| 309 there will be danger of their being numbered among the transgressors instead of being set down as orthodox. For, says John, second epistle, I: 9; 'Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrines of Christ, he hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and Son.'
The reader is here brought to a very nice and important point. We will now see if the forms which some of the sects of the present day have adopted, relative to the ordinance of baptism, are constitutional or not. Let us compare them with that great touch-stone of truth, the Bible, and see if the principles of one are consonant with the doctrines of the other. If we can ascertain the sentiments of the apostles upon this point, and learn from the scriptures, the manner that they administered the ordinance of baptism, we shall, in our opinion, be getting pretty near the constitutionality of the matter. As this is to be our course of reasoning, we solicit the reader to divest himself of all his former opinions, that are not scriptural, upon this subject; untramel his mind by driving out the fabulous sophisms of the age, and expose it to the broad light of reason, by chasing therefrom the multiform theories and fulsome dogmas of fallible man. All prejudices should be extracted from the mind before entering upon the investigation of any subject; otherwise the attempt to reason candidly will be futile, and the forcible truths of sound argument will fall innoxious [innocuous] to the ground. When the channels to reason are closed up by the force of education, by bigotry and superstition, that the rays of truth cannot find ingress thereto, we might as well address ourselves to the sensibility of a stone, (for it is as intelligent as such a mind,) or hold converse with the uncivilized denizens of the Rocky Mountains.
As the Bible is to decide the question now under investigation, it will be well to adopt some scriptural rule of interpreting it. St. Luke, X: 25, 26; 'And behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the law?-how READEST thou?' It seems from this, that the Savior designed that the scriptures should be understood literally, and that they mean what they say and say what they mean. 2d Pet., I: 20, 21: 'Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation, for the prophecy came not in olden time by the will of man; but holy men of God spake as they were moved upon by the Holy Ghost.; As these rules are very good for understanding scripture, we will make use of them upon the present occasion, and see where they will leave the sects of the day. The sectarian spiritualizing machine has done such an extensive business, and made so many wonderful and frightful developments to the world of late years, that we have sometimes wondered whether it was not propelled by the powerful incentive of steam, or aided by that incomprehensible magic which achieved the unwithering laurels of the eccentric Sinbad. At all events they seem to partake of the nature of this remarkable genius, for as he 'scored to meddle' with any but the most 'resplendent gems,' while perambulating the 'valley of diamonds,' so do the sectarian clergy scorn to meddle with any scripture but just such passages as they can run through this mighty engine, and warp into the proper shape to suit their private predilections. But we will not be more severe than the real nature of things will admit. Truth however, must be brought to light.
We propose to hold forth no doctrines that are not clearly provable by the Bible; for as Paul says, so say we: Gal., I: 8; 'Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.' Let us see then, what the apostles say relative to baptism. We are going to let them have it their own way, without the interference of spiritualizing machines, modern humbugs, or popular dogmas.
Mark I: 4; 'John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance, for the remission of sins.' Be careful John! you will get into litigation with some of our modern divines before you have fairly taken your text; for some of them do not believe in remitting sins by any such process. Then you believe in baptism for the remission of sins, do you John? It is rather suspicious from the above quotation, that this is the case. Then we believe in it also! Mar, I: 5; 'And there went out unto him all the land of Judea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.' I n the river Jordan! What a pity it is that John was not as fruitful in invention as some of our educated ministers, at the present day. If he had been as deeply absorbed as some of them are in the love of worldly arrogance, it is probable he would have invented some mode of baptism different from the one here expressed. John said he baptized them 'in the river Jordan.' Then he must believe in immersion? Yes, we believe he did; but we will see before we get through if he talks any more about being 'in the water.' Luke, III: 3; 'And he came into
(page 309) |
