because the water of separation was not sprinkled upon him," vypit The son of Sirach, referring to this sprinkling, calls it baptism.-Ecclesiasticus, xxxiv., 30. βαπτιζόμενος ἀπὸ νεκροῦ καὶ πάλιν ἁπτόμενος αὐτοῦ τί ὠφέλησεν τῷ λουτρῷ avrov. "He that washeth himself after touching αὐτοῦ. a dead body, if he touch it again what availeth his washing." The λourp is the same word used by Paul (Titus iii., 5), “the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost," the washing, the baptism, in relation both to the body and the soul, was by sprinkling.

This is still further evident from a direct comparison of those things by the same apostle (Heb. ix., 13, 14.—" For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer, sprinkling the unclean, ῥαντίζουσα τοὺς κεκοινωμένους, sanctifeth to the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the Eternal Spirit offered himself without spot unto God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God." βαπτω, from which βαπτίξω is derived, is used by inspired writers for "sprinkle” (Isaiah lxiii., 3).—"I have trodden the wine-press alone, and of the people there was none with me, and I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury, and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment."

by

The very same image is employed in the Book of Revelation to describe the triumphant

progress of the conquering Messiah (Rev. xix., 13). "And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood," ßeßauμévov aiμarı, where the word rendered dipped evidently means sprinkled from the, bodies of his vanquished foes, over whom he passes in triumph.

The Septuagint uses this word when sprinkling is evidently the meaning: "His body was wet, ¿ßápn, from the dew of heaven.”—Dan. iv., 32.

The blood of the paschal lamb was sprinkled upon the lintels and door-posts of the children of Israel, and Christ our passover was sacrificed for us. External usage also corroborates the views which have been given respecting the meaning of the words βαπτω and βαπτίξω. Judith is said to have washed herself near a fountain of water in the camp: ἑβαπτίζετο ἐν τῇ παρεμβολῇ ἐπὶ τῆς πηγῆς Tov vdαros.-Judith xii., 7. A modest woman would not attempt to bathe her whole body in the camp, being only at or near, not in the fountain, and who ever is so reckless as to bathe in a fountain?

Origen, the most learned of the ancient fathers, commenting on the baptism of John, quotes I. Kings, xviii., 33, and uses the word ẞantico four times, two in describing the pouring out of the water upon the sacrifice and twice in application to the baptism of John.

Homer, in his poem describing the battle of the frogs and mice, represents the lake as eßάлTεTW,

sprinkled with the blood of frogs, certainly not immersed.

The practice of the apostles still further confirms the views already presented in the usage of the language by writers inspired and uninspired.

Wherever they went and their message was received in faith, they baptized in houses, by the roadside, in jail, or wherever they might be; Lydia and the jailer are baptized forthwith, and three thousand in one day after the sermon of Peter on the day of Pentecost. Paul himself, rising up, was baptized, avaoτàs &ßantion.—Acts ix., 18; xxii., 16, ἀναστὰς βάπτισαι.

The nature of the ordinance being a symbolical action requires the practice of pouring or sprinkling. As in the Lord's Supper, a square inch of bread and a spoonful of wine are sufficient to answer the purpose of the institution, and better than a full meal, so a little water in baptism illustrates the inward purifying better than covering the whole person in water.

This principle our Lord has explained in washing the disciples' feet: "Peter saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him, If I wash thee not thou hast no part with me. Simon Peter saith unto him, Lord, not my feet only but also my hands and my head. Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean, every whit."-John xiii., 8, 10.

Let us examine the position taken on the other side of this question.

The name by which they claim to be known, the Baptists, is yielded to them by courtesy, not because it is admitted by other denominations that they themselves are not baptized, any more than it is admitted in calling those who deny the trinity Unitarians, that they themselves do not believe in the unity of God, or calling the Church of Rome. Catholics, that they themselves do not belong to the Church universal. They are properly called Anabaptists, as they were at first in the days of Luther, and Anti-Pædobaptists because they baptize again those who had been baptized by other depominations, and because they deny the propriety of infant baptism. The question with them is made of vital importance, for they teach that none are in the Church of God who are not immersed by them. It is proper then that those who do not think with. them should give a reason for the hope that is in them, and as the appeal has been taken to the originals by our opponents on the subject, it is is necessary that they be met on that ground.

They claim that total immersion is the only proper baptism, and all who are not immersed are therefore among the uncircumcised and the unclean. Not being in the kingdom of God they must therefore belong to the kingdom of Satan, for there is no neutral ground.

They occupy the place of the Judaizing teachers

in the days of the apostles, who insisted that unless men were circumcised, and kept the law of Moses, they could not be saved.

And what are the arguments by which our immersed friends sustain their position?

They say that the word ẞantigo means, to immerse, and nothing else; and 15 means, into, and, under; and ex, from under. They quote writers on our side who admit that the word for baptism sometimes means to immerse, and hence claim that the question is given up. But the same men thought otherwise, and contended for the propriety of baptism by sprinkling and pouring. These authorities then are against them.-As are also the translators of the Bible into our language, for instead of rendering ßantico always by, immerse, they never render it so at all. Indeed, the word immerse, expressing a doctrine without which many say there can be no visible church, is not found in the English Bible. At least, I have not been able to find it.

Moreover Schleusner, the great lexicographer of the Greek Testament, declares that it is never read in that sense in the New Testament: " In hac autem significatione nunquam in N. T.... legitur." He adds,. indeed, that it is used in that sense frequently in Greek writers: "sed eo frequentius in scriptt.gr. legi tur." And the only example which he gives will not help our Baptist friends much, for there it means. to be drowned. "Diod. Sic. 1. c. 36; De Nilo exundante τῶν χερσαίον θηριῶν τὰ πολλὰ ὑπὸ τοῦ