[HG247] Evening, February 27, 1908.

(Chairman, STANLEY E. BOWDLE, Attorney, Cincinnati, Ohio.)


The Scriptures clearly teach that immersion in water, "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," of a believing penitent is for, in order to, the remission of sins.

L. S. White, affirmative.

C. T. Russell, negative.


Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: I esteem it a happy privilege, indeed, to stand before you in defense of the proposition, "The Scriptures clearly teach that immersion in water, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, of a believing penitent, is for or in order to the remission of sins."

The teaching of God's word on this question of baptism has withstood the storm of shot and shell, of the opposers of God's truth, for more than eighteen hundred years; and God's word on this great question, as on all others, will be standing the test of such opposition as it will have on this occasion, at the time that the angel of God stands with one foot on the land and the other on the sea and cries with a loud voice that time shall be no more.

In order that we may understand the precise point at issue, so that there can be no room for caviling, it becomes necessary that I should define the terms of this proposition. You will remember the course of my honorable opponent, two nights ago, in wandering around in his first reply, and then presenting his main points in his second reply, when I had no opportunity to say anything. Now I am going to give him the benefit of all the arguments I have time for in this first speech and trust that he will at least undertake to reply to them in his first reply, that I can say afterwards what I may have to say.

Definiton of terms'" Immersion:" By immersion in water I mean what might otherwise be termed baptism'that is, a burial in water of a proper subject in obedience to Jesus Christ.

"In the Name:" By this I mean into the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

"Believing Penitent:"By "believing penitent" I mean a believer in Christ who has repented of his sins.

"For, in Order To:" By this term, "For, in order to," I mean that baptism is a condition of remission of sins as stipulated in the gospel of Jesus Christ.

"Remission of Sins:" By "remission of sins" I simply mean forgiveness of sins.

The way this proposition is stated does not require of me that I affirm anything on immersion. The point at issue is as to what baptism is for.

Eider Russell, I understand, practices immersion. I want him to tell this audience, was he baptized by immersion? Does he immerse people when he baptizes them?

The point is not as to whether baptism is immersion or not, but what is baptism for? I am affirming that the Scriptures teach that it is in order to the remission of sins.

But we will call your attention unto a few things concerning immersion before we proceed unto the design. Certainly every person desires. to be a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ, especially when Jesus said, "Come, follow me." Then it is necessary that we follow him in this great question of baptism, but how was Jesus Christ baptized?

Matt. 3:16:" And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water, and, lo, the heavens were open unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him." You ask me, how was Jesus baptized? The Bible says, "He went up straightway out of the water." I care very little about any construction that you might put upon [HG248] the use of the word "straightway." There is one thing certain, you can not go up out of anything without first going down into it. Then, regardless of what construction you might put on it, there is one thing sure, that when you were baptized if you did not go up out of the water you have not been baptized like Christ was baptized.

Matt. 3:11, John the Baptist says: "I indeed baptize you with water." I read this now from the American Revised Version, standard edition, "I indeed baptize you in water." But how did John baptize these people with water? Mark 1:5:" And there went out unto him all the land of Judea, and they of Jerusalem and round about Jordan, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins." That is the way John baptized those people, with water; he baptized them in the river Jordan.

Rom. 6:4-5:" Therefore, we are buried with him"'that is, with Christ'" by 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.

For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection.

#Col 2:12:" Buried with him"'that is, with Christ'" in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead."

There is not a six-year-old child in this audience but that knows perfectly well that a person is not buried until he is covered up. The Bible represents people as being buried with Jesus Christ in baptism, then when we were baptized, if we were not buried in that baptism we were not with Jesus Christ in baptism, and it is just as easy to be right as it is to be wrong; and we had just as well be right as to be wrong; then why not do the very thing that everybody would say is right?

Persons thus manifest their faith in the burial and resurrection of Christ. Eph. 1:18-20:" The eyes of your understanding being enlightened that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, and what is the exceeding greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places." But how do people believe according to the working of the great power of God? #Col 2:12:" We are buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God who hath raised him from the dead."

Through the faith of what operation of God? Through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. It is faith, then, in the burial and the resurrection of Jesus Christ that you manifest when you are buried with Jesus Christ in baptism and raised from the watery grave, to walk a new life.

But the word "baptize" is translated from the Greek word baptizo .and we want to call your attention unto the definition of that word as given by standard lexicons. I give you the definition of baptizo by Dr. Thayer: "First, to dip repeatedly, to immerge, to submerge.

"Second, to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water.

"Third, metaphorically, to overwhelm."

Bagster' Bapto :To dip, to dye. Baptizo :To dip; immerse, to cleanse or purify by washing; to administer the rite of baptism; to baptize.

Bloomfield' Baptizo :To immerse or sink anything in water or other liquid.

Dunbar' Baptizo :To dip, immerse, submerge, plunge, sink, overwhelm.

Ewing' Baptizo :In its primary and radical sense, I cover with water or some other fluid, in whatever manner this is done, whether by immersion or affusion, wholly or partially, permanently or for a moment; and in the passive voice, I am covered with water or some other fluid, in some manner or other.

Green' Bapto :To dip, to dye. Baptizo :To dip, immerse, to cleanse or purify by washing; to administer the rite of baptism; to baptize. Baptisma :Immersion, baptism, ordinance of baptism. (Matt. 3:7; Rom. 6:4.) Baptismos :An act of dipping or immersion; a baptism. (Heb. 6:2.)

Greenfield' Baptizo :To immerse, immerge, submerge, sink; in the New Testament, to wash, perform ablution, cleanse, to immerse, baptize, administer the rite of baptism. Baptisma :What is immersed, hence immersion, baptism, ordinance of baptism. Baptismos :Immersion, baptism; a washing, ablution. Bapto :To dip, plunge, to dye.

Liddell and Scott' Baptiso :To dip in or under water. Baptisma :Baptism, the usual form in New Testament both of John's and of Christian baptism. Baptismos :A dipping in water, ablution. Baptistes :One that dips, a baptizer. Bapto :1. To dip in water; Latin, immergere . 2. To dip in dye. 3. To draw water by dipping a vessel.

Pickering' Bapto :To dip, to dip under, to plunge. Baptizo :To dip immerse, submerge, plunge, sink, overwhelm. Baptisma :That which is dipped or steeped, immersion, dipping, plunging. In New Testament, the rite of baptism.

Robinson' Baptiso :To immerse, to sink.

But this is enough. I could give you a number more, [HG249] but I challenge the gentleman to show one standard lexicon in all the world that defines the Greek word baptizo as a word signifying to sprinkle or pour. Will he come unto the issue?

Now we come to the design of baptism. I want to call your attention to the fact that baptism is an expression of faith. Without faith it is impossible to please God.

(Heb. 11:6.) But will faith benefit people unless it is a living, working, trusting faith? Certainly not. (Gal. 5:6.) "For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth anything nor uncircumcision, but faith which worketh by love."

Here I want to ask my able opponent two questions. The Bible speaks of a living and a dead faith. First, what makes faith alive? Second, how is the sinner made alive?

Justification. We are not justified by any one thing alone. (Isa. 53:11.) Justified by knowledge. (Acts 13:38-39.) Justified by Christ. (Rom. 5:9.) Justified by the blood of Christ. (Rom. 5:1.) Justified by faith. (Jas. 2:24.) Justified by works and not by faith only. (#Tit 3:7) Justified by the grace of God. (1 Cor. 6:11.) Justified in the name of the Lord Jesus. (1 Cor. 6:11.) Justified by the Spirit of God.

What are the causes of salvation? The love of God is the moving cause. The blood of Christ is the procuring cause, and faith the appropriating cause. But it must be a faith that works by love. You can never be justified and stand free in the sight of God but by a loving, working and obedient faith. Gal. 3:26-27:" For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ."

How do we become children of God by faith in Christ Jesus?" For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." That is the way that people become children of God by faith. Their faith leads them to obey the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Heb. 5:9:" And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all that obey him."

The commission, Matt. 28:18-20. After Jesus arose from the dead, just before he ascended to heaven, he "came and spake unto them," unto his disciples, saying: "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen."

Here we find that all nations are to be taught and the taught are to be baptized.

Mark 16:15-15:" And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned."

Luke 24:46-47: And Jesus "said unto them, Thus it is written and thus it behooved Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem."

Thus we have, in the great commission given by Jesus Christ, the gospel to be preached to all nations, to every creature in all the world. The people are to believe on Christ. They are to repent of their sins, and they are to be baptized. The penitent believer, then, is one who has heard the gospel, and has accepted it, believes on Jesus Christ with all his heart and repented of his sins. Baptism, to such a character, I maintain that the word of God teaches, is in order to the remission of sins. But let us see. The apostle, acting under this great commission, guided by the Spirit of God, preached the gospel unto the Pentecostians, as we read in the second chapter of Acts of the Apostles, and when these people heard the gospel they cried out, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" In the thirty-eighth verse the Holy Spirit guided the apostle Peter to say unto them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of the Lord Jesus for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." But you say that does not mean "for the remission of sins." Well, if it does not mean for the remission of sins, what does it mean? If Peter, guided by the Spirit of God, did not mean what he said, how are you going to find out what he did mean?

Jesus said (Matt. 26:28), "For this is my blood which is shed for the remission of sins." Did Jesus mean what He said, when he said his blood was shed for the remission of sins?

Luke 3:3: John preached "the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins." Just as surely as Jesus Christ shed his blood, looking forward to the time the people could receive remission of sins, just that sure did the apostle Peter tell the people to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins.

We have in Greek a prepositional phrase, eis aphesin hamartion , that occurs three times in the New Testament. (Matt. 26:28; Luke 3:3; Acts 2:38). The English phrase that is translated from that Greek phrase is, "for the remission of sins." The scholarship of the world tells us that it is identically the same, both in Greek and in English. Then, whatever Jesus Christ shed his blood for, Peter told the Pentecostians to repent and be baptized. for. But we are going to give you some standard authorities, the finest in the world, on this prepositional phrase that we have just quoted. [HG250] Adam Clarke, the great Methodist commentator, in his commentary on Acts 2:38, says: "For remission of sins, Eis aphesin hamartion .In reference to the remission or removal of sins."

1. Dr. Ditzler, the greatest living debater and scholar in the Methodist Church, in the Wilkes-Ditzler debate, page 295, says: "No, neither repentance nor baptism is for remission, but conditions precedent to doing that which is for remission."

2. Goodwin. You remember Goodwin is the author of one of the finest Greek grammars that we have. In a letter to J. W. Shepherd, July 27, 1893, he says: I think els, in Acts 2:38, expresses purpose or tendency, and is rightly translated for or unto (in the sense of for)."

3. Harkness, the author of another very fine Greek grammar, in his letter to R. T.

Matthews, Feb. 24, 1876, says: "In my opinion eis in Acts 2:38, denotes purpose, and may be rendered in order to, or for the purpose of receiving, or, as in our English version, for. Eis aphesin harmartion suggests the motive or object contemplated in the action of the two preceding verbs."

4. Hovey, a great Baptist commentator, in his commentary on John, appendix, page 420, says: "' Repent, and be baptized every one of you in [or upon] the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission [or, forgiveness] of your sins" (Acts 2:38, Rev. Ver.). Here repentance and baptism are represented as leading to the forgiveness of sins."

5. Thayer says: I accept the rendering of the Revised Version "unto the remission of your sins," the eis expressing the end aimed at and secured by repentance and baptism, just previously enjoined. Letter to J. W. Shepherd.

6. Willmarth, one of the greatest and most representative men in the Baptist Church of America, in the Baptist Quarterly , July, 1877, pages 304-5. on this disputed question says: "It is feared that if we give to eis its natural and obvious meaning, undue importance will be ascribed to baptism, the atonement will be undervalued and the work of the Holy Spirit disparaged. Especially is it asserted that here is the vital issue between Baptists and Campbellites. We are gravely told that if we render eis in Acts 2:38, in order to, we give up the battle and must forthwith become Campbellites; whereas, if we translate it on account of, or in token of, it will yet be possible for us to remain Baptists. Such methods of interpretation are unworthy of Christian scholars. It is our business, simply and honestly, to ascertain the exact meaning of the inspired originals as the sacred penman intended to convey it to the mind of the contemporary reader. Away with the question, 'What ought Peter to have said in the interest of orthodoxy? 'The real question is, 'What did Peter say, what did he mean when he spoke on the day of Pentecost under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? '"But having entered this caveat, as a lawyer might say, it may do no harm to show that dogmatic dangers here exist only in imagination. The natural and obvious interpretation can not give undue importance to baptism, for baptism is here united with repentance and faith. It can not undervalue the atonement, for baptism is one resting upon and deriving all its value from the name of the Lamb of God, and this is distinctly understood by the person baptized who submits to the rite as a believer in that name. It can not disparage the work of the Spirit, since he alone effectually calls men to repentance and faith, and it is by (Greek, en ' in , with the influence of) one Spirit that we are all baptized into one body; ie ., the Spirit leads the penitent sinner to baptism and blesses the rite. And as to Campbellism, that specter which haunts many good men and terrifies them into a good deal of bad interpretation, shall we gain anything by maintaining a false translation and allowing the Campbellites to be champions of the true, with the world's scholarship on their side, as against us? Whoever carries the weight of our controversy with the Campbellites upon the eis will break through'there is no footing there for the evolutions of the theological skater. Shall we never learn that truth has nothing to fear from a true interpretation of any part of God's word, and nothing to gain from a false one?

The truth will suffer nothing by giving to eis its true signification. When Campbellites translate it "in order to," in Acts 2:38, they translate correctly. Is a translation false because Campbellites indorse it?

I have given you the scholarship of the world on this question. I challenge the gentleman to meet me on it. I have the Bible on my side; I have the scholarship of the world on my side. I challenge him to produce you the testimony from one man living today who will risk his reputation as a scholar to say that that phrase means anything else besides what those scholars say it does. I have shown you at this time what they say.

But I proceed with the Scriptural argument. In John 3:5, we find Nicodemus was in conversation with Jesus; and among other things, Jesus answered: "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God"'showing that it was the condition of entering into the kingdom of God.

Dr. J. R. Graves, one of the greatest Baptist scholars of his day, said as to "born of water," that "no person ever understood anything else of it besides [HG251] baptism until Alexander Campbell frightened them away by an interpretation that is sustained by the consensus of all scholars of all denominations in all ages."

In the ninth and twenty-second chapters of Acts, we read where the Lord appeared to Saul of Tarsus to make an apostle of him, and he fell down before the Lord, and said, "Lord, what wilt thou have me do?" And the Lord said unto him, "Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee what thou must do. "Not what he could do if he wanted to, but what he must do. He came to Damascus, and the Lord sent Ananias unto him, and Ananias found him, a praying, penitent believer, yet unsaved, and he said to him (verse 16): "And now why tarriest thou?

Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

I want to ask Elder Russell, Does he teach the people to arise and be baptized and wash away their sins, calling on the name of the Lord, as Ananias did to Saul of Tarsus?

Acts 8:35-39:" Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and. preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still; and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip that the eunuch saw him no more; and he went on his way rejoicing."

He "went down into the water ;" then he was baptized , and they "came up out of the water." And where does God place the remission of sins? In Exo. 20:24, God said: "In all places where I record my name I will come unto thee and I will bless thee." In Old Testament times God recorded his name in the temple in the city of Jerusalem, and required his people to come there and worship; if they could not, they were to pray with their faces turned toward Jerusalem; but where did God record his name in New Testament times? (Matt. 18:18-20.) Jesus Christ by all the authority of heaven and earth recorded the name of God, of Jesus, and of the Holy Spirit, in baptism. No wonder, then, Peter said, guided by the Spirit of God, to the Pentecostians to repent and to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, for when you are baptized you come into the awfully sublime names of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and God said in all places where he records his name, there he will come to the people, and there he will bless them.

Gal. 3:26-27:" For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus." How did they become children of God by faith? "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." But we must come to the blessing of the blood of Christ. How do we get this. Eph. 1:7:" In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace." #Col 1:13-14:" Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son, in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins."

How do we get into Christ P Paul says: "We are baptized into Christ." But suppose a person rejects baptism, will he be saved? Luke 7:29-30:" And all the people that heard him, and the publicans justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. But the' Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him."


With some of my opponent's presentations just set forth I can heartily concur. I agree that baptism is a divine institution; that it was taught by our Lord and his apostles, and practiced by the early church. I agree that nothing in the Bible indicates that either sprinkling or pouring constitute baptism. I agree that the Greek word baptizo has in it the thought of submergence, burial. I agree, further, that this ordinance was never intended nor commanded for impenitent sinners, but only for those professedly lovers of God and of his righteousness. But otherwise I can not concur with Brother White and the large and intelligent body of people his utterances represent, styled "Christians" and "Disciples" renames which I very much admire and claim also for myself and for all true followers of our Lord. And here let me remark that while Elder White is said to belong to the "radical wing" of his denomination, as distinguished from the "progressive wing," the difference between these wings is not along doctrinal lines, but chiefly in respect to the use of musical instruments in divine worship. I am sure that Elder White's position on the topic of this evening is the one held by both the "wings" and considered the fundamental tenet of their church since the days of its separate establishment by Elder Alexander Campbell, a half century ago.

I take this opportunity to assure my opponent and his coadjutors of both "wings" that what I am about to say in the negative must not be understood to signify personal antagonism. On the contrary, many of them I number among my warm personal friends, and as a [HG252] denomination I specially appreciate the evident endeavor to stick closely to the Bible and their repudiation of traditions and titles of men. I ask them to remember that I concede them to be honest and conscientious in their view of baptism; that I concede that many of the views of Christendom respecting baptism and other doctrines were in a horrible condition of disorder during the "dark ages," and that reformation along these lines could only be expected to come gradually, and that their practice of water immersion was one of the advance steps away from the error of infant sprinkling. But we have approached a half century nearer to the "perfect day," and more of the shadows and clouds of ignorance are passing, and the true light upon God's word, the proper understanding of the Bible, should be more apparent to us'especially as we are living in the very dawning of the millennial morning, when all of the Lord's true people are awakening. That which is perfect has not yet come, but to the wise virgins who have been wakened by the Master's knock and the message, "Behold the bridegroom," and who are trimming their lamps, examining the word of God carefully, and who have oil in their vessels, the Holy Spirit in their hearts, now is the time to obtain clearer views on baptism, as well as on other Bible subjects.

Raised a Presbyterian, sprinkled in infancy and with all my early prejudices in its favor and its arguments in my mind, I had my own. experiences, too, along the lines of getting free from the errors of the past. I therefore know how to sympathize with others who have more or less error to unlearn and truth to appreciate more clearly. I forewarn, however, that the tests that come upon us to prove our loyalty to the Lord and to the truth frequently come upon lines upon which we had supposed ourselves to be most thoroughly fixed. Nevertheless, this is the character of the tests which the Lord permits to come to those who are his.

If we love sect or party, theory or creed, more than we love the Lord and the truth, we are unworthy, and can not continue to be counted as his disciples, but as the disciples of error. I shall never forget the look and tone of a Baptist minister who had read but the first volume of "Millennial Dawn," which only indirectly refers to baptism. He remarked: "Well, Brother Russell, I see that you agree with us on baptism, and I am glad of it." I answered, "Partly, brother." With a look of consternation and distressed voice he said: "What! Are we not right in that, either?" I realized at once that his hardest test in respect to faithfulness to the Lord would be along the lines of the strongest peculiarity of his creed'baptism. And similarly I realize that the truth of God's word respecting baptism will be a special trial or test to Elder White and the Christian denomination which he represents; for his name, I understand, is published in the printed lists of ministers of both wings of the Christian or Disciple Church. But, notwithstanding my sympathy for them and my desire not to hurt their feelings, it is my duty to God, to the truth, to my opponent and the denomination which he represents in both wings, to my auditors this evening, and to whomsoever the Lord may send my message, to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth on this subject, whose importance is recognized by all Christendom, and very particularly by my opponent and his church fellowship.

Elder White has already set forth something respecting the history of baptism and general views on the subject. I call your attention to some points that he has not covered. He did not bring to your attention the fact that he and his denomination are in accord with the great mass of Christians in respect to the object and necessity of baptism. Catholics also believe in baptism for the remission of sins, and history tells us that in the third century they practiced immersion, and this accounts for the fact that the ruins of the great churches at that time show large baptisteries connected with them The doctrine gained such emphasis under the teaching of one of the so-called "fathers" that it led to infant baptism for the remission of sins. With greater consistency than our Disciple or "Christian" brethren, Catholics acknowledge "original sin," that we are all "born in sin, shapen in iniquity," hence they say "our infants need to he baptized for the remission of sins." As a matter of fact, history tells us that it became very popular to immerse infants. Subsequently the Roman Catholic Church decided that it had the authority from God to change the institution from immersion to sprinkling, which has since been their vogue. However, the same thought suggests that children, because of "original sin," need baptism for its remission and for the introduction into the household of faith, because, as the Scriptures declare, we are all "born in sin and shapen in iniquity, in sin did my mother conceive me" (Psa. 51:5).

The Reformation of the fifteenth century brought with it the custom of infant sprinkling which had prevailed for centuries among their forefathers. They had become so accustomed to it that it did not occur to them to look to the Scriptures on the subject. They had been taught that baptism in this age corresponds to circumcision practiced upon children during the Jewish age; a gross mistake which should be readily detected by the fact that only the males were circumcised under the law, and their age at the time for the circumcision was clearly stated; whereas Christian baptism, on the contrary, is never referred to in the [HG253] Scriptures as for infants, but always for believers. Nor is this fact entirely overlooked either by Catholics or by Protestants, for it is the custom with Lutherans and Episcopalians, as well as with the Catholics, to have "godfathers" and "godmothers" to undertake for the unbelieving infants and to guarantee to God and man that they shall he believers when they grow up, and thus to apparently harmonize the incorrect practice of infant baptism with the direction of the Word'" believe and be baptized." As an evidence of how strict are Catholics on this subject, we note that although that denomination carefully holds every authority and prerogative in the hands of the clergy, it makes an exception in the baptism of infants if there is danger of death of the infant before the priest arrives.

In such an event anybody, good or bad, is permitted to sprinkle a few drops of water in the name of the Trinity to preserve the infant from hell. Some Protestants, indeed, do not carry this thought so far; their intelligence rebels.

Nevertheless, there is a lurking fear if the child be ill and in danger of death without baptism. More than this, the Catholics have a special arrangement by which if a doctor finds at the time of the birth of a child that it can not be delivered alive, a special baptism in utero is provided.

Such ignorance of God and his gracious arrangements for his creatures is pitiable, indeed. Nevertheless, through the gross superstitions we are glad to note the sympathy which would endeavor to shield the little infant from the supposedly malevolent God and his pernicious arrangements for its torture.

I was shocked on Tuesday evening, when my opponent, introducing Proposition 3, declared that he had pleasure in affirming that the Scriptures teach that the "punishment of the wicked will consist of conscious, painful suffering eternal in duration." Apparently he has pleasure this evening in insisting that immersion in water is necessary for the remission of sins, although the gentleman's argument shows that this will mean eternal torment for 999 out of every 1,000 of God's creatures. I looked into his face to see whether or not it looked so hard as that, and it seemed to me that it did not; that the gentleman was allowing his theory to dominate his tongue, giving his heart an anesthetic. And yet reflect that such has been the power of false doctrine all through the past. When, centuries ago, our forefathers burned one another at the stake, or plucked out each other's tongues by the root, they said: "The Lord be glorified. According to our theory, God is going to roast and fry and torture these people who have different opinions from ours, throughout all eternity, and we will copy our conception of God and have some of his pleasure in tormenting them now."

Undoubtedly, dear friends, false doctrines have made men a great deal worse than they would be without them naturally. Things have been done in the name of religion that the perpetrators would otherwise have shunned and even rebelled against. So I take it that Brother White and many others today would have far more of the love of God shed abroad in their hearts if they could get rid entirely of some of their errors of doctrine, their misunderstanding of the divine word and character. It is since the doctrines of the dark ages have ceased to be promulgated, since people have come to be ashamed of them, that we find a larger measure of benevolence and courtesy among civilized peoples. But, dear friends, if the mere abandonment of these false doctrines has worked a blessing, what would not the promulgation of the true doctrine of Christ's work among men in the way of uplift of heart and head and character?

Let not my point be misunderstood. It is this: The doctrine of the Christian denomination, as voiced through its religious press and books, and as represented this evening by my opponent, tells us practically (though he does not have the courage to use the words) that all heathendom is condemned to eternal torture, and that nearly all of Christendom is in a similar condition; that Roman Catholics, Episcopalians, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, are all, or nearly all, bound to go to hell, to eternal torment. Why? How? Because they have not been immersed in water, and because our brother tells us, in harmony with his affirmation of this evening's topic, that baptism is for the remission of sins'which means, beyond a question, that sins can not be remitted without baptism. If, therefore, Episcopalians, for instance, have not been immersed, according to my opinion, they are yet in their sins, and the penalty of their sin is yet against them.

And he has told us repeatedly during these debates that his conception of the penalty for sin is eternal torture. And so all others not immersed for the remission of their sins. This is hard to swallow, and we shall show it is unscriptural.

Practically the same is the view of our Baptist friends, for, although they agree with us that baptism is not "for the remission of sins," they claim that water baptism is the door into the church, and they claim that the church alone will be saved and go to heaven, and they claim, further, that all who do not come into the.

church through the door are unsaved; and they claim, further, that the penalty of God against all the unsaved is eternal torment.

The Baptist minister to whom I referred a few moments ago as saying, 'What f Are we not right on baptism, either?" objected when I brought this matter [HG254] to his attention, that Baptist doctrine condemned all not immersed in water as being outside of the pale of the church of Christ, and, therefore, outside the pale of salvation and inside the limits of damnation and eternal torment, according to general Baptist doctrine. He said: "Oh, Brother Russell, we do not preach that." I said: "No, my brother, you do not preach it, because you know that it would bring down upon you the wrath of the other denominations like a thousand of brick. But it is your theory. You, can not deny that." He attempted to dodge the question by saying: "Well, what are you going to do with the Scripture that says, 'He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned'?" I have every reason to believe that Elder White and the school of thought he represents would answer me similarly, and my reply to this is what it was to that Baptist minister, namely: "I am examining what you believe now, and attempting to show up its weaknesses and faults. After I have done that, I will produce to you what the Scriptures say on the subject of baptism, and you will find it reasonable, logical and satisfactory, to both heart and head."

I fear I shall greatly shock my Disciple friends and my opponents when I now declare that the baptism which they teach and practice is not only not so exclusive as they had supposed, so that all others who do not practice it will go to eternal torment, but, on the other hand, that they are not practicing the baptism which the Lord enjoined. My present effort is to show my opponent and others that baptism for the remission of sins was John's baptism, and not Christ's baptism. In a word, those clear friends, while seeking to hold fast to the Scriptures and to be guided by their expression, have unconsciously fallen into a serious error through not discerning the dispensational changes that came when the favor to the Jewish nation ended at the death of Christ, and when a new dispensation, a new age under new conditions, was then ushered in.

The baptism of John, the baptism to which our dear friends so frequently refer, was never meant for the Christian age. John, as our Lord declares, was the last of the prophets, and was sent to the Jewish people and preached to them alone, and his message would not have been appropriate to any others.

Let us review the situation. The Jews did not practice baptism. The whole nation was recognized as baptized into Moses in the sea and in the cloud. John's mission in the end of their age was to prepare for Messiah, to, arouse the people to thought on the subject, to Icad them to a renouncement of their sins against the law, and to a reformation of life. He did not go to sinners, in the ordinary sense of that term, those outside the pale of divine influence, but he appealed to the sinner class, the renegade class, of the Jews, "publicans and sinners," who, although baptized unto Moses in the sea and in the cloud, and children of the promises, and related to God through that law covenant, had been living carelessly.

John's announcement was, "The kingdom of heaven is at hand; believe the good news and repent," and get ready for it; for if you do not get ready you can have no share as a member of that kingdom for which our whole nation has been waiting for centuries. Those of you who acknowledge that you have been living in neglect of the law of Moses should now repent of the same and come back into harmony with that law, and should show your repentance and reformation by a washing away of your sins'a cleansing of yourselves.

Numbers of the Jews were influenced by John's preaching, and were baptized'not the "Israelites indeed," but those who conceded that they had been living in open sin. Thus we have no record that John himself was ever baptized, nor that his disciples were baptized. When Jesus went to him for baptism John at first declined, declaring that he had no sins, and that if either of the two needed to confess sin and to profess a washing away of sin, it would be John himself rather than the Master. It was after Jesus had assured him that His baptism meant something different that he would not then explain, that John performed the service for him.

This baptism of John was not appropriate to any but Jews. Gentiles could not repent or come back again into harmony with Moses' law, because Gentiles were never under the law of Moses, but were counted as aliens, strangers and foreigners, without hope and without God in the world. (Eph. 2:12.) We remember that the first Gentile convert was Cornelius, and that his baptism was three years after our Lord's death, and his baptism was not John's baptism, but of a different kind, as we shall show presently.

As illustrating what I have just said, namely, that the baptism practiced by the Christian denomination is John's baptism and not Christ's baptism, and that there is quite a distinction between the two, which our dear friends have not recognized, I call your attention to the record of Acts 19:1-7, where we are informed that a certain Jew, named Apollos, had made converts amongst the Ephesians, twelve in number, and that when St. Paul was passing through Ephesus he became acquainted with these, but noted that they were deficient as respects the evidences of their discipleship. The evidence of discipleship at that time consisted in miraculous "gifts" of the Spirit, as, later and since, the evidence of discipleship has been the possession and manifestation of the "fruits of the Spirit"'love, joy, [HG255] peace, etc.

The apostle inquired respecting their deficiency and said, "Unto what, then, were ye baptized?" And they said, 'Unto John's baptism." Then said Paul, "John verily baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying unto the people that they should believe upon him which should come after him; that is, Christ Jesus. When they heard this they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." I quote this as evidencing the fact that there is a decided difference between John's baptism of repentance and Christ's baptism.

The various Scriptures which my opponent has quoted as proving the necessity for repentance and washing away of sins, etc., we agree with fully, but we call to his attention the fact that all these persons who thus "washed away their sins," and practiced baptism for the "remission of sins," were Jews who were already baptized into Moses "in the sea and in the cloud," who were already children of God and heirs of the covenants and promises, and their washing away of their sins meant their coming near again to God, and into closer touch with all the promises and the blessings thereof.

Never is it said of any Gentile that he was baptized unto repentance and remission of sins, that he got back into Moses and in accord with the law. On the contrary, the apostle shows that we and all spiritual Israelites coming from among the Gentiles, come into Christ in a different way from that in which the Jews became related to him. I call your attention to the apostle's argument in Rom. 11:17-24, where he uses an olive-tree as a symbol or picture. He tells us that that olive-tree was primarily the Jewish nation; that its root was the Abrahamic promise; its branches were the individual Jews. It was to those branches that John preached the baptism of repentance. Many of them were defiled, living in sin, and he urged them to repent and be washed, cleansed; that otherwise they would be broken off.

And so it was when Messiah was manifest; the prepared ones, Israelites indeed, in whom was no guile, were ready for him, received him and he received them, and they continued to be branches of that olive, tree.

But the great mass of the branches, as the apostle goes on to explain, were broken off because they did not receive our Lord, because they were not in the right condition of heart, not "Israelites indeed, without guile."

In the harvest time of the Jewish age that tree, that nation, was transferred from Moses to Christ, and those branches which were permitted to remain were thenceforth branches or members of Christ, and did not need to be baptized into Christ. Or, according to this figure, they did not need to be engrafted into the tree, for they were in it already, and merely the new name came to them, the name of Christ as instead of Moses'Christ, the antitypical Moses. And the other branches were all broken off from relationship with this antitypical Moses, Christ, whom the tree now represented.

It is into that tree that you and I and all Christians of this gospel age are invited to be baptized, or, in this figure, engrafted. The apostle explains this, and says that by nature we were wild olives, and had no part or lot in this tree, but that God in great mercy has permitted us to be endrafted, to be united to our Lord, and with him, and with those faithful Israelites of the Jewish nation, we are permitted now to have the blessing that comes from the root of this tree, the Abrahamic promise.

In other words, we are the children of Abraham, or, as in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, we belong to the Lazarus class, the little flock, who have come to be inheritors of the blessing of God, provided through him as the father of the faithful.

I trust, dear friends, that this, the apostle's illustration, helps us to grasp the fact that a great change of dispensation occurred at the time of our Lord's first advent.

But all of the Jews were not broken off at once, and hence, wherever the apostles went preaching the gospel throughout Galatia, etc., they went to the Jews first, saying, "That is was necessary that the gospel should be first preached to you, but seeing ye cast it from you, lo, we turn to the Gentiles."

I feel confident that Brother White will not claim that we are Jews or descendants of Jews; but even if we were, having been once broken off from that olive-tree, as all Jews were with the ending of their harvest time in A. D. 70, it follows that there would be no way for us, even if we were Jews, to now enter into relationship with Christ except by being re-engrafted, or, according to the other expression, "baptized into Christ."

My dear brother remarked in connection with his discourse on this subject, that it is as easy to be right as it is to be wrong. Under some circumstances, dear friends, that might be true, but not under all circumstances. Does it not seem to be more easy to be wrong than to be right? Look out over the sixteen hundred millions of the world today; are they more right than wrong? How about the heathen with their various classes of error? When we come down to Christendom how is it? We have our Greek Catholics and Roman Catholics, large denominations; then amongst Protestants we have large denominations also. I tell you, dear friends, it does not seem to be as easy to be right as it is to be wrong. The wrong seems to have something or other pushing it all the time, [HG256] does it not? The wrong has been getting along splendidly all the way down, has it not? It is a fact and what is the reason? The Scriptures tell Us why. The apostle tells us that we wrestle not with flesh and blood, but with wicked spirits in high positions. What does he mean? tie means to say that your adversary, the devil, and my adversary, the devil, is busy continually trying to get us confused, to bring in false doctrines; and, as I said before during these debates, he is the author of that first great lie, which has been the foundation of all the after disaster, theological, that has come upon the world. When our God said "Ye shall surely die" is the penalty of sin, Satan promptly answered, "Ye shall not surely die." And he has succeeded, you see, dear friends, in making all the heathen believe his way. Some of these heathen will say, "Yes, we believe when we die we go over the river Styx." But they do not know where the river Styx is. But they go over that. There is somehow or other a transmigration of souls, they say; "we do not know whether we will be an ant, or a toad, or an elephant in the next life," and therefore they are afraid to walk on the ground for fear they may tramp on some poor ant, which might be a relative of theirs, not that they have so much sympathy for the ants, but they are afraid some day, through transmigration of souls, they might become ants and somebody might ruthlessly trample on them.

But you see, dear friends, that all of these errors of the heathen are traceable directly to this original lie of Satan. Now, then, it is not as easy to be right as to be wrong. It is very much easier to be wrong. Satan and all the demons are assisting, and the work of them all over the world is manifest. The apostles warned us, saying, "We are not ignorant of his devices. We know how he works. We see the operation of Satan all around." And now, dear friends, when I charge that Satan has had a great deal to do with all of our Christian religion, I am not saying a word unkind about any particular Christian.

The apostle says that Satan is the god of this world, who blinds the minds of all them that believe not. Some of us are more blinded and some of us are less blinded; some of us are getting our eyes opened. You remember, the apostle had that same thought, too, for in addressing the church on one occasion he says: "I pray God for you" (for the church) "that the eyes of your understanding opening" (that is, continuing to open), "that the eyes of your understanding continuing to open, ye may be able to comprehend with all saints the length and breadth, height and depth, and to know the love of God, which passeth all understanding." It is the love of God, dear friends, that Satan tries to keep hidden from our eyes. He would have us think of God as the greatest of all demons; he would try to make us misunderstand every teaching of the Divine Word, that we might think this was the record and we might 'be more thoroughly deluded. Now I am calling on you to wake up. It is time that we were examining the word of God to see that we have a God who is infinite in wisdom, love, justice and in power; that we come to an understanding of his truth. It is time that we begin to find out that in the early part of this Christian dispensation, when the apostles had fallen asleep, as Jesus said, there came in a great flood of error. You remember the parable of the wheat and the tares: He said that God sowed the good seed, and afterward Satan sowed the evil seed'that is, the seed of error'until the whole field changed practically to be a tare field. And he tells us that at the end of this age there will be a harvest time'a separating time'separating the wheat from the tares, the truth from the error; and it is for you and for me to see that we are trying to get in harmony with the truth. And he tells us that when the wheat shall be gathered it will be gathered to the heavenly kingdom. "Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father." "He that hath an ear to hear let him hear" is what our Lord, says. Alas! we have not all got ears to hear; we have not all got eyes to see; but we should be praying and seeking to have our eyes opened and our ears opened, that we may understand the mystery of our God.


Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: I assure my distinguished opponent that he should not have made any apologies for being afraid of offending me or my brethren, or in any way hurting us, because he most certainly never touched the proposition at issue this evening.

It was amusing indeed, to me, to see him, and to hear him, read a speech that he had prepared in answer to another before he had heard that other's speech. He reminds me of a lawyer, not our honorable Chairman, how-ever, that prepared his speech to argue in a certain case; he had an idea that the evidence would be given a certain way; but the evidence did not turn out as he expected, and he had his speech prepared, and had to make it anyway; it was all he had. So Brother Russell had his speech written out; it was all he had, it did not fit the case, but he had to read it anyway. But the most amusing part of it all was that he thought that he knew just about how much he could say in reading that little piece like a school-boy or schoolgirl; but it gave out, [HG257] he got through about five minutes before his time was out, and then he just had to wiggle around, scatter around to think of something to say the best way he could after he got through reading his "piece." You better write your speech a little longer, Elder, next time!

Here is Volume V1 of "Millennial Dawn." In an article on "the baptism of the new creation" I read this speech this afternoon that he wrote several years ago.

The most that he said in that speech I read about three hours ago, and had it all about by heart; was satisfied he would say it here this evening, and consequently I had but little trouble in keeping up with him. He said in the beginning of his speech that I belonged to the "radical wing of the church" and not the "progressive wing." I am glad, for his benefit in particular and for the benefit of this audience in general, to say that I do not belong to either "wing" of it. I belong to the thing itself; I belong to the church that we read about in the Bible'not to either wing of it. The church of God has no wings.

He spoke at some length, it occurred to me, to try to create sympathy because there are so few people in the world that are baptized. We are not discussing about whether there are many people in the world that are baptized or not, but this proposition says, "the Scriptures teach that baptism is for, or in order to, the remission of sins." I am simply presenting to you what the word of God says; I have shown you what the word of God teaches; I have maintained my proposition.

He has not shown that my arguments are untrue, but he tries to go afar off and get up a little sympathy because there are so many people that are not baptized. Such teaching as he is giving is more calculated to keep people from obeying the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ than to induce them to accept it. The idea is, put the matter off, and after awhile you will have a thousand years' trial; it will be easier, it will be better, than it is at the present time. The people will begin to say, "Well, if that be true, let us just put it off until that time." But he referred to the Lutherans, and the Methodists, and the Episcopalians, and the Presbyterians, and the Baptists, and said that if this proposition be true, that the greater part of them would be damned in eternal torment. I never saw a man in my life that dreads torment as bad as he does. There is an old proverb that says "a burned child dreads the fire." He has been tormented since last Sunday evening; he has had torment beforehand for several months looking forward unto this time, and it is hurting him, and he does not want anybody else tormented. But as he has brought up about the Methodists and Presbyterians, and many others, I want to read to you what he says in "Millennial Dawn," Volume V1, page 430, about that: "We must include our Baptist friends, our Disciple friends, our Presbyterians, Methodists and Lutherans, Episcopal and Roman Catholic friends, as being part of the one general Christendom, otherwise in the Scriptures termed Babylon." I understand that the Bible teaches that people who will not come out of Babylon will be cast off after awhile into the dark world of everlasting woe and misery. Thus you see that according to Elder Russell's theory, the last one of the various denominations will be lost; and yet, while he is in debate, he is trying to court their sympathy.

Thus Elder Russell himself, in his own writings, teaches that you Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists and Episcopalians, all outside of the kingdom of God'lost, lost! Why does he not do it here in this debate? He is debating now; he was writing a book then. I want to keep it prominently before this audience that the proposition to-night is not the consequences of baptism for the remission of sins, but what do the Scriptures teach on this question. Let us see what the word of God says, and leave the result with God. But he referred us unto the nineteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, the first five verses. "And it carne to pass that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus; and finding certain disciples he said to them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. And he said unto them, Unto what, then, were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people that they should believe on him which should come after him; that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard this they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." What was his point on this? If John's baptism was a different baptism from that authorized by the Lord Jesus Christ, why had not these people heard of the Holy Spirit if Jesus Christ authorized people to be baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, the very soul almost of the proposition that I am defending this evening? John the Baptist baptized people before Jesus Christ gave this great commission; consequently John did not baptize in the name of Jesus Christ. But when Jesus Christ gave this commission, then that commission came into force, and for people to be baptized acceptably in the sight of God, they had to be baptized in the name of the Lord, or, as Jesus puts it, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and when Paul taught them this they were baptized in the name of the Lord. But he tells us it is not the same, I want to show you that it is exactly the [HG258] same in design (Luke 3:3): John "came into all the country about Jordan, preaching baptism of repentance for the remission of sins." (Acts 2:35.) The Spirit of God guided the apostle Peter to say, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins." God certainly looked down the stream of time and anticipated that there would be somebody who would love the praise of men more than that of God, and would take the false position that the baptism authorized by Jesus Christ was a different kind from that practiced by John the Baptist. And so he had recorded in the divine volume that John the Baptist baptized people for the remission of silas, and the Spirit of God guided the apostle Peter after the great commission had gone into force to tell the people to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.

We have in the Greek prepositional phrase eis aphesin hamartion , the same thing in Greek and the same thing in English. In English it is "for the remission of sins."

I gave you the testimony of the scholarship of the world on this. Why did he not come up to the issue? Just simply because he could not do it. He knows he can not do it, and consequently he has decided that he will wander around on something else that scarcely touches this proposition.

But he tells us that the olive-tree in Rom. 11 represents the Jews, and the Jews did not have to be baptized into Christ. That the Gentiles came in in a different way from that of the Jews. Great men, you know, sometimes differ. Jesus Christ, a great character, on one side, differs very seriously from Eider Russell, a great character on the other side. (John 3:5.) Jesus was talking unto a Jew, Nicodemus, a ruler among the Jews, a great and powerful character among the Jews, who thought about it in one respect just like Elder Russell thinks about it now; that because he was in the Jewish kingdom that he was all right; it did not matter whether he did anything else or not. Jesus read his heart and saw the proud, haughty, pharisaical disposition in him, and, answering, said: "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." He was talking unto a Jew when he made that statement.

Rom. 6:4, I read this statement. Paul says: "Therefore, we"'Paul was a Jew himself and included himself in this statement'" therefore, we are buried with him"'that is, with Christ'" by 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." Paul was a Jew and a Pharisee. and he himself had to be baptized before he could enter into the kingdom of Jesus Christ. And he said to him, "What wilt thou have me to do?" Jesus said, "Arise and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do"'not what you can do if you want to, it is non-essential anyway. God has no non-essentials; God does not talk that way; but he said, "Arise and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do" (Acts 22:16). "And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord." You remember the questions I asked him, Did he ever tell a person to arise and be baptized and wash. away his sins, as Ananias did Saul, and how he utterly failed to say anything about it?

A little further, in reference to the Gentiles coming in in a different way from that of the Jews: Eph. 4:4-6:" There is one body"'if they come in a different way, then they get into different bodies; but Paul says "there is one body and one spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism. One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all." I insist that the Spirit of God will not lead me to do one thing and Elder Russell another thing when the two things we are doing are diametrically opposed unto each other.

There is unity, there is oneness in the Spirit of God, and two people can not differ and both be right. People may differ and both be wrong, but the very fact that the people differ shows that they are wrong. In reference to its being just as easy to be right as it is to be wrong, I insist that it is. And the reason that people are not right is just simply because they are being led off by a lot of false teachings. "Oh, the Bible can not be understood, it is only addressed to the little flock; it does not go unto the great majority of the human family. God has closed our eyes and stopped our ears that we can not hear." Jesus Christ said that the people had "closed their eyes and stopped their ears and would not hear." Jesus Christ said: "Ye will not come unto me that ye might have life." He did not say that you can not come, but he said, "Ye will not come that ye might have life." Just such teaching as you have listened to in the speech that my honorable opponent made awhile ago is calculated to lead people into darkness rather than to light; is calculated to lead them away from the simplicity of the gospel of Jesus Christ instead of bringing them back into the word of God, where people can see alike, and where they can teach and practice the things there are in the word of the living God.

But furthermore, in reference to the Jews and Gentiles coming in in a different way, God did not say that; Paul did not say that; Jesus Christ did not say it. Who did say it? Elder Russell said it'he is preaching the gospel differently from that recorded in the word of God. And let us see what will be the result. Gal. 1:8-9, [HG259] Paul says: "But though we" (that is, we, the apostles) "or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again: If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." He is preaching another gospel that is not authorized in the word of God.

Furthermore, in reference to the Gentiles having come in in a different way from that of the Jews, he says there is a difference. Rom. 10:12, Paul, guided by the Spirit of God, says: "For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek.

And the Greek includes the Gentile, "for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him"'not merely the little flock, but all that call upon him. God's book says there is no difference between the Jew and the Gentile; Elder Russell says there is a difference'that they have come into the kingdom of God in a different way. Now, which will you take?

Then, a little further on the question of baptism. 1 Pet. 3:20-21, in speaking of the disobedience of the wicked people, just before the flood, Peter says: "Which some time were disobedient when once the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water." That is a type of our real salvation in Christ. "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Those people over there had an idea that baptism was for washing the dirt off the body, and they never would have had that idea on earth had baptism not been performed wholly in that age by immersion. So they give us that idea, and Peter says the like figure, whereunto even baptism doth also now save us, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

He said many things, and there were a great many things that he said in his speech that I could agree with certainly, but the question is, he did not take up the Scriptural and scholarly and logical arguments that I presented in my investigation and show that they did not teach the things that I showed you from the word of God that they did teach, so I want to call your attention to them. He could not touch them. He could not do anything with them. Now, I am going to impress this thing on the minds of this audience.

In giving the great commission unto the disciples that they should go to the world (Mark 16:15-16.) Jesus Christ said unto his disciples: "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." He made it world-wide; every one of them in all the world; everywhere the gospel had to be preached, and he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned.

But I am aware of the fact that Elder Russell teaches that the last part of the sixteenth chapter of Mark is spurious, and I believe he intends to bring that up this evening at a time when I have no reply; so I will anticipate him by saying that this preaching such as he does on that line is more inclined to make infidels than Christians. He says the scholarship of the world says that the last part of the sixteenth chapter of Mark is an interpolation. I deny it. The scholarship of the world says no such thing.

Here is the American Revised Version, standard edition, that does not put it in as an interpolation; here is the Emphatic Diaglott that does not put it in as an interpolation; here is the Critical Greek and English Testament that does not put it in as an interpolation; here is the revision of 1881 that does not put it in as an interpolation; here are the Living Oracles that do not put it in as an interpolation.

[Elder White walks to Pastor Russell's table and lays down the stack of books above referred to.] Even Elder Russell appreciates the truth of my statement, for he actually forgot himself and applauded me on it. Now if he wants to come to the scholarship of the world on that question, let him come. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved," says the Lord Jesus Christ. Now, what about these people that will not be baptized? That is not what we are discussing at this particular time, but the proposition that says the Scriptures teach that baptism to a penitent believer is for, or in order to, the remission of sins. (Acts 2:38.) Peter said that people who believed the gospel, believed on Jesus Christ and asked what to do. He said to repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. And I piled up more lexicons upon him almost than he could pack, showing this was exactly what I said, and the scholarship of the world is on my side, and he dared not touch it. I maintain that my proposition stands and he can not meet it, and this audience knows that he can not meet it. But he went off to something else. Matt. 26:28: Jesus Christ shed his blood "for the remission of sins." The same prepositional phrase in Greek and English in the passage of Scripture given by Jesus Christ, and as used by the apostle Peter in Acts 2:38, they are exactly the same thing. John 3:5, where Jesus said: "Except a man be born of the water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." I showed from the best scholarship in the world that that had reference to [HG260] people being baptized, and he did not touch it. He did not say one solitary word about it. I have showed you two or three times that the Lord told Saul to go to the city and it should be told him what he must do, and the Lord sent Ananias to him, and Ananias found him a believing, praying penitent, yet unsaved, and Ananias said to him: "Now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling upon the name of the Lord." And he did that and went at once to preaching Christ.

And when I stand before you and preach to you the same things that the apostles preached, when I practice the same things that the apostles practiced, I know that I am right and can not be mistaken. When he presents his theory that is not authorized in the word of God, I know from the word of God that he is wrong, that he is mistaken; and with the hope that I may benefit him, and if not him, others, I am thus earnestly presenting the word of the living God, because I know that I am right on this question. The proposition is that the Scriptures teach these certain things, not the sympathy of the heathen or the sympathy of the various denominations who teach differently. The great question is not what are they doing, but what does the word of God say on these great things and these important questions? If I was going to discuss men, if I was going to discuss denominations, I could have found plenty of them in Texas without coming to the great city of Cincinnati; but I came here not to discuss men, not to discuss denominations, but to measure what I understand to be the false doctrine on the other side, by the word of the living God. We are here measuring great principles by the word of the living God, and I thank God that he is blessing me as an instrument in his hands to stand in defense of this great Scriptural question on the design of baptism'that infidels, that sectarians, and all character of persons on earth, from the lowest even to the highest, Elder Russell himself, having shot their fiery darts of skepticism against the Scriptural doctrines, but yet they stand, and will be standing when Jesus Christ comes back into this earth to reward his servants. But do you ask me what about people who reject baptism? I know about it just exactly what God's book says about it. Luke 7:29-30:" And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John, but the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against there lyes, being not baptized of him." That is what God's book says about it. God's book teaches us that. Pharisees and lawyers would include anybody else that would do the same'who reject baptism, reject the counsel of God against themselves. I am pleading with you to accept the counsel of God. I am pleading with you to do what God says. I am aware of the fact that something else is more popular, but I am not seeking popularity. I did not come to Cincinnati to please the people of Cincinnati, but I came to Cincinnati to preach the word of the living God unto you, and you are aware of the fact that I am doing it, and you are aware of the fact that it is not being met in the person of my distinguished and honorable opponent, who has a world-wide reputation for scholarship. He put so much of his scholarship in his books when he was not meeting a man in debate, why does he not meet me on the scholarship now? I would have been glad to meet him. I am just anxious to meet him on this scholarship question, showing the teaching of the word of God on this great question of the design of baptism. Will he come to the issue? Will he try to answer it? No, sir; he will not risk his scholarship on it. He knows I am right, and he knows he is wrong so far as this scholarship question is concerned, and he dare not touch it himself. He dare not touch it. He is afraid of it.

Then I call your attention to Gal. 3:26-27, where Paul says: "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus." How did they become the children of God? By faith in Christ Jesus. "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." What benefit did these people get by being baptized into Christ? We read the two following verses: "There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither bond nor free; there is neither male or female; for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." He shows that this is addressed to both Jews and Gentiles; both are included, by being baptized into Christ, and are heirs according unto the promise God made to Abraham, when we are baptized in Christ. Then I call your attention to Eph. 1:7, that in Christ we "have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins according to the riches of his grace." We come to the blood of Christ by coming into his body. What is the body of Christ? Eph. 1:22-23:" And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all"'the great spiritual body of the Lord Jesus Christ. How do we get into Christ? We receive remission of sins through the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, and Paul teaches us, as already quoted, that we are baptized into Christ'in Christ, where we reach remission of sins, where we become heirs of God and joint-heirs with our Lord Jesus Christ. Sometimes people say: "Oh, well, I do not understand how it is that being baptized has anything to do with a person being saved." It is not so much a question of understanding as it is a question of faith. [HG261] The great question is not so much do you understand it, but do you believe that Jesus Christ told the truth when he said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved"? If you do believe that Jesus Christ told the truth, then why not accept it? I want to say to you that God has given us these promises; has confirmed these promises; if we do these things we shall be saved. He has confirmed them by his oath and they are sealed by the blood of Jesus Christ, written by the Spirit of God, and if Jesus Christ were to come into our midst and shed his blood for us again, and God was to be in our midst and to give us that promise and confirm it by his oath, and it was written out and given us by the Spirit of God that we are saved, it would not be any stronger than it is; for that is exactly the kind of testimony that we have. It is the oath of God, sealed by the blood of Jesus Christ, written out by the Spirit of God, that people are saved when they hear the gospel, believe on Jesus Christ, repent of their sins, are baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, they then become heirs of God and joint-heirs with the Lord Jesus Christ. Let me beg of you, one and all, to accept the gospel of Jesus Christ as taught in the word of the living God; then there will be no further need of any division, or any strife, or any contention, or anything of the kind. If we just simply accept the word of God as it is, there is not need of any division, for there is unity when we come to the word of God. There will never be unity as long as people get up some theory, like my opponent, separate and apart from the word of God, and try to sustain that theory by the word of God.

We should never

, At this point the Moderator called time, and Elder White immediately ceased speaking. At the same instant, Mr. Russell having handed the Chairman some different translations of the Bible which Elder White had given him, and which the Chairman appeared to be about to read, Elder White said: Mr. Chairman, I will be Chairman for a moment. I put that in my speech. It is to go in the record. If there is anything to be said in reply to it, Mr. Russell himself must read it, and count it on his time.

Chairman Bowdle: I was just finding out what it was.

Elder White: I heard him ask you to read it. He has those Bibles there that I handed him, and he can read them himself.

Pastor Russell: I was afraid that my opponent might think I was not reading it right. He seems to think that I read things wrong.


I will read it, but any of you who like can get your Bibles and read it at your leisure. These are the authorities for my statement that the passage in Mark 16:9 to the end of the chapter, is an interpolation. This is the Holy Bible, American standard version. It says: "The two oldest Greek manuscripts and some other authorities omit from verse 9 to the end."

The Emphatic Diaglott says: "From this verse (9), to the end of the chapter, is wanting in the Vatican manuscript and in many other ancient copies."

New Testament, Revised Version, says: "(verse 9 to the end) the two oldest Greek manuscripts and some other authorities omit from verse 9 to the end."

[Applause.] I might remark, dear friends, that our brother was surprised that I knew what he would say. I knew that he did not have anything else to say. [Laugther.] I knew what the doctrines of the Christian denominations are; have known for a long time. Now our brother had Volume V1 of "Millennial Dawn," but he does not know what is in it now, although he read it, he says, this afternoon, three hours ago.

In the brief time at my disposal I do not know that I can better reply to Elder White's strictures than by proceeding to lay before him and you all what I understand to be the Scriptural teaching respecting baptism. First, then, I remind you that the baptism of John is not the baptism that is enjoined upon us, baptism into Christ. I remind you that our Lord's baptism could not have been the baptism unto repentance, which our "Disciple" friends claim; it could not have been the baptism for the remission of sins. That was John's baptism, as is most unequivocally stated in the Scriptures. Of our Lord it is said, "In him was not sin;" "He was holy, harmless, undefiled and separate from sinners." When he came to John the latter refused on this score, and our Lord indicated what he was doing was something distinctly new, but it was not appropriate that he should explain to John, except "Suffer it to be so now." He did not dispute John's argument, but insisted on being baptized.

Incidentally we remark, for the benefit of our Baptist friends, that he was not baptized into the church of Christ, either, for there was no church of Christ as yet.

The church of Christ, "which is his body," was not established until Pentecost.

Besides this, it was eminently proper that the head should precede the body, and that they, the members, should be gathered to him, the head.

Our Lord's baptism, therefore, should be considered the beginning of a new institution in every sense of the word. It represented in symbol the [HG262] consecration he made at that time, as he began his three and a half years of ministry. He consecrated his life'even unto death'yen the death of the cross, and his baptism into water, his burial, there symbolized this laying down, immersion, burial of "the man Christ Jesus, a ransom for all." His raising up from the water symbolized his resurrection from death on the third day after Calvary. In the dying he represented the sacrificed bullock of the Jewish Atonement Day. In the rising from the water he represented the antitypical High Priest, who thenceforth went into the holiest, there to appear in the presence of God for us.

(Heb. 9:24.) Hence, Paul refers to this transaction and quoted as applicable to Jesus the words of the prophet: "Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me.) to do thy will, O my God." (Heb. 10:7-9.) Then said the apostle: "He taketh away the first that he may establish the second." At the time of his baptism, at the beginning of his ministry, began the setting aside'" the first," the typical atonement matters, and the establishment of the "second," the antitypical, himself representing the bullock of the atonement of Leviticus 16. So, then, our Lord's baptism in water was not his real baptism, but merely a symbol or picture of it. His real baptism was into death, and his real raising up was his resurrection.

He was "put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit" (1 Pet. 3:18). Keep this thought in mind while we examine what the Scriptures say respecting the church's baptism.

I call your attention to a passage of Scripture quoted by my opponent'the passage of all passages in the Bible relied upon by Baptists and Disciples as most distinctly setting forth the importance of wafter immersion (Rom. 6:3-5). I will quote it: "Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore, we are buried with him by 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. For, if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection."

From this passage my opponent, and Disciples and Baptists in general, gather the thought that water immersion is all-important, really necessary, to relationship with Christ.

I wish to call your attention, dear friends, to the fact that nothing in this Scripture passage says one word about water baptism. I will proceed to show you that this text, generally supposed by our friends to refer to water baptism, has no reference to it at all, but refers instead to the same kind of a baptism that our Lord had'a baptism into death. You will understand that we are not combating water baptism, for we believe that it is enjoined in the Scripture, as we have already stated, but we recognize it as merely a symbol'a picture of the real baptism'just as our Lord's baptism in the waters of Jordan was not his actual death and resurrection, but a symbol of his death and resurrection. That which he symbolized in water he had already done in his heart, as the prophet declares: "Lo, I come (in the volume it is written,) to do thy will, O my God." His full surrender had already taken place, and during the three and a half years of his earthly ministry he was laying down his life in his preaching, in his journeying and in his healing of the sick, when "virtue" or life went out from him to heal them. And his laying down of his life he completed at Calvary; then his baptism was finished. Note that this is our Lord's own explanation of the matter. Just before his crucifixion he said: "My soul is exceeding sorrowful'even unto death. I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how am I straitened until it be accomplished." It was accomplished the very next day, when, on the cross, our Master cried, "It is finished" (John 19:30). What was finished? His sacrifice was finished, his baptism into death was finished.

Now, my dear friends and brethren, you have before your minds what constituted the baptism of Christ, and see how the water symbol represented it, and I ask you to notice that this is exactly what the apostle says respecting the baptism of the church of Christ, "which is his body," "members in particular." The apostle urges that you and I, and all who would be members of the body of Christ in glory, all who would share with him in his death'must be baptized into his death. Now let me read this passage of Scripture with comments: "Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?" What is it to be baptized into Jesus Christ? Our Disciple friends and our Baptist friends view this as being a water baptism, but, my dear friends, one is baptized in the water every time he takes a bath, and many are baptized into water who are not baptized into Christ, and the text says nothing about water anyway. Surely every one can see that it is one thing to be baptized into water, and another matter entirely to be "baptized into Jesus Christ." The expression "into Jesus Christ" signifies "membership in the body of Christ," which is the church.

Keep before your minds the thought that our Lord Jesus is to be the appointed King of the world, who will shortly take his great power and reign, but meantime, according to the divine plan, a bride-class is to be selected for him from among those that have been redeemed by his precious blood. This same class is elsewhere spoken of as under-priests, brethren, and again as members in particular of the body of Christ. [HG263] Using the figure of "members," the apostle says, "The hand cannot say to the foot, I have no need of thee."

When the whole membership in this body of Christ shall have been gathered out of the world and glorified in the first resurrection, it will never be added to, therefore no further chance of gaining membership in it. Hence the apostle says, "Now is the acceptable time."

Now is the time when God is willing to accept some into membership into this body of Christ; and the terms or conditions upon which he will accept them is that they shall walk in his footsteps, be baptized with his baptism into death. Those who will so do will be accepted as the very elect. Those who fear so to do will fail to be of the very elect, fail to make their calling and election sure. (2 Pet. 1:10.) What we have just stated is what the apostle mentions in the very next sentence; namely, that baptism into Jesus Christ, into membership in the anointed body, is baptism into his death. All such make a consecration unto death, after the same manner that our Lord consecrated his life at the beginning of his ministry. This is urged by the apostle in so many words in this same epistle. Rom. 12:1:" I beseech you, therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service."

In a word, there are two priesthoods'the one a sacrificing priesthood, the other a glorious priesthood. Aaron and his sons, during the Jewish dispensation, typified the sacrificing priesthood, Christ in the flesh and all the under priesthood, Melchisedec typifying the glorified priest, head and body, "a priest were ordained to offer sacrifices, and whoever fails to offer sacrifices is not fulfilling this function of this priestly office. By nature they have nothing to present, being sinners, but our Lord's death being imputed to us, we are counted as justified by faith, and as such we have something to offer in sacrifice; namely, our justified selves. Therefore, says the apostle, I beseech you, brethren, present your bodies, holy and acceptable, your reasonable service. The priesthood of glory is not the Aaronic, but the Melchisedec priesthood, Melchisedec typifying the glorified priest, head and body, "a priest upon his throne." So the Scriptures tell us that our calling as the church, the body of Christ, is to membership in the royal priesthood, and our Lord assures us that those who are faithful in the priesthood of the present time, in their work of sacrifice, as members of his body, who will be accorded a place in the Melchisedec priesthood of glory, the privilege of sitting with him in his throne, they "shall reign with him a thousand years" (Rev. 20:6).

Note the next verse

(4) of Rom. 6:" Therefore, we are buried with him by baptism into death." What does the "therefore" refer to? Answer: To the statement of the preceding verse, that we would want to be immersed into Jesus Christ, into membership in the body of the anointed, not merely the body of humiliation, but specially the body of glory. This is our reason for desiring to be united to Christ by baptism into his death. And all such as will share with him by and by will give evidence in the present life of this great change by the sacrifices of the justified earthly nature in the interest of membership in the spiritual body of Christ. As the apostle proceeds to say: "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." And this new-ness of life, if persisted in, will ultimately mean to us the resurrection change and its perfection of life, its crown of life, which the apostle said shall be granted at our Lord's second coming, not only to him, but to all who are in this proper attitude to love his appearing.

Coming to the next verse, which has seemed to so many to strongly emphasize their position respecting water baptism: "For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall also be in the likeness of his resurrection." How many "Baptists" and "Disciples" have considered this verse a very Gibraltar for their faith! They state that their baptism into water was their "planting" in the likeness of Christ's death, and then reason from this that surely they shall also be in his likeness in the resurrection. But, dear friends, that interpretation is all wrong. That verse has no reference whatever to water baptism, and any who have been deceiving themselves along that line should take it kindly that I awakened them from such delusive hopes.

Think for a moment what it would mean if we applied it to water baptism. It would imply that any one buried into water in the likeness of Christ's death would surely be in his resurrection. That would be a very cheap guarantee to a place in the kingdom and joint-heirship with our Lord'simply water baptism. Surely, dear friends, you know very many who perform the symbol, the water picture of Christ's death, who have never shown any particularly saintly qualities nor manifested as much of the development of the fruits and graces of the Spirit, nor that the love of God was shed abroad in their hearts, nor that they were in any sense of the word of the elect, who are declared to be, in heart at least, copies of God's dear Son. (Rom. 8:29.) Alas, my dear friends, those who hope to get a place in the kingdom, to sit with the Lord in his throne, merely through an immersion in water; those [HG264] who believe that baptism is the door into the church, which is the body of Christ, and the guarantee of a part with him in his millennial reign, will be sadly mistaken. I want to assist in awakening all the wise virgins from the lethargy which misunderstandings of God's word have induced. As the apostle says: "It is high time to awake out of sleep, for now is our salvation nearer than when we first believed." It is getting nearer and nearer every day, whether, as claimed by Brother White, there is a thousand years' millennium in between us and that glorious event, or whether, as I believe and teach, our Lord's manifestation in glory is nigh, even at the door.

Permit me to show you that this verse is in full harmony with the preceding verses, and does not in the remotest degree refer to water immersion, but does, in its every particular, refer to immersion into Christ's death'to our fellowship with Christ in his sufferings of this present time, to the extent that we may also be glorified with him.

This expression, "planted together," is a mistranslation which has caused a considerable amount of the prevalent confusion. It should read thus: "For if we have been united with him in the likeness of his death we shall be also (united with him) in his resurrection." Nor is this my own unsupported translation. You will find it thus rendered in the Revised Version, the translators of which held nothing in common with my interpretation of the passage.

This increased force, meaning, in respect to the thought of baptism, may be startling to some, and I trust that it will be sufficiently startling to lead you to a fresh examination of the whole subject, and to make sure you have the right baptism which the Lord will be pleased to reward with a share in his kingdom and glory and in the likeness of his Son.

I remind you that our Lord with his own lips gave this interpretation to baptism.

Two of his most zealous disciples, James and John, were brought by their mother to Jesus, with the request, "Grant that these, my two sons, may sit, the one on thy right hand and the other on the left, in thy kingdom. But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?" (Matt. 20:20-22). Let us note particularly that our Lord could not have referred here to water baptism, for these two disciples had been with John before our Lord's ministry began, and, again, as Jesus' representatives, they baptized multitudes (John 4:1-2). Oh, no, dear friends; unquestionably the Lord referred to their share in the baptism of death, just as we have already shown you he spoke of his own baptism into death as being not yet accomplished. The symbol was in the past; the actuality was nearly ended, but was not finished until Calvary. So with your baptism and mine into Christ's death, by which we became identified with him and counted as members of his body. It began at the time you made a full consecration of your life with no reservation. It will continue day by day, for, as the apostle says, we are to "die daily" (1 Cor. 15:31). It will finish when you have made a completion of your course with joy and the sacrifices wholly consumed upon the Lord's altar.

In a word, the road to heavenly royalty is through faithfulness to the Lord, to the truth; to the brethren, to the degree of suffering and death. "If we suffer with him we shall also reign with him; if we be dead with him we shall also live with him."

Let us not forget the conditions. It is because the Lord is seeking this little elect company, as the bride of Christ and joint-heir of his Son, that he has invited us, and the necessities of the case make the way a narrow one'so narrow that those who love the world, or father or mother or houses or lands or wife or children more than they love the Lord, will not be counted worthy of him, and those who are ashamed of him and his word of such would he be ashamed.

Hence, as our Lord's faithfulness was tested by his being misunderstood, misrepresented, so it will be with his disciples, for the disciple is not above his Lord. And, again, as the apostle declares, "The world knoweth us not [understands us not, appreciates us not], even as it knew him not."

I remind you again, however, dear friends, that both by our Lord's example and the teachings of the apostles, it is both our privilege and duty to symbolize our consecration to death by a water baptism, in which the administrator represents the Lord. As the candidate gives himself into the hands of the administrator to be buried, and then to be raised, so in our consecration we realize our own insufficiency to either sacrifice ourselves or to bury ourselves in any sense of the word, and we give ourselves and our cause into the hands of our Redeemer, who promises us that he will see to our having the experiences necessary, so long as our hearts are in full consecration to him, and if we are thus faithful unto death he will raise us up at the last day, the millennial day. (John 6:40.) It was thus with the two disciples to whom the Lord spoke: He said: "Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?" Evidently meaning: "Are you willing to take of the cup and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?" They said: "Yea, Lord, we are willing, we are able." And Jesus said unto them: "Ye shall indeed drink of my cup, and be baptized with my baptism, but whether you shall sit on [HG265] the right hand or the left hand is not for me to give. That shall be given to the one who is tested and prepared by my Father." But let us see the point the Lord was guaranteeing: He promised these disciples their seat in the kingdom if they should prove faithful. They wanted to be near their Lord in the kingdom. He told them the conditions on which they could be in the kingdom. They could be in the kingdom by being baptized with his baptism'the baptism he was baptized with'not a baptism for a remission of sins, for, as we have already seen, Jesus had no sins to be washed away. No one, I think, would claim that he had sins to wash away. Therefore, if he referred to water baptism, it could not be thought Jesus should say that they should be baptized with him, because it was a baptism for the remission of sins.

I think it will give great encouragement to us, too, dear friends, when we feel the great importance of this matter; when we see how narrow the w ! y is; when we see how difficult it is; when we see that the Lord says that any one who will be his disciple must be prepared to take up his cross and follow him, or he can not be his disciple.

This would be impossible were it not that the Lord tells us his grace is sufficient for us. He tells us when we present ourselves for baptism we are thus putting ourselves in the Lord's hands. We are laying the matter in his hands. He undertakes to do for us as represented by the administrator in the symbolical water baptism; being buried with him, he buries us and he will raise us up by his own power in the resurrection. What a glorious thing it is, dear friends, that we can indeed put our little all into the hands of our glorious Master, and realize he is sufficient where we are insufficient. But he requires that we shall have the right spirit in the matter; that we shall be full of desire to be baptized in his death, and that those who are not so desiring can not have a share with him in his kingdom.

With this view of the Scriptural teaching on the subject of baptism, that membership in the body of Christ is gained through a full consecration unto death, you will perceive, dear friends, that there may have been, and may be now, some Christian people in or out of the various denominations who have had this, the real baptism into Christ's death, and, therefore, been acceptable to him as members of the church in glory'the Melchisedec priesthood.

You can readily see how there might be many Methodists or Lutherans who had never been immersed in water because of ignorance, through some misunderstanding, perhaps such as we have heard this evening, enough to turn people away from the Bible altogether and all thought of God and all thought of immersion. That is the difficulty with our friends, the Presbyterians and the Methodist denomination. They can not understand preaching of this kind'that if they are not immersed in water they can not get place in the resurrection. We can see how they may have the real baptism of consecration. Such we advise that their ignorance of the symbol has not worked a vitiation of their true baptism, but that so soon as their eyes open to see the proper symbol of death which the Lord has appointed in an immersion in water, the duty and responsibility of obedience will be upon them; and thereafter they shall not expect to make further progress in growth, in grace and knowledge and character-likeness of the Lord, or preparation for the kingdom, except as they shall yield obedience also to the outward form of water baptism. For, if their consecration unto death be genuine, nothing stands in the way of performing the symbol of this after they have realized the symbol to be the will of the Lord and the teaching of his word.

On the other hand, I suggest to all who find themselves deficient in the fruits of the Spirit of love, joy, peace, Christlikeness of character, that they make diligent inquiry within as to whether there is a possibility that theirs was merely the baptism of John and not the baptism into Christ's death. And if they shall so find, my advice would be that they lose no time, but present their bodies living sacrifices to God, holy and acceptable through Christ, and their reasonable service; and that subsequently they symbolize this great transaction and consider that any baptism previously was merely a misunderstood form, of no value whatever.

One Disciple minister said to me some years ago, after hearing my explanation of the Scriptures on this subject, "Brother Russell, I am going to tell you that I have baptized at least two thousand persons in the last twenty years, and I never understood baptism till ten minutes ago." I was glad for him, and I would hope it might be so with some others.

"Not one thing hath failed of all the good things which the Lord your God spake concerning you." Josh. 23:14

"In the smallest and in the greatest affairs of our lives, He has ever watched for our interests.

Every cloud had a golden lining! What, then, shall we render unto the Lord!" R5538 c1, last p c2 top. [HG266] [blank]