CHAPTER III.

THE DESIGN OF BAPTISM.

AMID the feverish controversies that abound on the mode of baptism, and on the proper subject of this ordinance, the design of the matter is partially lost sight of, though it is of greater importance to the faith and practice of the church than either the subject or the mode, inasmuch as both will perish together, unless the design be experienced. We would, in view of this conviction, prefer to occupy many chapters on the design of baptism, instead of one, only for the fact, that the public mind is diverted to the mode and subject, leaving us no opening for choice in the premises. We must, therefore, follow the tide of thought, doing the work needed under present circumstances.

The design of baptism now claims our attention; and for it, beforehand, we claim the serious attention of the reader-we mean that which baptism is a figure of.

Baptism as a figure. It is well known that immersionists contend that baptism is a figure of the burial and resurrection of Christ; but against this view, we shall place the understanding of the disciples during the stay of the Savior on the earth. Now, if we make it appear that the disciples had no such understanding, will it not follow that the introduction of baptism by immersion was an invention that must have taken place after the resurreetion of the Savior?

Luke xviii, 33: "And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again.” In the next verse we are informed: "And they understood none of these things." Here we are emphatically told that the disciples did not

understand his resurrection. How then could they have baptized, looking on baptism as a figure of his resurrection? We know that they baptized, and from the light of these quotations we also know that they did not use baptism as a representation of that which inspiration says they did not understand; hence immersionists do err, greatly err, when they state that baptism was used by John, and the disciples of the Savior, to set forth a burial and resurrection. Immersionists, from this aspect of the case, cannot support their theory. It stands condemned.

Thomas, after the Savior had risen from the dead, was found an unbeliever in his resurrection. Now, if John had taught, in any manner, baptism to be a figure of the burial and resurrection of the Savior, or if the Savior had so taught his own disciples, would they have been found so profoundly ignorant of the very thing the figure of baptism set forth? Never. The idea of baptism, during the time of Christ's abode on earth, representing his burial and resurrection, is not entitled to the merit of an ingenious invention. It is without the name of a foundation, the Scriptures deciding.

We admit, when immersion was first noted, that those who used it did use it to represent the burial and resurrection of Christ; but as this was a long way from the days of the apostles, and as it had then on its very face the evidence of an invention, in having the candidates naked, and other things equally as foolish and wrong, we are compelled to regard it as without any evidence in the Scriptures to justify its design.

In confirmation of this opinion, that baptism by immersion was introduced as a figure of the burial and resurrection of the Savior, after the apostles had been numbered with the dead, and not previous to this, we here insert some extracts

from the London Baptist Magazine, for February, 1850, p. 84: "The venerable Bede describes Paulinus as baptizing in the Glen, Swale and Trent. Gregory, the very Pope who sent Paulinus, thus speaks of the ordinance: "But we, since we immerse [mergimus] three times, point out the sacrament of the three days' burial.'' Again: "Fortysix years after Bede's death, the following canon was passed by Pope Clement: If any bishop or presbyter shall baptize by any other than trine immersion [immersionem] let him be deposed."" Again : "The writings of Alcuin, born at York, A. D. 735, and educated there by Bishop Egbert, abound in reference to the mode of baptism. In his sixty-ninth epistle he says: Trine immersion [demersio] resembles the three days' burial.'"

"At the commencement of the 9th century, A. D. 816, a canon was passed at the Synod of Celichyth, to the following effect: Let also the priests know that when they administer holy baptism they pour not holy water on the heads of infants, but always immerse them in the font.'

From these extracts, taken from an article laboring to establish immersion in the days of the apostles, we are re-confirmed in our conviction, that baptism by immersion was introduced as a figure of the burial and resurrection of the Savior after the death of the apostles; and moreover, that trine immersion did, to the inventors, definitely set forth the three days' burial of Christ. This, in truth, is the true import of the figure of immersion, as found in the early ages of the church, and handed down

to us.

But in trine immersion there is the idea of three resurrections. Ah, this is a serious objection! Where is the figure here? Does not immersion fail at this point, and become inconsistent with itself?

The nakedness of the candidate, which has as much claim to antiquity as immersion, was regarded by immersionists as representing the condition of Christ on the cross. Was this practiced by John, the Savior, and the apostles? There is just as much authority to say so, as to say immersion was. Three immersions-the candidates naked, men, women, and children, were originally found togethTo rely, then, on the custom of the early age of the church to prove immersion, is to receive three immersions, the candidates naked, as of apostolic origin; or, to say that the nakedness, and three immersions, were inventions of the fathers, which will open before us a similar right to speak, and to express our conviction, that the whole was a fanciful invention -the immersions, nakedness, and all.

er.

With due respect for the dead, who practiced trine immersion, the candidates naked, and pity for those who take one immersion from them, rejecting the nakedness and other essentials, we would observe that the former were much more consistent with themselves than the latter, inasmuch as the ancient immersionists did not pretend to give Scriptural authority for all their measures, while the modern immersionists pretend to trace the thing back to the days of the apostles-giving, however, no better evidence to the world than one stolen dip, out of the three practiced by their older brethren, in the invention of figure, who laid the foundation for the present unscriptural idea, that baptism was a figure of Christ's burial and resurrection.

The disciples and John did use baptism as a figure. Proof is ample on this point. We begin with John: "I baptize with water: he shall baptize with the Holy Ghost.". The figure is unmistakable here. It is well supported by the plainest

forms of speech. Luke xxiv, 49: "Behold, I send the promise of the Father upon you." Here is the very thing of which baptism, as used by John, in reference to mode in act, pre-figured. Upon you. Upon you. The promise of the Father, which was the descent of the Holy Ghost, was presented by the Savior in these two significant words-upon YOU. It would seem, from these words, as if the Savior guarded against the thought of immersion. The baptism of the Spirit, of which John's baptism was a figure in mode, is held up before us by the Savior himself, by an act of coming upon, and not an act of going into, which the design of immersion, in mode, involves. If there were no other terms in the Scriptures bearing on the out-pouring of the Spirit, which John's baptism looked to, but upon you, they would be found sufficient, clearly sufficient, to develop the thing which John's baptism was a figure of. But there are other forms of speech equally as plain. The next in order is one of the same import:

Acts i, 8: "But ye shall receive power, after the Holy Ghost is come upon you." The promise of the Father and the Holy Spirit, as found in these passages, are the same in all points. Upon you. This is sufficient, Luke giving testimony that the Lord, in person, described the manner of this baptism. The words, upon you, should be sounded loud and long, so that the dull ears of immersion might hear, particularly in this case, and become sensible of the force and propriety of language.

Acts ii, 16: "But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; and it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit on all flesh." Here is another exemplification of the thing signified by John's figure in baptism. Can we mistake the mode ? No; for the very act that John had spoken of by employing the word