but will not the verdict be murder, irrespective of any particular mode? Certainly. So it is as it regards baptism. We have three modes; still, we have only one baptism. Modes of action are not to be confounded with the name of the act when completed. Three farmers may and do differ in their modes of farming, showing three different plans; still we call their work farming, irrespective of their modes. So it is precisely with baptism. We have three modes of baptizing; nevertheless, the work or thing, when perfected, ought to be denominated baptism. By thus keeping modes from being confounded with the thing itself, we understand the meaning of the phrase "one bapWho would dream of confounding modes. of murder with the name? And who would think of confounding modes of farming with the term by which it is expressed? We pity men who cannot see a like difference between modes of baptism and the thing itself.

Let it be remembered, however, that, while we take this view of this passage, we are persuaded, if the Ephesians were baptized as John baptized his disciples, that they were baptized by aflusion, John having baptized with water; and let it also be remembered, from the above comment, that we could bring up three modes of baptism before the face of the phrase, "one baptism," and receive its

sanction.

After examining the various passages relied on by immersionists, we find affusion clearly established; and if the reader will please bear in mind that where the place of baptism is spoken of, in is used, and that where the MODE of baptism is spoken of, with is always used, no doctrine of the Bible will be plainer than the doctrine of baptism by sprinkling or pouring.

We started with this idea when we took up

John's baptism, knowing that it was founded on John's own declaration, "I indeed baptize you with water," and end this chapter with it, thereby preserving uniformity in our views, such as the plain letter of the Scriptures justifies.

Now, if an immersionist take exception to these views and conclusions, will he just please to be so kind as to bring a reflecting, impartial man to the water, and a candidate for baptism, and show how he can immerse him WITH WATER, and get a verdict from this witness that he did so, and we shall abandon all here said against immersion.

We never met with such a contradiction between words and practice, as we find between immersing in water and baptizing with water. We can place a man in water or out of water, and baptize him with water; but no man can be put in water or out of water, and immersed with water. In short, the language of heaven and earth could not make a point plainer than affusion is made in the Scriptures. And here it is: "I indeed baptize you with water.'

It will not do to place against the testimony of John, as applied in this chapter to the Christians at Rome, the views of Dr. A. and Dr. B. In matters of opinion they are entitled to some respect; but when it comes to a point that we are called on to hear the servant of God speak, mere opinions are out of the question. We repeat it, and would re-repeat it, that, if the Christians at Rome, when baptized, were baptized according to John's mode, they were all baptized WITH water. Gentle reader, this is the testimony of inspiration, not the opinion of men; and in confirmation of which, we shall here give the passages in which in and with are found. They demand honest attention. God speaks, and not man.

In. Matthew iii, 6: "And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins." Mark i, 4:"John

did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins." Mark i, 5: "And there went out unto him all the land of Judea, and they of Jerusalem, and were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins." Mark i, 9: "And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of him in Jordan." John i, 28: "These things were done in Bethabara, beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing." John iii, 23: "And John was baptizing in Enon, near to Salem, because there was much water there."

With. Matthew iii, 11: "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire." Mark i, 8: "I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost." Luke iii, 16: "I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes, I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire." John i, 26: "John answered them, saying, I baptize with water." John i, 31: "Therefore I am come baptizing with water." John i, 31: "But he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost." Acts i, 5: "For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence." Acts xi, 16: "Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost." Acts xvii, 4: "Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance."

In these quotations, we have the comment of the

Holy Spirit on the places of baptism, and the mode. In every instance, where mode is spoken of, the word with is used, but in every instance where the place is spoken of, the word in.

From the aspect of the case here, the matter runs thus,-in is used five times solely to point out place, but with seventeen times to express modenine times literally, and eight times in a spiritual

sense.

When men think of baptism, let them call to mind the understanding of Peter on mode: "Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized WITH water," and they will never dream of immersion.

CHAPTER XXI.

THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED.

OUR readers are apprised that we have examined all the principal passages relied on to prove the doctrine of immersion, and have found them clearly sustaining the reverse-the doctrine of affusion in baptism. This conclusion, in the form of proof, we were forced to, from the proper use, meaning, and application of English terms, apart from any appeal to the original. Chapters XVII, XVIII, XIX, and XX will be found living testimony, of the most satisfactory character, on this point. John baptized with water, not in water, and so did Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, and all who belonged to the apostolic college, if they baptized as John did. This we proved beyond doubt; and in view of which here we might stop-come to a full pause-only for the fact, that we are much disposed to confirm, by a number of examples, confirmation on this

and out the exact statements of inspiration, they will ever find that the mode of baptism is kept entirely separate from the place, and made clear, positive, and impressive. Is it not surpassingly strange to hear a man reason thus: John baptized in Jordan; therefore he baptized by immersion? Most assuredly. Now, let us follow up this plan of viewing the matter, and we shall find the results as follows: John baptized in the wilderness; therefore he baptized by immersion: John baptized in Bethabara; therefore he baptized by immersion and John baptized in Enon, much water being there; therefore he baptized by immersion. This is the work of inference, and how ridiculously absurd! To show up this mode of reasoning in its most deformed character, we have only to say: John baptized in the wilderness; therefore he baptized by affusion: John baptized in Bethabara; therefore he baptized by affusion: and John baptized in Enon; therefore he baptized by affusion : and in Jordan; therefore he baptized by affusion. We say of this, as of the other mode of reasoning, of which this is an exact copy, how ridiculously absurd! Now, abandon this course of procedure, and view things as already expressed by us, and all will be plain; and all the baptisms of the New Testament resolve themselves into the doctrine of affusion, the plain doctrine of the Bible.

In bringing this chapter to a close, we deem it necessary to present in a few words our conclusions on the terms, in, into, and with.

1. Wherever in is found associated with baptism, when place is the idea to be conveyed, we are to understand it as only signifying that the act was done within certain limits; and that in reality it means on. For instance, let us say that Peter addressed them in the temple. Does this not simply mean that the act took place on the floor of the