Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1877-12-13
Yflistellameuns &eading.
For the Yorkvllle Enquirer.
"BAPTISM OF CHRISTI"

In the last article under the above heading,
is the following remarkable language, which
is worthy to be engraven on the memory OF
every reader of the ENQUIRER, viz: "Chris'
tian baptism ia New Testament sacrament,
and not an Old Testament rite. There is no
rite, ceremony, ordinance or sacrament men,
toned in the Old Testament, which, from its
form or mode of administration, can possibly
be thought to be Christian baptism. The
fact is, with the exception of divers ceremo-
NAL washiugs, there is not, in the Old Testa'
ment, from the beginning Of Genesis to the
last verse of the Prophecies of Malachi, one
single syllable about baptism at all"
Neither Mr.. Latham nor myself has writ.
ten a sentence that is more certainly true
than the above. Let the reader ponder it
we'll, and when he applies to his pastor with
a conscience troubled with the conviction that
he has never been baptized, but only sprin-
kled, and that, perhaps, in unconscious lnfan-
cy, and when the pastor refers him to Isaiah
and Ezekiel, where Jehovah himself speaks
fguratively of his sprinkling clean water on
the Jews, and where it is said he shall sprinkle
many nations let him say respectfully to his
pastor "This does not refer to baptism at all !;
for Mr.. Latham says there is not in the Old
Testament one sing gle syllable about baptism >"
But his conclusion that Christ did not re-
ceive Christian baptism at the hands Of John,
is not legitimate. All the acts, ordinances
and institutions of Christ are Christian as
the disciples we're called after Christ Chris
tians, first in Antioch. Christ was baptized
by John in Jordan, and this was, therefore, a
Christian act. If Christ did not receive
Christian baptism at the hands of John, then
in submitting to Johns baptism, the natural
conclusion is that be did an unchristian act
1t was asserted in the first article on this
subject, that Christ could not have received
Christian baptism, for the reason that Chris
tian baptism is administered in the name Of the
Father, and of the Son and ofthe Holy Ghost.
I did not notice this in my reply, because l
regarded it as mere 9uibble; but inasmuch
as it has been re.asserted, the reader will no.
toe the fact that all acceptable prayer must
be offered in the name of Christ, and We may
as we'll conclude that he never offered an &C.
ceptable or Christian prayer, because we can.
not suppose that he closed his prayer With
"This I ask for Jesus Sake"
John taug ght the people whom he baptized
that "they should believe on him which should
come after him; that is, on Christ Jesus"
He baptized Jesus, whom he very probably
knew to be the son of Mary, his mothers cousin,
and whom he certainly knew to be his supe-
rior, but did not know, till after his baptism,
that he was the Christ and it is more reason.
able that Christ should thus receive baptism
in his own name than that his was not Chris.
tian baptism.
1t is still contended, as will ha sesn by re-
ference to the last article on this subject, that
Johns baptism was not from heaven. But to
prove that this is an error, ! will here quote
eminent Presbyterian authority. Wm, Hanna,
D. D., IL. D., in his Mfe Of Christ, page 73,
says: "This baptism in the river was so
marked feature In the ministry of John,
that it gave him his distinctive title, The Bop
tst, It was new and peculiar rite Of divine