion, so this theory must fall through. Likewise in regard to time, I say, that it can- not be so a])plied. It must always be rendered, in the various ]>ositions of (}od's word, vnth water, when used to express instrumentality. In order to show this I maintain it wo\dd just be as absurd to say, "I strike in a rod," as it would lie to say that " I baptize in water," because water is jiist as much the instrument used and ajiplied to the person as the rod. Now turn with me to Acts i. 5. " For John truly baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence." Here in this case, we ha\ e the translation given to us " u-ith water." Apart, altogethei', from the ]>reposition which is used in Matthew's gospel, we have the some tendering given, showing that wiih water is the only admissiljle translation. In the gospel according to Maik, r, 9., we are told that when (Jluist came to him, eit, in J<»rdan ; it might be said that He was dipped, but there yon will admit that the woi'd jf?a/</i,'.o of itself does not express motion, and in order that there might be motion in the Wi.rd, it must have an adjvnct, or son.e other qualifying word, and whenever an at'ijunct is oo used it is tvauslated in. le woixl dip, prinkle." element, to ;c., or wliat- e also heard icomplished i^eare there sy eat with } went into iter — far be Now, per- ho bcaptized Christ, and L'ly if John ink that ho ated never ly the word anslatedtr), in all cases taken ? is it irtpective of motion, so that it can- lonitions of n order to rod," as it much the .•ith water, ' Here, in altoi,'ethei', -' the some lation. ist camp to yon will 1 in oi-dcu' t, or sonic slated in. 27 Now, in order to show you that even when there is no motion in the verb, Mhere tlie ]ire|i()siti(»n eit is used in llu' varimis portions of seri|itu!T , and where the rendering into is totally inadmissible with the existing syntax, turn to Acta 21-13, where we find — for I wish to found all my data, as far an jfossible, on the scriptures — at Jernsahau . Here no action was expressed, and consecjuently eis is rendered at Jerusalem. Mark, well not into Jerusalem. Again turn to Acts 23,-1 1, " For as thou liast testif'ed tif me in Jerusalem," not into Jerusalem" so must thou liear witness also at Rome," not into Rome. Again compare the following texts : — Acts 21,-13, "^ »"! ready to die (m) at Jerusalem." John 21,-4, "Jesus stood (eis) on the shore." John 9-7. -'Go wash {eis) in the pool of Siloam." Hear, what Dr. Cai-son stiys on this, "My doctrine is, that the motion is implied in a verb which is understood, and is not properly communicated to a verl) that has no motion in itself. It is absurd to suppose that the same verlj can designate both rest and motion. It is impossi- ble both to stand and move at the same time. What I say is, when e'ls is con- strued with a verb in which there is no motion there is always a verb of motion understood, r.iid which is not expressed, because it is necessarily suggested-" Again he says on page 239, " The account of the Evangelist not merely asserts that Jesus went into the water, but that when in the water, he was baptized or immei-sed into it " Here we have the Dr. taking the preposition m from the verb Baptko and con- ecting it with the verb rvent understood and thus disposes of it. He is seemfcgly unconscious of the fact that the preposition is already disposed of and he again joins it to the verb JSaptixo thus compelling it to do double duty. This error against the rules of syntax I most strenuously oppose. Admitting the fact that the preposition eis takes Christ into t^ie water, what will Baptizo do, which is of itself inexpressive of motion ? It will do nothing, but John comes forward to the rescue and declares that he baptizes mth water, not in wn.ter. Thus M'e have evidence given us from the word of God itself, and this is confirmed by the same construction used to express the baptism on the days of Pentecost. With regard to those who were baptized on the day of Pentecost, none M'ho are ac- (piainted with the history of the i»lace, will atfirm that there was not a suffici- ent sujtply of water, as historians inform us that there was abundance of water in cisterns under groxmd. But what will these cisterns do for us, in order that the discii>les might ba})ti/,e their candidates ? Could they dip them in ? No. They could easily i)lunge them into tl»e cisterns, but how could they get them out again, that is the (juestion. Tiiey must of necessity have had apparatus similar to that used in taking Jeremiah out of the dungeon. Had they such appai-atus ? No ; neither, have we any reason to believe thui the disciples dipped on that occasion. But permitting thai, it was possible for the disciples to dip their candidates into such cisterns, can we for a moment believe that the authorities of Jerusalem, who were opposed to the teachings of the accui-sed iNazareens, as they called theiii, wuuld alluw the disci pii;s to dip them into the 28 water wliich the Jews uscfl for dimVinr, o« i *i to nn.ler.stan.l tl.at thov left 1 .7 ^ l'"' ^'""'^^''''^ N^''^'"' '''' ^^^ Howed ou side t^. d ^ i"'* " ':' """" ''^ '"""''^ ^^•^''^ ^^^'^ nsed sue!,. As you att uH ' T . '< '^'' '"'■ ^^'' '''■' "«* *«''^ *^'«^ ".ey let UH turn to i7 Ac fgp'?" 1 ' '"" ''""" '^ ''" ^'^""^^^^'^ ^-l^tism tluy went dow l.ft 1' L '^"f ^^^-^^^^-^-^ the chariot to .tand still an.l I'inder me from In.iny haptixed - lZ^^:^ , • "'" '' '''''''"' ^'^'^' ^^'^^h chariot socs on. Jfow fo ft w^n^ r ; '"'* '*'^^^ ^ ^'"- ^he water a,;i the tin^ete/lpLteTn" ^,/"r ""^ *^'^ ^^"^^^^' -^^' Eunuch made such an ^^m 3 n ' 7*' '" '^^"' ^^'^ '^^'^ ^old is that the charioteer to stop. Now tnt Z ^f.^^"^^^.^'«^/^'« ««"""and was given to the No ! They have stilV i ! '. f /, '*^ '' '''"^^'"»' '"^^'^ ^'^^^ "^ the water ? wate, .va^h:;:;-:;:;^ t:t;;iir^ --^ ^"^^^•^ Mr, Blexus :_ l.ad ,Knm, Jl°° l" o W • """""^ f'™" » 'l'.a.l..r to 3;^ acre ; 8 ll.at -ooooooof 1 ""'""""l, covorins ovc-r ,5 ac« in all. Ov,^ "» that iiK r. n ; , ♦"''■• ""' °"'' '"'■''"'' '■"■' "'"' "''""'• '■■■" Pool of Si 0. „ tr, r f ■,;■' "'i' * "'''^- ■ ^"'""'»"'» P-l' '5X6, P0..1 of Hc.0 ai,'^ \ ; .",;,;;';„';, :"■:'=■■ ''~1 ■ °" '■""'. - ■«'» -3 ; - -^ V : 'J"Hei 1 0o| of Ulho?! Ill tii/1 • 1- lA ,. 1 1 Ktntun, ju loui \ 10 rods, and we are 29 told that ill llic (lays of tlii" A{)o.Mt].;,s it covorea over 4 acres ; and with all tliis water, irrcsportive of rj.^ein.^ tank., iVe., tlie.v .ciild iim( inniiei.sc the 3000 ! Ur. Avchilmlii lias said th;it I .aniHit iiiaintaiii the point that Naamaii was dippe.l. Just turn witli me to 2 Kiii-s, v. 14, and we find there that he Dii'PKi) liiiuself seven times in the water. Mr, Aicliihald says he did not. Mr. Archilmld says he did not Inrause he could not. The BihlJ savs lie did ; honce lie niust have had the ability. My friend tries a little (piihble here by saying he did certainly not dip himself, because, he never was commanded to dip— I>iit certainly the very idea ..f his dippin- as the seiiplures assert, shows plainly what was nnderstood by the cxpres.sion, wash, in the Old Testament, and only tends to strengthen my position, and beautifully agrees with the ancient Jewish custom of washing the body on (•"rtaiii ocaisions. My opponent's arguments on this j.oint are certainly unworthy ui the source from which they origuiate. He tells us that in the meaning of the word wash, a rubbing ])rocess is necessary. Paul wa.s told to "arise and be baptized and wash away his Bins" ; what about the rubbing process in this instance? It certainly seems hard work for my friend to have to go to all the; trouble to quote from antiquity,— vases and wo(jdcut,s— to show us that anciently men and women did not have to dip themselves to wash or cleanse the bodv, and then after all his trouble to find the Spirit in the word of God saying Naaman dipped himself." But we find hhn ere he closes getting things a little mixed in his argument, trying to prove the absurdity of Naam'an dipping himself, he asks :~" Do we understand that the whole body of Naaman was dipped," and answers, "certainly we do"— we feel pleased that at last candor seems to have compelled the admission. The remainder of our friends, argument is rather puerile for our notice. Next, we come to the baptism of the Eunuch by Phillip. The ([uestions here are 1st, Whether Philiji an.l the Eunuch went down into the water, or only to it. 211 d Whether the facts in the case afford any evidence that thr Eunuch was immeiwd. The determination of the first (piestion depends upon the exact force of the Greek expression in the original kdt«b.tsiin eis to hudor, and aimhasan elc to hudatos. Nov/, if the latter expres- sion means "they went up out of the water," then the former necessarily means "they went down into the water." There are two methods of enquiry by which to determine whether they went into the water, (r.) The direct method which depends upon the meaning of the words sui>posed to declare the fact. (2.) The indirect method which determines whether tlu^v went into the water, by determining whether they went out of it. We are told by objectors that the Greek projiosition efs, usually meaning in or into, often means to or at when used, as here, with the Greek verb hdahaino. For instance. " Jesus went down to Capernaum." "Jacob went down to Egypt." "They went down to Attaha." "They went down to Tmas." "He went down ^0 Antioch." " Going down <o Ca>sarea." Now, in the instances above quoted, let me ask any candid hearer, to answer, do you understand, from them, that the person 30 Of persons hav. just go... to or at the city limits or .nitskirl., or actually i..to the city. When 1 s.v I n..i «ni,.,, .h.w., to Halifax, .1. T a.t..ally n.oa., i.a I i.,t.„<l g..i..M -mlv t..'tl..o.it.-ih' limit of th.MoiiK.ral.o.., or adually ...to the city ? The a..swcr is evidct. Now, for a few exa...i)les from the New Testmm.nt to sh..w how it was ..scd an.l how ,ii.aerstoo<l. Rom. X. 7., VVlu) .hall .lesc.ul into the .lee,.." (.•«-a/.Hs.;u)-literally i.it.. the ahyss. Mark XIIT. 15, Let l.i.n that is on th. h-ms-top not go dow.i intu the house ^vtfa «e.o rs.) A.'ai.., Ephesia..s iv. 9. "Now that he ascen.lea, what .s ,t ; hut that h*^ also .lescenaed first i.^> the lower parts of the earth av«,./«t a..) Luke xvill 14. " This man went clown into his house justifie.l {kaleha m) .-ather than the othe.'. The iusta.ices thus cit.d from the New Testanient, where these words aie used tog..tl.e.s shosv that in every si..gle i..sla..ee the expression means to -ro dow.i i.ito-l.y our li.st method of e...i.ii.y, therefore it is settle.1 that PhUip and ♦he Eunuch we.it dow.i into the wate.'. Another ohj.-ctiou is Ofte.i raised, hy saving that the Greek verb anahamo; u never employed .n the sense ofemei-ging'from a li.iuid sul.stance. Now, it is a fact, and one k.iowu to fverv schoiai', that i.. everv single occurrence of these two w..r<ls in connection; iutlie New Testament, they mean to go up out of. Let us examme a tew texts and see for ourselves " And the Jews' passover was nigh at hand, ai.u many went out of th.^ country, up to Jerusalem l)ef..re the ],.^ssover to purity themselves." Joh.i XI. 35- " An<l Jo.--pl' '^l'^^ ^'^''^^ »i^ ^^""^ Galilee c)k< of city of Nazareth." Luke li. 4. " And the smoke of the incense which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended np b.^f.n-e God out of the angel's hand. Rev. vill. 4, besides several other passages, sii(;h as Rev. ix. 2 ; xi. 7 ; xrii. i ; XVII 8 Li Rev. XIII. I, John savs, "I stood upon th.; sand of the sea and saw abeasi {eJc tas th.dlus^as anahahwn) rising up out of the sea." The expression in (piestion does, without a single exception mean to (jo up out of Phihp and the Eunuch therefore went u>^ out of tlie water ; hence they must have first gone down into the water, and . , K.th methods of exa.nination our conclusion is settled. Another objection is sometimes raised, namely, that as they both went down into the wate.', a..d both came np out of the watia-, they must have both been baptized ; and yet Philip wa.s baptized befor... Against such (juib- bling as this I must protest. What are the facts of the case. Plnhp d.d iM)t baptize the Eunuch till he got down into the water, and the baptism was com- pleted befo.e thev commenced to come up out of the water, ami here notice this, that the simple act of walking down into the water prior to Phdip baptizing him, can not be considered any part of the act of baptism itself. The next case to which I wonld draw for the second time your attention is the baptism of Saul of Tarsus. An objection is raised that here we have an instance were an iiulivi.lual was told "to arise and be baptized." Let us see, what the Apostle himself has to say about it. "Thein^fore we are buried with him bv baptism into death, that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." Here we have Paul speaking of himself together with the Christians to whom he is 31 writing, says "tlicy wciv Imiitillty baptism." In tliis connection we will sum- mon some of the most learned Aniiotators an<l Commentators to tell ns what they think of this [lassaye, in Romans vi. 4,-5 The first i>-.,Bir»es, a celebrated scholar and commentator ; conunenting on this passage says, "It is altogether probable that the Ajjostle in this place had allusion to the custom of baptizing by ivimersion. IVM, one of the most celebrated of E[iiscopaliau Church Writers, says, "As to the manner of baptizing then generally used, (he texis, John iii. 23; Acts viii. 38 ; jmiduced by every f.ne who speaks of these matters are undeniable proofs that the Impti/.ed jH-rson went ordinarily into the water and sonietim s th(! ba])tist too. AVe should not know from these accounts wliether the whole body of the baptized was i)ut under water, head and all, were it not for the two later proofs, which, seem to me, to ])ut it out of the (question. One that Paul does twice in an allusive way of sj.eaking, call baptism a burial, the other the customs rf the Christians in the near succeeding iimes, which bein-j more larce- ly and particularly delivi'red in books, is known to have been generally or or- dinarily a total immersion." A)xhb!shop T.llotsoii, an Archbislio[) of great notability in the Cluirch of England ; commenting on the .same passage, says :— " Anciently those who were baptized were immersed and burietl in the water to represent their death to sin and then did rise up out of the water to signify their entrance upon a new life and to these customs the ai)ostle alludes." Another Epkcopalian, »S'({w»('i Cln-A;, on the same passage saJ^s : — "In the Primitive times tlie manner of baptizing was by immersion, or dipping the Avhole body into the water and the manner of doing it, was a very significant emblem of tlu^ <lying and rising again referred to by Paul in the aliove men- tioned similitude." Ihddriihjc, a Congregationalist, remarking on the same, says, " It seems the part of candor to confess that here is an allusion to the matter of ba^itizing by immersion." GeoTfje JFhit(]fu:ld, says, "It is certain that in thi' words (jf our text, Romans ^■j' 3)-45 there is an allusion to the manner of baptism which was by immersion, which is what our own church allows." John JFesh'y, the celebrated founder of the ]\Ietliodists, in his notes on the New Testament in refeiring to this passage, says, "Alludi-.g to the ancient wanner of ba])tizing by immersion." This from such a celebrated man,— a man whose menu)ry is cherished by all here piesent, whose works you are all, more or less, ac(|uain(ed v.illi ; an ex- ample of godliness all might try to emulate, the writer of books all might read, and teach their children to do lik»'wis. — is surely of weight. I know full well you all place confidence in him, and I know also that with many of you it is of a liighcr order than that which you wiU place in me. \V1 Let 111. tuiu ay.i.i tc. ntlur NViitH-8 of .miunu'e ami -see wlmt tl.ey sny oh this same question. McKnhjht, a c.k.l.mt.a riv.sl.yt.iia,, cuninu-nlatursays :-" Pla,.U..l to;-.tlu-r in tlu. r.kHuv.s of l.is .leatl.. Tlx' l..uyi..^' uf ("Inist aiul ol b. levels, t.rs in the water of baptisn., an.l aflevwanls in the earth is litly en.>n«h compared ,o 11... planting of see.ls in th. earth, because theelVect in both ca.es is a rcvivi- scence to a state of a greater p.-rfection." Many others of the most celebrated divines could be bn.u-ht as wilnessv-s on this point; such as (. rot uis, be/a, r-lnondield, Kuppe, Rusen.iller, and others all teslifyin- that this passage in linn.ans, plainly refers to the anci.nt mode of Baptism by immersion, and these men aiv all from the i\'dubapti.-4 ranks. A minisfr from the United States, a few days ago in conversation on this subject with n.vself said, "That if he were discussing with Pedobaptists on this subject the very strongest arguments he could p..ssibly use, would be their own acknowleagments-aud c^ulid connuents on Holy Writ-and it is true that the best, the most learned and the most w.ll-known writers in Pcdobaj.tist ranks can.lidlv admit immersion to be the primitive mode of baptism and hus prac- tised fJr centuries." These men were well aware that their scholarship was a stake-and although many of them think baptism a matter ut lud.irerenct notAvithstanding we tind '.he best and most learned agreed as to its sigmhcation and primitive meaning, we shall before we have done with the discu.sion call up as witnesses many more to thoroughly substantiate the position I have taken. Before I concUule my argument on thi^ point, I will again quote fn.m that most distinguished Presbvterian ineachev, the justly honored Thomas Chalmers, D D LLD. Boldlv and independently he expresse. in his "Lecture on the Elnstk to the Komans " chap, vi sec. 4. "The origin.! meanmg of the word baptism is immersion and though we regard it as a point ot mdillerency, wheth- er the ordinance, so named, be performed in this way, or by sprinkling, yet, m OonU not that the prevalent style of the administration m the Apostles days, was l.y an actual submerging of the whole bo.ly muler water. _ We advei^ to this for the purpose ot throwing light on the analogy that is instituted m these verses- Jesui Christ bv death underwent this s.rtof baptism, by an immersion under th-^ .urfoce of^ the ground, whence he soon emerge.l again by his resurrection. y, ...Vbein-' baptized intohisdeath are c.nc.ived to have made a sundiar trans- lation Li the act of descending under the water of baptism to have resigned an old life; and in the act of ascending, to emerge into a second or new life alon- the curse of which, it is our part to maintain astrenuos avoidance of that t wl ic , as good as, expunged the being that we had formerly, and a s renuous " ^^ ,^i n .d that holiness which .hould begui with the liM moment that we ' u l.ed into our present being ; and be perpetuated and mad.- progre.ss to- w 1 perfection of full and ripened immortality." The next case wha iwd Xy ur time for a few minutes will be that of the riiillipian jader, as fouud 3d in Acts xvi. 25 to oiul of chaiittT. Hfiv we lia\ p. an nccount of tin; Jailer l.riii^,'- iiig Paul ami Silas out of the pri-ion, an.l wlicii lie was fold what lie must .lo, in nuswtT to lii.s iiUfstioii, we liiiii him liring hajili/td, after which he broiij^lit them into Iuh house. Now he w.xs nut liajitisod in the iirisun, for we are told that he l)rou},'lit them out prior to hin liaptism. He was not baptized in his house, liecause, he did lujt take into his house till aftei' lu; was baptized. Had Paul desired to sprinkle, or pour, the Phillipian Jailer, no doubt he enuld liave done so in the Jail, or in the house— but we tind them l)rouj,dit (not from the inner prison simply into the outer ]»rison, the ,-cripti re says nothiny of the kind) out and after bajitism taken into the house. I shall ayain call upon my resi)ondeiit to notice the aiydmeiits I have ad- duced—he, as yet, has utterly faile<l to, in the .sliyhtesl instance, set aside tlu> voluminous testimony produced. ile seems to lalxjr hanl to estal)lish some- thing, but you cannot but perceive that his great luliur seems to be, to teach you that the Bible does not mean what it say.s. When it says dlji, it cannot m. dip, it must mean something else. My time is nearly up. I have still more than ninety otlier authorities to quote, of undoubted fame, to strengthen what I have already said. The meeting here adjouined till 6 P. M. 34 AD.Kill.'NKI) Mi:K'l'IN(i. Onlor having Ihm-h callctl, Mu. Aut iiiiiAi.u id.m' aiitl ~iMikc a.- lulluws : Mr. Cliainiian, Ladifw .'iixl ( Jciillinifii : — Again we arc lut't to tlixuiss llii.s iMiiMiitiint ^iiljcct. Vuii will oli^crvf, tliose of you wliu wurc lieic liffdr*; we adjnurnoil, lliat 1 did not make one statement or call on any one (d' (lie iiexicograplurs. My opiionenl lias fniuted n nuniher, and I also wish tu »[uute one or two. Under the word Bujitto, we. have several nieainngs, and among ollicrs hapti/e, that is snllicient for nie. That word baptize is.sullicient, for wo have the English Icvicograidiers defining that term for us, that is fur those who do not understand, it or are not acquainted with the Gieek terms ; if you will ai([>ly yourselves to Webster or Walker, &c., you will there find that which will substantiate what I have said on this question. We have Robinson's (Ireek Lexicon to the New Testament, and in it he says : — "In the New Testament usage it is to wash, to bathe, to cleanse by washing, to wash ones hands, to perform ablutions, its secondary meaning, to baptize, to admhiister the rile of baptism." Coming next to Scajtula we haVv' him giving the delinitions titujo, ahliio, lavo, iiammjo, hanrio. Now, note this, it is said that the tirst tiwjo is the exact equivalent of lHipti::o. Dr. Smith, Examiner of London University, an uiuhnibted authority on such matters, thus defines these teiins for us : — (i.) Tt/if/o.-— To moisten, wet, bathe, color, tinge, tlye, paint. (2.) Abluo: — i'o wash «if or away, to purify, to cleanse by washing. (3.) LKro;— To wash, bathe, moisten, wet, bedew, wash away. (4.) Immcnjo .'—To dip, to plunge;, sink, immene, thrust in. (5.) Hauiio .'—To draw* out, drain, spill, shed, breathe. Here we have all these several meanings to ponder on, but especially the lirst ^i?((/o which is the most approximate in signiticntion to the word ]!aj)to. We liavp filsoDr. Carson, — let nu' give you his scholarly opinion on this ](oint — he fjays : — "The Word lj(t.pti::o means mode and nothing but mode," as I have said he is a scholar and is obliged to confess after saying this, "tliat all the lexico- graphers are against me." Now, think you that Dr. Carson, would make such a statement as this if he was not sure of the fact. He knew well what he was aljout when he ^aid that. irav '"A' f,'iv<'n vol 1 Olll' lie "ft.iiti,,,, to (I„, N,,\v 'iv^t <H (wo >tat('iii(.|it> oil II iiiii'iiJ n-'iii; '"•^ word, lf( iiif .1 law your the «iiii«' wlifi, il„. X,,.., Kin 1 "'''•'" "'■'' '" '"'"o >■"""• atfiiiion to the om .h.„ this;:,!:!! ';;;;^ X. "'" ""•" '"""•^' ""'^^ '-^ ^-» « -- I ""^'^ '"""''"l\Mtli j.owiTfroiii „n Hiu],. '»l-c!l in uC Kir' "'"T"; ^' ''"''" "'• ''"•^' "'^^' ^*'""'^- Tlu-y wove -nst acknowl... JXVL w S "::''7"' ^^M'l-' -^o the spint ; but, we opponent thi "li,. . "■' " ''^""••^ "'^'' "'^* "°'>' ^^''-^•" ^^-v, n.y Dr Col / lo 1 ^^' ''^"^'^' ^'" ^'•'^^^' *^'^''"-^^'l «f- T--t u^ leam from ^^:tHz:::u:T'' '"' ^^'^^ '''' '^^ -^y- "'-^^' -That t Zi .X^l utTow 10 ' "f ^^'-/^"-^^ ^'^^ tlu. word napti.o put. a pernon iu the v^atcl but now lore does it take the ],o.son out of the Avator." As a scholar he |sul>hKo.l to acknowledge such, and, I ask you what took placf if t dU n 1 < ^^''^V V'""'" ^'" '"""'"'^ '"^" ^'"'^ New Kingdom. I ask of voJ MLat other place .lo..s the Mater take? I say it takes the sauie place L the s,^.t when water is applied to those who are hapti.ediuto the visible knj^lT ■n.k how the diseiples could be received / The proposition of our BrotYer ii that those who are baptized according to the Christian baptism are dipped. 1 deny that they are dipped. I atliini that they are not .lipped. I have already m dieated that the disciples were not dipped, and I ask yU, how el;! th.) dip others m order to uu-iiale them into the x\ew Kingdom, when they were not dipped themselves. But, you may be le 1 to say ho", do ;ou expla n hat pftssage m Romans 6, " Bmied with Christ ui Baptism." Fri/nds if you have read tins passage before, you will be able to see the reason, and undei^tand why baud Paul littered these wui^ls. First, you will see that he wanted to show the ].ower of sin and that of grace. Secondly, the difterence between the saved and the unsaved. This was St. Pauls object if we understood the passar^e con-ectly, for we read iu the 3, 24 verses :-"Know ve not that so many of us as wi're baj.tized i:uu his death. Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death." We cau here see that the baptism into Christ's death was but the result of the baptism inio Christ. "That so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ." Mind it is not two baptisms my ilear friends, but one, the two 36 condilions, icsultiii- fiom ,,ue Laptisia. T1k-u annrs th^' lliiid coiKlilioii, iiaiiu'ly—lairial, rosullin- from t]w l,ai)tis,iu in Cliiist. Wc read 'buiiwl with Clu'ist ill l,a].fisia.' T!u. tliiv ivsults, tlion, art' l.riclly, fust ; baptism to Christ ; sccoiid— l.,i|itisiii with (h-atli ; tliird— hiirial fus a ronult. We ire told, thai tlicy were "hurled with Christ in haptisin." Now, let me ol).serve f.)r a few mhuitrs somewhat on the second condition. I have stated that the second conditi(m cannot, thai i,- fairly, l,e construed into an emhlem of the death of Christ. Thi-re must he a resemhlance between an object and an action, where there is no resembhuice we have, properly speakin.u, no emblem whatever. I ask vrhere is the resemblance between dipj.ing and the death of Cheist. The Lord die,l on the Cross ; persons are said to be diitjied to symbolize the death of Cht'ist ; had the Lord been dromied instead of beiny crucified, there miglit have been a resemblance to the death of Christ. Are not Christ's sufferings .'spoken of elsewhere as H„o<ls that drown their unfortunate victim ? No. For the baptism description of Christ's sufferings is of itself, a fi-ure so that we camiot convert a figure into a figure, or a symbol into a symbol. Dr. Carson has settled that point with all sensil)le men for ever. Further, let us obser.ve a few things concerning the Ijurial, which is the third condition. ^Yi'^ are not to interpret tliis passage as a svmbol of burial for if it is tak,,.n as such, it must be threefold-death-burial-resnrrection. If burial with Christ IS an emblem of His death, how can it l)e an emblem of His burial. For the death ofj our Savi<nir preceded Kis resurrection, and we liave ,eoAi it is not an emblem of His death, and how, I ask of you can It be an emblem of His burial ; if it is not an emblem of the ivrdity how can It become an emblem of that which is but an inference of the reality 'itself. I say that It cannot be so ; you will be really to ask me the question-what does tins burial with Christ teach ? It teaches a living union with Jesus. For did Paul say, " As many as were baptized into the name of Christ were ba].t.ze,l hito His death ?" Not at all ; what he says is, "as manv of us as were l-apti/c-l into Christ were baptized into His death." Now, we are told how this union takes place in Col. 2. 13 : " By the faith of the operation of God." 1 aul further explains this to be a spiritual baptism, I Cor. 12-I3 • " For bv one spirit are we all baptized into one body." Again, he inf^nms us in (Jail. 3-4 :-" Fur as many of us as have been bapti/ed mto Christ have put on Christ." " Now that we are one with Christ by baptism, we are said to be dead." Rom. 8, ,0-1, .-"If Christ be in yo 11 the body 1^ dead because of sin, but the spirit is life because of righteousness It IS then that Paul could say, " I am crucilied with Christ, nevertheless I live" yet not I, l)ut Christ that livetli in nie." ' How does this change take place/ In Col. 2. n, " without hands in the putting ofl the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ- buried witli lum m baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operati.m of (!od, who hath raised him from the dead." Paul explains this in bath 87 Rom. 8. . I, « But if tl.c .spiiit uf liim that rai.e.l up J vat r 1 1 1^" ;, n^""' '''"' '"^'"^'^'' '" >'«"•" ^^ cannot refer to of 1 rr. V ' '" •'. "1" ''^' "'l*'*"" *^'^ ^«"'^'^'^'^ ^''^ ^^-^^i^^^'^ I'V Pete ■ W b^d th^^ "'" "" "^^^ ^" ^"•^^•^' believed, was bapti.:ea, yet i^^^ r: "' '•^'^"^'/'-■tl- «-" of bitterne.. and thl bond of iniquity, whose heart was not riglit in (iud'.s sight." M-ho't J l!n 'r "/''i"^ '^" "'-t'^"" '""^ ^''"" ^^'^'^^^ •■^'•^"'^•^ ^'"-t f"^""w to tho..e t1 a t oC^^ ' 7"'/ '"■"' "^^'' ''''^■'■^^' ^'^'f-^ t« -t- baptism, n .. f. T ? ''''1 "T ""'''^'^y ''''' ^^-" "-^- «- water to ex^. fv ■ t • ; "r;'^'^ ■' ''^' '"^' ^' '^^ *''"«« ^^'1^« '••'^ve been dipped No a tho 7 T '• '': "^"''^ "^l"^"'^^^'^ ^'>^ ^J- ^P-tle in Rom. 6I4 No, all those who are bapti/e,l by dipping do not show in t .eir after lives tilt h:t1;;:;ri'^7"''''-"^'^^'f^^^"^ ^^"^^'^ ^'^^-- ^^-^ ^hlii^g pia^^ tlat th ,e almngunion, and that wo are one with Christ, that is; that we aie dc^d with hnn, bunod with, and said to be raised with him and w; .say that U^^e enns arc not emblemat.al terms of Christ's death, burial'and resui^ecZ^ as 1 Im e endeavored to show l)ut an actual union. Mr, Blexu.s : — Mr. Moderator Ladie. and Gentlemen :-Mr. Archibald has at last consent- ed to have sometlnng to do with the Lexicons.Vt .hen he comes to then 1 e uses he Greek Lexicons very sparingly-takes the word baptize as a n a i of Baptuo and then runs of to some English lexicon to .see what bapti e n ^^^s -why does he not go to the Greek Dictionary and there find its ai^n '-f ^:iSm";;:.;i7-T""^^ ^^'-'^^ -'-' ^^very hundred ifruut a^aiast Inni. This certainly ,s not a very scholarlv way to ascertain the true meaning of any word. But I have quoted sufliJiently from and^t cL d jmgs aswel asf,.om the best lexicographers to gi^ witlu J ^ ^^^ of a doubt the true meaning of Baptv:o. o™/*, gives -I„„ue,„, i,umt.r.„, .„l„„e,.,.., »i„k, „.„.,,, ,,„„„,,, ,„j„i,„ merge Brdschneuhr, gives ,— Dip or hut],. f,...^„eHl]y, ball le, wash, uuniere, sub- I 38 If my tiiuo was not so liiuited, and T liavo slill aboiu loo soh-ot aulliois of tho eminent and Icanit'd of tlif dmVrcnt cnnuucntators. I niiglit '{uotc from all ritni iL'.;s to tlic triitJi ol iniuu'isioii, licin^ tlic action ',;omnianut'd by the Lord Jesus Christ and practiced l»y primitive Christianity. 1 will read the names of some of those as I will not have time to read what they have written. Those are, McKnight, Whitefield, Wall, Archhishop Tillotson, Archl)ishop Seeker, Samuel Clarke, Burkill, Olhauser, Conyheare, ITouson, Hammond, Bishop Smith, The Westminster Assembly, Tyndale, Iloadly, Storr, Hatt, Luther^R Newton, Baxter, Chalmei'K, Chrysostem, Ambrose, Cyril of Jenisalem,' Gregory Myssen, Apostolical CVmstitution. John Damascenes, Athanasius, Basil, Justin Martyi's, Theodosit, Dyonisius Aeropagus, Council of Tole<lo, Photius, Gelasius, Archbishop Cranmer, Sciulder, Pictetus, Nicholson, Manton, August tiiu', Bengellius, Goodwin, Doddridge, Wells, Whitby, Adam Clark, Edwards- Edinburgh Reviewers, Bloomfield, Suicer, liingham, Bi,shop Sherlock, Warbur- on, Leighton, Mathias, Rusemuller, Jasper, Frankins, Turretin, Theo^jhylaet,, Leo, Tholuck, Weiner, Lange, Jortin, Supermillc, Burmanns, Peter the Martyr, Albert Barnes, Estins, Braunus, Bergs, Rheinhard, Burnett, Cayeton, Cave Davanant, Fell, Queenstadt, Starke, Locki', Kna[ii) ; all these bishoi»s, commen- tators, divines, archbishoi)s, and enuaent scholars, with many others of all ii^es, churches, and creeds say that baptism means a burial, and nearly all say so, be- cause such was the ancient practice. My friend has labored hard in his si»eech to tell yuu what he thinks of Rom. vi. — but when he is done, with you, not one of you can tell how lu; tixed it; he certainly cannot well understand it himself. I have already (juoted in my other speeches much on this \)o\ni,i^l have as much more to bring forward. Dr Koi>pe, says of Rom. vi. : — "This icasoniiig depends on a certain )iecu- liar usage which men used to jiractice, namely : tjie rite of immersion in the waters of baptism." J, C. Walfuis, a learned German critic, savs : — " Formerlv immersion in water furnished a sign of burial in bajitism " Dr. Philip Schaff, says : — "The New Testament coiujiarisons of bajitism, with the passage through the Red Sea (i Cor. x. \,-t), with the deluge (i Peter iii. 2i), with a bath (Eph. v. 26; Titus iii. 5), with a burial and resurrection (Romans vi. 4 ; Col. ii. 12), and hnally it was the universal usage of the churches of anticpiity to baptize by immersion (as (he oriental churches and also the Russian-Greek do to this day), and Avetting or sprinkling was only allowed in cases of urgent nece.ssity, as with the sick and dving." D>: DeJVitt, speaking of baptism, says :— And so was the rite according to Romans vi. 4, John D. Mkluulh, says :—" Also the explanation which Paul gives of bap- tism (Romans vi. 3,-4) sets deaily before ns, immersion, and cannot be apjilied to sprinkling with water." Dr. Thvlud; Pn.f( it'll by ) es,S()]' () f Tl ai)tism (Roman.s vi. 4 :— -For tl.o ..x,,! 39 H^.-lo^y ill the Univerdty of Hiille, ^ays of bur- I'lanatiuu of the fiinirativu d u ties- cHpt.on of the ba,tis.al .ite, it is n.o.., i:::^Z .Z^nTZ .^- ^^::TT1\ T '" tT''^^ ''''''' ''- ^^--'' •— when m2 I 111 :,' ?^r •" TV'"' '""" ^'""^"^'^^ ^^-^^--t'^ which iltice, ruuMchn, to the .luvct.nn of the Apostle., the early christians gave a syLbolical ^J^uHiRos..nnU.r.-:i:hU .MraU.l Cm.au scholar, savs on Ron^ans vi. 4 : - To baptize i,s to numerse, to .li,, the l.,nly or part of the bo.ly which is to be -i.t.ze.l gon.g un.ler Ih. wa.,.. Innuersiou in the water of baptsn, and n.econnn,outot .hesa.u., was a sig„ that the oM life ha.l been L.L..\, a, that the new one n. the opposite ,lirection establishcl. Hence it was cus- tomary for those bapt.z...l to be spoken of on the one hand as .b-ad andlmried, on the other, as resuscitate,] again into a new life. The learne.l rightly adnion- sh us that on account of tins mystical sc'use of baptism,, the rite o? immersion ought to have been returned ni the Christian Church." ArchhiM^ miotm- says :-" Anciently those who were baptize.l were in.- inersed and buried in tlie water to represent tlu-ir .leath to sin, and then did rise up onto the water to signify their entrance upon a new life. And to these customs the apostle alludes m Romans vi. 2,-5." Dr S. CUtrke says :-" We are buried with Cliri.t in baptism &c. In the pnnut.ve tunes the manner of baptizing was by immersion or dipping the whole body under water. And this manner of doing it was a very significant emblem of the dying and rising again referred to l>y St. Paul, on the above mentioned sunuitude." Dr.D. Wkithj says :-<qt being so ex,>ressly declared here, and in Col. ii. 12 that we are being burned with Christ in baptism by being buried under water, and the argument to oblige us to conformity to his ,leath, by dyin-^ in s.n, being taken hence, and this imme.ision 1,eing religiously observed by chris- lans for thirteen centuries, and approved by our church ; and the chani of it o .prinkling, even without any allowance from the author of this institution It were to be wished that the custom might be again in general use." Dr T. Sherlork says :-" Baptism or immersion in water, accotdin.^ to the anueut riteof administering it, is a figure of our Inirial and of our conformity to lus« ath, and so signifies our dying to sin and walking in newness of life." mn n„rkUt on Romans vt 4, says :-'' The apostle.no doubt, alludes to Mu' ancient way and manner <.f baptizing persons in those hot countries, which wn-s by immersion, or putting them under M-ater for a lime, an<l then raisim^ thorn up igain out of the water, winch rite had also a mvstical signification n-preseid.ng the burial of our old man, sin, in us, and our insurrection to n I 40 Dr. JFall/aiti'v «jUotiiig several passages as " uiKleiiialile proofs that the Lapti/ed persons went ordinaiily into the water," says : — " Weshouhl not know .lom these accounts whether the wlioU- liody was jiut underwater, liead and all, were it not for two latter proofs which seem to nie to put it out of the (juestion, one that,St. Paul does twice in an allusive way of speaking call baptism a bur- ial ; th. other the customs of the christians in the near succeeding times, which being more ^nrgely and particularly delivered in books, is known to have been generally or ordinarily a total innuersion." Dr. Georfje Hill says: — "The apustle Paul (Romans vi. 4,-6) illustrates this connexion l)y an allusion drawn from the ancient method of adnxinisteiing bap- tism. The immersion in water of the bodies of those who were baptized is an emblem of that death unto sin by which the convei-sion of christians is generally expressed; the rising out of the water, the breathing in the air again, A.fter having been for some time in another elenu'iii,is an emblem of that new life which Christians by their pro fessiort are bound, and by the power of their religion are enabled to lead." Dr. James McKnirfht, in his note on Romans vi. 4, says : — " Christ submitted to be bajjtized, that is, to be buried under the water by John, and to be raised out of it again, as an emblem of his future resurrection. In like manner the baptism of believers is emblematical of tlieir own death, burial and resurrection." Alhert Barnes, in his note on Romans vi. 4, says : — "It is altogether probable that the a])ostle in tliis jdace had allusion to the custom of baptizing by immer- sion." Likewise Beza, Calvin, George Campbell, Chalmers, and a host of the most eminent Presbyterians, bear united and unequivocal testimony to the same truth." We have also — Dr. Doddr'uhje, in his comment on Reman vi. 4, Bays:— j" It seems but the part of candor to con'''ss that here is an allusion to baptizing by immersion, as most used in those early times.'' Moses Stevnrt, on Romans vi., says : — " Mof>t commentators have niaintainetl that the original Avord has here a necessary reference to the mode of literal bap^ tism, which they say was by immersion, and this they think afl'ords ground for using the image employed by the apostle, because a burial under water may be com])ared to a burial under the earth." Let us next hear the leading men in the Wesleyan Church. ^ John Wesley, in his note on Romans vi. 4, says :— Alluding to the ancient manner of bai)tizing by immersion." Adam Clarl; on Romans vi. 4, tays : — "It is probable that the a]»ostle here alludes to the, mode of administering baptism by immersion, th(> whole body being put under water." Joseph Benson, in his note on Runans vi. 4, says : — " Therefore we are bap- tized with Chiiat. Ailudiijg to the aucieul manner of ba[itizing ijy immersion." Mr. 41 To the aliove we mialit add tlio tesliiiiony of Icanit-d aiid eminent wen in different age?, and in different cunuuunions, since the apostle.s' days. John Frith, a learned divinj, the companion of Tindal, and who suffered Martyrdom at Smithtield, J,dy 4th, 1533, .say.s:-"The .signilicalion of baptism IS describe<l uf Paul in the 6th of Romans ; that a.s we are plunged bodily in tluMrater, even so are we dead and buried with Christ from sin ; and as we are again lifted out of the water, even so we arc risen with Christ from our sins, that we might hereafter walk in a new conversation of life. So that these two things— that is, to lie jdunged in the water and lifted u]. again— do si-niify and represent the whole pith and effect of l)ai.tisnH, that is, the mortification of our old Adam, and the risuig up of our new man." I have quoted all this to .show you, that Christ, an.l all the others of whom we read in the New Testament, were i.ut under water. Our brotlier lias vainly sought to make us believe otherwise ; I say vainly for who can doul.t that any- thing but immersion was practiced after hearing this long list of noted authore, say that " they must have been immersed » that is placed under water and then brought up again. If this will not suflice to prove my p(jiut, I will call, for every one he calls to prove the i'ever.se, five ; Ijecause I know fruin research, and that has not been a little, that such was the custom and even is now among those of the Greek Church in the East. Mr. AncHiiiALD : — Mr. Moderator, Ladies and Gentlemen :— You have heard a great .leal of what other men say about this question " buried with Christ in Baptism " and I am coiui)elled to .say that if I have the correct words here this evening, he (Mr. Blemus) has the opposite. Dr. Clarke, states in his comments on tlie°New Testament:— "It is probable that the apostle here alludes to the mode of ad- ministering l)ai)tism by immersion— the whole body being put under the water, which seemed to say the man is drowned, is dead, and that lie came uj) out of the water he seemed to have a resurrection to life, the man is risen again, he is alive. He was therefore supposed to throw off the old Gentile st'ate, as he. threw off his clothes, and of assuming a new character, as the baptised .»f John put on new or fresh garments ; I say it is probaljle that the apostle alludes to this mode of immersion, but it is not absolutely certain that he does say so as some do imagine, for in the next verso, our lieing corporate with Christ liy baji- tism is also denoted by our being ].]anted, 01 rather grafted together in llie like- ness of his death and Noah's Ark floating ujioii the water aii<l s[)rinkled by the rain of Heaven is a figure corresponding to baptism, i Peter 3, 20, 21. ' But ndther of these give us the same idea of the uulwaid form fis buryiu". 42 l)rowiiing among the ancit'iits was considered the nio.^t noble kind of doatli, some think that the aposth" may aUude to this." We have John Wosley speak- ing somewliat in llie same ntraiu. Dr. Curiie when discu.ssing this same (ques- tion, and in a somewhat ctnahigous case, gives ns these reinarks and (flotations: " No lexicon gives immerse, or dip, as a meaning of BcqitviO, in Greek earlier than Polybuis, B. C. 165 ; next comes Diodorus Sicuhis, B. C. 66 to 32 ; next Strabo, B. C. 54 to A. D. 54 ; and still later Joseplms and riiitarch." "Permit me to ask. what was the rendering of Baidto before Polybius, B.C. 165 ; Diodorus Siculus, B. C. 66 to 32, «S:c. ?" It ha.s been stated in your hearing that, that it does not refer to tlii.i point but, that it means to refer to water baptism. That is just the thing we contend for. We know that there is a burial and n resurrection but it is not a l)urial under water nor a resurrection out of water. If that is granted all is granted. That is sjiiritual baptism is a real burial and a real resurrection to the newness of life not effected by water. Having gained such vantage ground ; I wish now to draw your attention to what was said before we adjourned, with the regard to the prepositions. It was just as absurd to say baptism w'ithout water fvs to say with Bathabara. I wish you to notice that there is a difference between the ])rei»ositions. You will observe that in this case that when en is indicative of place or when it has reference to a place, it can only be translated by in and it would be »[iute as absurd to say with such and such a place as it would be contrary to common sense and judgement to say I strike you in a rod. We must keep these prepositions in their place and as I said be- fore we adjourned with regard to these that their use was threefold, namely first i»lace — second, time — third, instrument, and we must not take one for the other. For instance ch governs dative of time in Math. 12,-42. It governs dative of place John 1,-28 and dative of instrument Rev. 12,-5,-19,-21. It was stated that eis always express motion into w'atev but I say that it is used in other senses when it simi)ly means to or from Math. 17,-1,-9. Here we have the word into used but can we think for a moment that they were dipped into the moun- tain. My time is drawing to a close. However, I wish to draw your attention for a few moments to the baptism of Cornelius as that as not been referred to. Acts 10,-45,-48. Paul reasons thus " Can any man object to these receiving the baptism of water seeing that the Holy Spirit has been poured out or fallen on them as on US at the beginning." Surely not, for if they had been baptized with the reality itself, namely, spiritual baptism ; why deprive them of that which is l)ut the emblem of such. Thus showing the distinction dear friends that Lhe disciples Were baptized with the S])irit not in the Spirit. IVfy friend here brings to my mind that the Spirit overwhelmed them. True, I grant that, but tlio point in question is whether they were dipjted and if they were not dipped ill this case by the translation of the word Baplko how can you I ask, translate it dij) iii 43 I anotlior place without making a contradictor}' statement. Not at all, we can* not do il, and altlioiij^di llify wciro oviTwhflnu'd by tlie sjurit descending (or lieing poured out, u[)nu Uicni) tlicy were liaptizi'd l)y the out pouring of the spirit and not in the spirit. Acts 19,-47. "Can any man forbid water." In the language of this verse "Can any nuui forbid water " there is implied that the water is to be brought to Peter and not he to go to it. In order, to see this fully, let us turn to the words of our Saviour Luke 18,-16 " Suffer little children to come unto me and forl)id them not." Can we understand anything else from this expression of our Lord than that he wished the children to bo brought to him. Now we will place these two pa.ssages together. Peter says, " Can any man forbid water /" Christ says, "Forbid them not." Here we can all see that the same idea is expressed in both vei-ses ; in the one children is l)rought, in the other water, and the same language is used by both namely, "forbid water," "forbid them not." Now that the water was brought to where Peter was and not he to go to it, as those who dip have to do, I would ask in what then was Cornelius dipped ? It is evident that there was no baptistry in his house as at that time l)aptism was quite a i^ew thing. How- ever this may be Peter does not leave us in doubt concerning the mode by which he baptized Cornelius for he translates the word l^aptko himself for us in Acts 11,-15,-16, and surely we must give him credit for knowing something about the language he used. We have already seen that the disciples were baptized by the Holy Ghost, but not dipped ; that John baptized with and not in water. It is evident, I know to every candid mind, that he would not trans- late it one way and practice from the same woid in quite another mode. But who would charge the apostle with inconsistancy in his teachings. Therefore, as Paul was no dipper l)y doctrine ; he was no dipper by practice. Let us turn to the baptism of the gailor. Acts 16,-33. I aHirm in this connection that the jailor was baptized in the prisun. The jailor, put Paul and Silas into the inner inison (v. 24) and took them out (30), simply from the inner prison. Observe that (32) does not teach that they left the prison in order to .speak the word of the Lord to all that were in his house for the word used it oikia, which means, the whole premises, prison- ers included, and difl'ers very essentially from oikon, which is used in the 34tl'. verse to mean the jailor's family. I say that these words do not imply that Paul or Silas went into tl e jailor's house in order to speak to them and this ''s the more evident from the 33rd verse. " He took them," where he took them to we are not told, but as I say it is evident that Paul and Silas did not leave tbe prison from the message which they sent back to the Magistrates verse 37, " let them come and fetch us out." How, I ask, could the great apostle say so without being a hypocrite if he had stolen out of prison the night before. Wlio amongst us will charge this great apostle with duplicity ! None, con- sequently we must take his rendering, which I maintain to be the correct one. Tiie jailor did not leave the prison because it \^as against the law and he 44 woulil have suH'ercd tloalh l>y duiii^ so. ('uuKl any niii' think that Paul woultl i'nconragc a nian to do what he would not do himself and this he must have done if he left the prison, Fuither it is evident that the jailor and his family was1)a]iti/('d at the jtlacc where I'aul had his stripes washed from the word strai|^litway {yartu-hmna, on the spot) and that we have seen wjis in the prison. The (juestion may he asked, were t'::ere no cisterns tliere ] True, there luiyht have been a cistern in the prison. I have myself seen cisterns while ahroad foruud like ajar, havinf,' a narrow mouth widening' out as it descended. It is also true that Paul VH[jht have i)ut them into such a cistern easy enough, but how could he get them out again; that is the ([uestion He must have had an appaiatus similar to that used to raise Jeremiah from the dungeon. The thing resolves itself into this «|uestion. Had Paul any such ajiparatus / I answer, No, for if he had, mention would have been made of it. A])ait from this have we not seen that Paul was baptized standing, and if Jie was baptized standing, how could he baptize others by dii»ping. These thhigs do not agree together so that if Paul baptized according to the manner in which he was bajitized and if he baptized the jailor and family in the prison .at midnight, he did not, we are lid to conclude baptize them by dii)ping. Mr. Blenus : — Ml'. ]\roderator, Ladies and Centlemen : — I am sorry to hear Mr. Archibald somewhat impeach what I (juoted concerning John Wesley on Rom, vi. I say now again — that in his Comon Roni. vi. — " Buried with him " Wesley says '■^lUmliny to the anciinl munnir of ha^Aimuj hj immtrsion .^^ AVill Mr. Archibald deny this ? « Mr. McDonald : — I believe that John Wesley uses the word "manifestly." Mr. Blenus : — I (juoted, I believe, what he says in his notes on Rom. vi. — I did not, nor have I any intention of misrepresenting him. Mr. Bond : — Will the brother please read it again ? (Mr. Blenus here read the extract as l)efore given.) Mr. Bond : — The brother will oblige by reading a little further on. Mr. Blenus :— I have only this extract of the work with me. 45 Mil. Bond : — The 1)rotln'i lias nut g'll I'limij^li.— (CalL ol' unhr.) MoDKUATon : — Silence ami let the (li;iu-siuii jiroceetl. Mr. Blenus : — I .am astonished at any man attemittin<,' to deny the povrectness (if a plain well-known and simple (piotatiuii. If .John A^'esley published the ([notation I have made, and in the same breath contradicted it, I will admit his evidence would not be worth much. But he did no such thing, neither do I think any one can on this point chaige Wesley with vacillation. It seems my respondent is in sfune trouble about Enj t'::o necessarily beinj:; connected with water in its use. I have already shown from the classical I'sage as well as the Biblical usa^^e of • the word that you can immerse or bajitisc a man in — sand — in water — in earth — in oil, or in trouble — but of course in Christian baptism we are ct.mmanded to be immersed in a certain element — water. Next, our friend runs back un the case of the Phillipian Jailor, and treats us to a long list of old arguments, nothing original or sensible hi them. Then on to the case of Our Lord speaking of the little children. Why all this is known from l)eginning to end by every child who attends school. In tliese cases the words used are self explanatory, there is no ambiguity about them, and I will not waste your time by talking of things you all under and jierfectly well already. He has referred to Dr. Carry, I will put Neander against Dr. Curiy and see who the world will say is the best Church Historian and to whom they will most trust in this place. I will, in the first place, quote Mosheim and others and see what they say about the ancient practice of baptism. Now, let us examine the writings of a few of the most eminent Church historians. I will first quote " Mosheim," — the learned Church historian, here are his own words : — "The Sacrament of baptism was administered in this (the 2nd) century without the public assemblies in places apjiointed and prejiarcd *for that purpose and was performed by the immersion of the whole body in the baptismal font. Those adult persons who desired to be baptized (among the Collegionists) received the Sacrament of baptism according to the ancient and primitive manner of celobratingthat institution — ever by immersion." Neax- 1>ER— a (Lutheran,) celebrati;d Church Historian, says, " Baptism was originally administered by immersion. — To this form many companions of the apostle Paul alludes, the immersion being a symbol of the dying the being buried with Christ, emersion being a symbol of the resurrection, as the two parts in the death of the old man, and a resurrection to a new life. In respect to the form of baptism in conformity with the original symbol perfonned by immersion as a sign of an entire immersion into the Holy Spirit of being entii-ely. penetrated 46 Ity the snmo- It was only witli the sic) wlioio tho oxigcncy ro(iniro(l it tlmt any exception wa.s made and in this case liaptisni ".va.-< adnjinisterod by s|uinklinj,'," t(» tlit'sc we cnii fdso adil tlie tt'sliimiiiiii.^ nf Dr. Wm.S',!.,il)', (a learned liUllier- an,) Dr. Dowitt, Dr. (iicitius, Jcdiu Fiitli, (Jeiiter, Cufseluns, Dr. Fuwerrson, all Peilobapti^t tlivines te/liny lis plainly that immersion was primitive baptism. Next, let us examine the history of some of the Kastevn fhurches, — Deylinyiiis — infiirnis us that the Greek Church, "retain the rite of immersion to this day." Ludolphius — inform.- us such is tho practice of the Ethiopians. Venoun, says : — "The (Jreeks immerse the whole man in the water." They certaujly can understand their own language. Tiarimhis : — "Consider how he hath joined l)oth the cross and the water to- gether ; for this he saith, ' Blessed are they who putting their trust in the cross, descend into the water'." ##**#***# Again, " We go down into the water, full of sin and pollutions ; but come up again bringing forth fruit ; having in our hearts the fear and hope which is in Jesus " Hermes, writing about A. D., 95, speaking of bajitisni and backsliders, says ; — "They are such as have heard the word, and were willing to be baj)tized in tlie name of the Lord ; but, when thi'y call to mind what holiness it rtM^uired in those who professed the truth, withdrew themselves." Again, "Before man receives the name of the Son of God- he is oidained to death ; Init, when he receives that seal, he is freed from death, and delivered unto life : now, that seal is water, into which men descend undi-r an ol)ligation to death, but ascend out of it, being ai»])ointed unto life." Justin Maityr. Al>out A D., 140, J as* In Martyr wrote "An apology for Christians ; addressed to the Emperor, the Senate, and People of Rome." In this work, he describes the doctrines and ordinances of the Church of Christ; and, on baptism, has the following jjassage : — "I will now declare to you, also, after what manner we, being made new by Christ, have dedicated ourselves to God ; lest, if I sh(Hild leave that out, I might seem to deal unfairlv in some part of my apology. They who are persuaded and do l)eliin'e that those thuigs which are tauglit by us are true, and do promise to live accordingi to them, are directed first to pray and ask of God, with fasting, the forgiveness of their former sins ; and we also pray and fast with them. Then we bring them to some jilace where there is water, and they are bajttized by the same way of baptism by which we were baptized: for they are washed {en to hudiiti) in the water in the name of God the Father, Lord of all things, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit." Tertullum, A. D., 204 ; — " Because the person, [to be baptized,] in great sim- plicity ... is let down in the wate)', and, with a few words said, is dij)- ped." Homo in aipia demissus,ct inter pauca vtrha tinctus. Again, when sjjeak- ing of the vain anxiety to be baptized in the Jorban, — " There is no ditJerence, 47 wliotlier oiu! is wasluMl in a sea or a j)ool, in a river or in a fountain, in a lake or in acliannel ; nor is there any tlitt'ercncc hctwoen tlieni whom John (lip]»etl in the Jordan ami those wlioni Peter (li|tiu!(l lit the Tiher " Qhoa Jonmm in Jimhinr, ft qms I'etrui^ in Tihiti tin.i't. He also uses the words, "/<'. aqua vur- ijimur," i. e. wc are intniersi'd in the water. Gnyory iVlcmd.-.oi, A, 1). 360: — "We are Imried with Christ hy haptisni, that we may also rise ayain with liiui ; wc descend with him, that we may also he lifted up with him ; we ascend with him, that we may also be glorified with him." Biml, A. 1). 360 : — " En tmitaU h dmhrnsi, «S:c. By three immersions, the great mystery of haiitism is accomi>lished." Amhroi^', \. I). 374: — "Thou wast asked; 'dost thou believe in (jod the Father Ahiiighty /' Thou saidst, *I do believe,' and wast immersed : that is, thou wast Ijuried, {mermtl, lioc est, scpiiUus en ) Thou wast again asked, * Dost thou believe in our Lord Jesus Christ and his crucifixion V Thou saidst, ' I be- lieve,' and wast immersed again, and so wast buried with Christ." C'i/rt7, of Jerusalem, A.D. 374: — "As he, emUioron en toishndasi, who is]»lung- ed in the water, and bai»lized, is encompassed by the water on every side ; so they that are baptizsd by the Si)irit are also wholly covered all over." We now turn our attention to sprinkling our pouring. They have never been substituted in the Eastern or Greek Churches for immersion, but immers- ion still continues to be practised — sprinkling or pouring never was introduced into the Western Churches till the 13th century. John Call-in, in his comments of John iii.5:— "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God," says— "From these words it is lawful to conclude that baptism was celebrated by John and Christ by the immei-sion of the whole body." The Church of England prayer-book, which can be seer by almost every one in the community who may wish to see it — gives the direction to the Minister " that he shall dip the person in water or pour water upon him," — (dip is given the preference). In the direction for the public baptism for infants, it says "that the child shall be dipped, unless it be certified that the child is to weak too endure it. In that case, it shall suffice to pour water upon it." By this it will be seen that the mode of the Episcopal Church is immersion . Professor John Younr/, speaking ofthe Hellenistic or N.T. Greek, says: — "Had the Evangelist and apostles written in a language materially changed from that spoken by Gretiks generally, they woidd have given mysteries and enigma to the world whi(;h no scholarship could have solved. The Greek language like every other living tongue passed through various changes in its dialect and idioms in the course of its histoiy . The N. T. Greek does not differ more materially from that of Xenophon than Xenophon diffei-s from the dialects of Homer." 48 Now llio argiiiiidit }ieiu i> this : — '' Tlic i)iij,'jtinl (Jnnik writings tVIl into the hands of the (ireek Church at a Very cixrly (hay flud shu han kept the itractice of iiiuiiorsidn to tlie proseiit day, proving,' coiiLlii.ivcly what ich-a the l Jri'ik Church j,'h;ans from /i'lfitko. It has chan^it'd many other customs why has it not also rlian;4(>d this It emlnaces nearly all (Jreece ami Russia, with a membership of nearly one hundred millions — Russia is a cold country to iuimcrHe in, hut they will use nothiny else f(»r haptisni. — But besides the above coticliisive testimony. We also have the Ancient Fathers, vi/ : — Jjiunabas, flermas, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, who lived in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd conturius, bearing witne-js, that in their day immersion was universally practised. Ai^aiu we have numerous versions and translations of the Bible — beginninj^ with the 2nd Centuiy and extendinj^ down to the'])i'*^'HentJtime; amonj^ these the Syrait;, Arabic, Persic, ICliiiopic, Armenian, Ciothie, ({ernian, Danish, Swedish, Dutch, Anu'lo-Saxon (of the i-arly fathers of the 8th Century.) Vulyate, French, Italian and many others, nearly every one of these that translates the vcrl) UdlitvM at all, gives a word that means to innncrsj, and not oue of them by a word that means Bj)rink\' or ]ioui'. Again President Hhannon, says : — *•! found in the Greek Testament and Sep- tuavint "di]»" used twenty-one times. — In a'l these it was a translation of Baito or Bnptko, except once where Joseph's brethren smeared or daubed his coat in blood cHio^M^t/i is here usel Sprinkle is used twenty seven times — never once as a trfinslation oi Bapto or Bapt':.o ; in twenty cases it was a trans- lation of Raino, or some of its derivations. In three cases where scattering ashes was meant I read pao. In three cases were pouri ig was meant, I read proscJifo, and in one case spattering bh)ud on the lintels of the dom- j^msc/tHsis. Pour I found 1 19 times, but never has a translation of Hqito :>r B<ii)ti:o, but as a tiTHslation of cheo imudo. WaJi I found 32 times where reference was had to a part of the 2)erson, and not once as a tianslation of Bdpto or Bopti-j). I found wash in the sense of batlu; 28 times, eveiytime a translation of luo. In Luke, Mary is said to have washed the Saviour's feet with her tears here Brecho to moisten, is uned. Now, from all this we see the accuracy of the Greek. Where we find dip we find B q>to or B qJko, but never for pour or sitrinkle. Then can a command given to ns by the apostles in so exact a language mean inditt'ereutly jtour, sprinkle, (jr immerse, when these actions are so carefully separated liy the ( Jreek . Our next argument will be basjd upon the law of suI)stitution. That is the meaning of any word will make good ser.se when substituted in the place of the word itself. Now for example let us read ]\Iark i. 5. " And there went out unto him all the land of Judea and they of Jeiiisalem and were all im- mersed (Baptized) of him in the river Jordan." (Xow read inserting sjninkle or pour in place of Baptize). A man can be immersed in debt — in oil — in water — in spirit— in grief— l»ut he cannot Ite sprinkled in any one of these (grammatically). John could not sprinkle these men and women in Jordan, 49 neither couM Pliilip .-*|iniikle the Kumirli cviii nfU-r he ;^nl withliim down into Ihn river — hf cuulil iniiiuTsf him. — I'.y "^ayiii;; s^irinkle nr pniir, wculiiiii^t! a most hi'iuitiful iuhI cmhh'm.itiial cominiiiKl into a monstrous ulis'irtUty and iniitemli the kuowhdj^c of oiir Saviour ami liis aposth-s. My opjMinrnt has lal»oro(l hard to fry to show that li<tpti:ocm ht- translatid hy aHccoudnry niuan- iu^ whi'u uwd toexj)ro.s.H ailirect — particuhir s|itMilif conimand \ hich is a futilu attompt indeed, unscholarly and contrary to all h';;itin»ate rules of inter- ]>relation and translation.— He h.vs also failed utterly to (-.talilish ; as liu has tried to do, n <^\\\i hetween the siynilications dip and immerse, when used in a christian baptism connection. I have advanced authorities whom he has not yet atlempted.to answer, evi- dently because he well knows them to be incontrovertible— you have heard Avhat the most sensilile and the most erudite men of all a^'es have said ujion the subject. I am ([uite sorry that we are not tu be permitted to carry the discussion !■ ■ yond this eveninj;, as I have much more 1 sh(»uld like to lay before you. But ere I close the allirmative of this ju'oposition 1 sholl give a brief account of the ()ri},'in and i#o;,'resrt of sprinkling and pouring as used by some l\)r Christian baptism. / Mr. Archihald : Mr. Moderator, Ladies and Ueutlemon :— With regard to what has been said concerning baptized unto "death with Christ " by my brother, the point con- tended for is gained by the concession made that it does not refer to waterbaptism. Our brother did not say that the children were to be forbidden to come, that is the children vere brought to Christ and not Christ to niem; this was ju^^t acknow- ledging the point I wanted to gain. All I wanted to artirm from such was that the water was brought and not Peter go to the water, as those who baptize by dii)ping have to do. Likewise he brought no proof that the jailor left the prison and he said nothing with regard to them leaving the prisoif,or the difl'er- ence between the words used to express, house Further he does not mention anything with regard to the laws of the prison ior1)idding them to leave it. Likewise we had substitution brought before our minds. To this 1 will Init briefly refer. It was stated that it would be absurd to say sprinkling in the. river Jordan instead of dijiping in the river Jordan. Nowl wonld like to ask why the tenn sprinkling is less appropriate thaii the term di]>ping to (express the act of l)ai»tism as performed in the river Jordan. Avlicn we rememlxr that the term m on that occasion governs its object in the dative of locahty and not that of instrumentality . 60 NoM^, Fet u^s turn to wliat in lecunted of John bai)tizing at Aenon (John 3,- 23.) We arc tohl that he baptized there on account of their being much water there. Why is it called Aenon i You all know that places as a rule get their names from some physical appearance, or configuration of the land, or in honor of some distinguished person, or some ])articular characteristic of the ]^lace ; thus we know that Beaver Bank is called so from the beavers in olden times constructing dams and running over the banks ; Halifax so called in honor of the Earl of Halifax ; Annapolis, which was formerly called Port Royal, is now so called in honor of Queen Anne. So we lind that other places get their names not by hazard or chance, l)ui by some pecultarity of the place. Why did the Hebrews call this place where John was, Aenon; they might have called it by another name, but let us see what it means— the Word Aenon means many springs, and this place abounded in springs and thus we see the reason for its name. Why did John go to Aenon ? Why did he not go somewhere else why was it hecessary for him to go these. Was it because he had camels. Well that might be the cause, I don't say it was so, but this I do say, that John went there because there was much water. He would not have left jnuch water and gone to a place were there was only a few springs. Thus showing that he was leaving abundance of water and going to where but a small (quantity existed. There- fore he might have gone to Aenon to sprinkle, but he would not go to dip for he had plenty of water for dipping in Jordan, and in order to show that there were many si)rings or that it was not a great lake as we might be led to suppose from the reading; John says, in Greek hndatapolla—tlmt is Ibe Plural-«iaji)/ waters, not much waters, and this corresponds exactly with tlfc term y n by the Jews to this place shov,-ing that the place abounded in many springs. These two terms as- ee exactly one with the other. I shall endeavor to show that even admitting that there was a great lake then', John could not dip in such unless he stated one thing and practised another. We have not had it fully explained or cleared up to our minds, that John baptized in water and as I have endeavoured to bring before you time and again that when en is employed to govern itsolyect in the dative of instrumentality it cannot possibly at the same time govern the dative of place, why such reasoning is absiud. I wish you to notice the difference between the word when meaning instrument and place, to do such an absurd thing is to pervert the divine words of Scripture and if we keej) the word in its jJace, as we must do in accordance witJi existing syntax &c. We are compelled to translate it with idth and not in. What John says, is " I baptize xcith water," and not in water. It is just as absurd to say I strike in a stick. That is a parallel phrase and the same con- struction is in one as in the other. We have likewise had someshing broiight before our minds with regard to the eunuch. The eunuch we are told went in- to water and came up out of the water. Admitting that he went into the water, was he baptized when going into it. No he was not for iJien the eunuch must have been baptized aJso, for they both went into the water. How far they went into the water we aie not told. Now permitting that the eunuch was up 51 to tho wai^t in water how mncli I ask, was loft of him to be .lippetl ? Evidently only half the body. And according' to the; imniersionist theory the whole body must be dipped nnder the water. Wa.s this done in the case of the eunnch i We will hear more of this. We have heard this evening that if the word sprinkle was substituted instead of the word baptize in the New Testament there would be but one edition published. I would state here that if the word dip was suT)Stituted in the place of tlu; word baptize it would be a flat contra- diction of the word haptke in the New Testament. Mr. Blenus :— I would just say that versions have been pul)lished and the word immerse is used. Mr. Archibald : — I recalled the word immei-se because I know there were editioas thaUiatl the word immerse sustituted for baptize, if the word dip was substituted, it would be a flat contradiction of the word baptize. For as I have shown in one ins- tance in the New Tes'amont it is absolutely absurd to use it in that condition. I will refer you to some authorities that lived a few yeai-s after the apostles. We have Oregon who lived 17 years after Polcaxp, who was a disciple of Christ and si;rely should have known its translation ; likewise Oregon was a Greek by birth and wrote in Greek. He translates i Kings 18,-33, " Elijah baptized the wood of the altar," and still we are told that water was poured on the altar on that occasion. Again, lot me refer to what Dr. Walker, says in his doctrine of baptisms. A Jew while travelling in the desert with a company of Clnistians was converted, fell sick and desired 1 )aptism. Not having water they sprinkled him thrice with ^^and in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. He recovered and his ease was reported to Polycarp, who decide<l that the man was baptized if he had only water poured on him again. The formula of baptism could not be repeated as he was already baptized in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Now, Pokarp Avas for many vears a disciple of the apostle John, and must have known the apostle practice. The mode was pour- ing and he refused again to pronounce the name of the Trinity. He knew no such thing as rebaptising those who had once received baptism. In Suidas the great treasury of the Greek tongue, it is rendered by Mmhfaclo (to wet or moisten), lavo, ahluopimjo, (to make clean to cleanse), vumdo. Now we have Dr. Smith giving the meaning of Im; to which I have alreaily referred. Therefore, when Dr. Smith assents to such, he knows no doubt what he was about, else he would not have asserted such. 52 31 H. Bl.ICNTS ; - Mr. Moderator, Ladies and Gentlemen : — I liavc (Rioted Paul in Romans vi. to show you liow he lookid upon the subject of haptlsm — when he says, " we are buried with him l)y bajjlism into doath," and to show you that it is also en- tirely evident that Paul here is alludinj^ to Christian Sciptnial baptism in water. Til prove this I (pioted over thirty of the very ablest and best commentators of nearly every age since the Apostles' days. Now, after I had done all this, when my respondent arises lu; tells you that I have conceded that in this passage (Rom. ■\'i. 4,-5,) there is no allusion whatever to water baptism. I made no such con- cession and am sorry that although enough has been said on that point to satisfy the most exacting, that my resjiondent unwittingly, or otherwise, has grossly misrepresented my arguments. But thfy will speak for themselves — Paul in Romans vi. docs emjjhutkallij, as 1 have proved, refer to immersion in water. In regard to the Philli[iian .Jailor he has said that I have brought no evidence that Paul and the Jailor hd't the prison. I shall now ^-eadthe account found in Acts xvi. 29,-30, " Then he called for a hght, and sprang in, and came tremb- ling, :vnd fell down before Paul and Silas, And brought tJwni out and said ' Sirs, what must I do to l)e saved ' ". Here now the Scripture affirms that the Jailor hwiKjht them out. Now, if my resjiondent is a btdiever in the Bible why not believe this account of the "belo\ed phvsician," they were certainly brought out for that simpL reason as Holy Writ declares it, — but because it is against my o]iponent, he tries to dwell upon some far-fetched ideas of jmson-rules, or some othei' ridiculous absurdity. My respondent is again in trouble about Philip and the Eunuch, — well it h no wonder. — The scripture tells us " they both went down into the water, both Philip and the Eunuch " and he baptized him — and " when they came up out of the water " etc. — This certaudy is very much against my o]iponent ; and it is in beautiful harnutny with the even tenor of the Bible. Mr, Archibald, labors hard at every ]>lace where baptism is spoken of, to try to show that it does not mean what the simple rendi'ring tells us, it does mean. He has also referied -o the circumstance, that if the word diji should be sul)- stituted foi- ba}>tize in the New Testament, there would be often a flat contra- diction of ti'rms. Let my friends substitute immerse for Ixqitizc and in every instance he will find the sense complete and the construction grammatical — now I am not particular which of the woids he uses as long as the burial takes place. The Biblc! teaches for baptism a burial in water. — Noav, my opponent splits a hair befoiehe can get anything to wiak with, — Every scholar knows that there are no two words in any language that are exactly synonymous. — Now the verbs dip aod immcrtui nw synonyms, and it matters little which is used, as long as the dea of a biiriul in \< conveyed ; but let him substitute siirinkle or pour or any (if their synonyms in the jilace of haptv.c, and he will at once see tbftt it gives 58 us tlu' most lidiculi.ns iiousoiisi'.~\Vt)uia my fiii-iul l.i- willing tx) translate tlu' New Testament, ami eveiytiiue haptke was used, .substitute spinilde or pour > Would he as a scholar be willing' to do this I I can answer for him. He would not— for the simple reason that he could not, the Scriptures would n(jt admit of the change— while editions of the New Testanxent have been and are now being issued with the word iomtm'. in the place of the word baptize and are recognis- ed as correct translations of the original. He also quotes 2 Khigsxviii. 33, to show that hero we have a bullock baptiz- ed (according to the translation of Origen), but he forgets to tell us that four barrels wa'< twice filled to accomplish it— plainly showing a complete submers- ion or overwhelming in water, even although poured on the thing commanded. He has also referred unto the sprinkling of sand on an individual who was sick, and water not being procurable,— before I close I shall have something to say on this point in the history of sprinkling. But, before I leave this part of the discussion I will here say— I challenge my opponent to produce from the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation one single instance where sprinkhng or pour- ing mere water on any person or thing, for any moral ceremonial or religious use was ever done.— It was never done by the authority of God since the world began. — Notice the expression mere water or miter alone. Next, I shall brieily notice the history of sprinkling, ist, I shall (|uote the " Edinburgh Encylopaedia " Article on baptism :~" The first laivfor sprinkling was obtained hi the following maimer. Pope Stephen II. being driven fruni Rome by Adolphus King of the Lombards in 753, fled to Pepm who a short time before had usurped the crown of France. Whilst he remained there the monks of Cr 'sy in Brittany, consulted him whether in case of necessity water poured on the head of the infant would be lawful— Stephen replied that it woidd— but though the truth of this fact be allowed— which, however some Catholics deny— yet pouring or s]iiinkliiig was admitted only in cases of necessity. It was not till the year 1311, that the Legislature in a council held in Ravenna declared immersion, or sprinkling to be indifi'erent.— In Scotland, however, sprinkling was never practised in ordinary cases till after the Refonnation, about the middle of the i6th century, from Scotland it made its way into Eng- land in the reign of Elizabeth, but was not authorized in the "Established Church." Next, we will quote Dr. Wall, acknowledged to be the most learned and able of Pedobaptists, avIio gives us a volume of evidence in one paragraph in his book entitled, " History of Infant Baptism " Part II. chap. 9. He says,— " France seems to have been the first country in the world where baptism by afl'usion was used ordinarily to persons in health and in the public way of ad: ministering it. They (the assembly of divines at Westminster) reformed the font into a basin. This learned assembly could not remember, that fonts to baptize in had been always used l)y the ])rimitive christians long before tlie be- <'im)ing of Poperj-, and ever shicc L-hurches were built, Vnit that sprinkling for 54 iho common usi^ of l)aj)tizin!::f was really introduced (in France first and then in other Popish countries) in times of Popery. And that accordingly all those countries in ii'hkh the. usurped itover oftlw, I'oin', is or has forim rhj hem. ornwd — Imrf. k/tojfdi/qnny of children in the font— but that all other countries in the world which have never regarded his authority do still nse it, and that hasins excejit in cases of necessity were never used by Papists or any other Christians what- ever till by thcaasclves. What has been said of this custom of jmuring or sprinkling water in the ordhiary use of l)aptisni is to be understood only in reference to the Western parts of Europe — for it is used ordinarily nowhere else. — The Greek Church, in all <he branches of it still nse immersion and they hardly count a child, ex- cept in cases of sickness, well ba])ti/,ed without it. — And so do all other Chris- tians in the world except the Latins. That which I hinted before is a rule that does not fail in any particular that I know of viz : — All the nations of Christians that do now or formerly did sub- mit to the authority of the Bishop of Rome, do ordinarily bapti/e their infants by pouring or sprinkling. — And though the Eiiglish received not this custom till after the decay of Popery, yet they have since received it from such neigh- boring nations as had begun in the time of the PopeV power. But all othi:r Christians in the world, who never owned the Popes usurped power— (/<> and ef«' did di]) their infants in the ordinary use " so says Dr. Wall, We also have recorded in Eusebius, page 114, that Novatian A. D., 251 or 253, had water poured all over him in bed, about eighty yeai-s after this time when other sick and feeble persons weie beginning to j»refer this method intro- duced by Novatian so far as all authentic recoids inform us, a decret; was issued called "The 12th canon of the Ctunicil of Neocaeserea" against such poniin<fs and sprinklings, prohibiting pei-sons so jjoured orsjirinkled upon from any par- ticipation in the honors of the ministry or priesthood. Again the very best and authentic Church historians inform us that for full thirteen centuries the whole religioxis world practised huiueision with the'^^xcep- tion of invalids and pretender of inalnlity to endure cold bathing, Bonavcnture, in A. D,, 1160, speaks of sjjrinkling in France as becomiii"' an orninary practice. — "It made veiy little progress in Ilaly,Gernmny or Spain till the 14th and 1 5th centuries " We see then from these authentic witnesses, besides volumes of other evi- dence, that would time and s2)ace permit coidd be adduced — that sprinkliu"- ■(vater on men, women, or babes is without any authority from Old Testament or New Testament Neitlur the Jewish religion nor Chiistiaiiity ever recpiir- ed or approved it In the history of Christianity the whole world Eastern or Western, with the excoi>tian nf n few siek and dying jievsons, practised immersion durhig the Ion- *, 55 space of 1300 yeavo. I cliallenge anymau in the face of Chiucli lii.^tory ov any other autlientic history to di.spiove tliis. License to practise affusion was first -^vant<Ml l.y the Pope of Ronie, in 131 1. Calvin next gave a law to his branch of the church autln.rizing the same. This was lirst carried into Scotland, then into England after the reign of "Bloody Mary," and finally imposed upon the people much against their own conviction anil inclination at first.— But why follow the history of si)iinkling and pouring further. We could till a large volume with concessions— candid and truthful acknowledgements from the most illustrious Pedohaptist names of Christ endom, but that on our part would be a work of supererogation,— after such men as Moeheim, Waddingtun, Geisler, Neander, Brenner, Cave, Taylor, Baxter, Usher and Grotius, and after such admissions upon the part of Stnart and Wall -we might and covdd sumnion a hundred others to repeat the same story and reiterate the same facts I have not quote.l the Mahomm.Mlan Koran to prove that they so rendered and underst(jod baptism yet I could have done so. Nor have I quoted Milton or any of the old poets to prove from their say- ings and allusions that they all admitted immersion to l-ave been found either in Baptizo or in its history. I shall now leave the matter for the cartful consideration of those who have listened so ]iatiently. The subject we believe to be an important one— because it involves one of Gods express and direct commands to be obeyed. Our Savion.r doubtless had before him some specific action when he commanded his disciples to "Go teach all nations baptizing in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit " This action the Bible certainly both in its record of teaching and practise plainly sets forth. As the evidence I have adduced which is but a tithe of what could be brought forward— plainly proves. t Mil. AucHinALt) :— With regard to the ancient practice of dii)ping, I have here a church history by Dr. Schoff, and in it he tells us that there was no baptistry or chapel where this ceremony might Ije performed till the 4th century. This is the latest and best church history extant and it is also stated that if baptism was performed by dipping in early days, they would have proA'ided places for its performance long before the 4tli century. This is the Lxst opportunity I will have of speak- ingwithis question, theref.ire, let me endeavor to sum up all that has been said bolh for and against the nuxle of a<lministerin-,' the ordinance of Christian Baptism by dipping. Our Brother has taken the alHrative, 1 tlie negative, of the following prc- ])Osition :— " That Baptko does dip a person in water when used to express the New Testament Ordinance of Baptism, How can he affirm that Baptko means 5(1 (lip and nothing but (lip and yot a(;knowledgi'-i that the disciples were baptized, winni being iniated intu the New Kingdom ir'tkont heimj dipped, I leave with you to uneutangle. Having seen, tlu'icfore, that dip is out of the (|Ue.stiou in one case, it must follow that all must have been, and ought to be, initiated into the New Kingdom in the same manner. It has also been brought before your mind that those who in reading the New Testament (;an come to no other con- clusion than, that those who aie baptized were baptized with dipiiing ; simply from the fact that we read of some going into the water ; John baptizing at a place where there was much water, and being "buried with Christ in baptism." With regard to sonu; going into the water, I have shown, that the ba(|ti,sm was essentially a diH'ennit and distinct act. I have shown that J(dm baptized with water, and Mr. Blenn^* himself has acknowledged that "buried with Christ in baptism," does m^t refer to water baptism. With this light on the subject, from what portion of the Scriptures can an en(|uirer learn that dipping is taught in the scripture ? Mr. Chaiinian, Ladies, and Gentlemen : — I have thus from my stand-point clearly sluiwn to you that the word Baptko does n(jt nican to dip. Mr. Blonus himself has acknowledged thai it does not signify this in one place, therefore I maintain that it cannot do so in another. Hence the proposition that the word Bcqdizo dips a person as ajjphed to the New Testament ordinannce of Ba])tism into water is completely refuted, for if it were not then would the word of God contradict itself. FINIS. -4^ MJnard's JLiniment, IJnsiiq ssed for external application, as is well known h the Province. Also — ExceUfiTit for internal >ains or cough. ^^^TAKB HALF A TEASPOOOTUL IN SYRUP, "ie^ Minard's Pills, An Excellent Cathartic. Minard's Vermifuge, There is no Vermifuge more Effectual Minard's Honey Balsam, An Excellent Lung Medicine. Minard's Catholieon For Internal and External use. For Cramp, Pain in the Stomach, Diarrhoea, Colds, Coughs, etc. All the above prepared by NEWPORT, HANTS COUNTY, NOVA SCOTIA. iW DAILY AND TRI-WEEKLY. tptn t Mmt%f A POPULAR EVENING JOURNAL. Published t 125 & 127 Hollis St., Halifax. HI. XJKA.^ l.X\^\A%. VA A«^ A 13i^r\-\rt rt ri-cs m^i John in advance.) roprieto^^^