Mexico weekly ledger. (Mexico, Mo.) 1855-1956, 1885-06-25
and no scholar would so translate it.

word of mode, yet the mode or man.
ner of administering baptism is as
clearly shown to be by affusion as that
amounting was done by affusion. I
can show you where aman was taken
down ''eiS" river to be anointed,
and where the amounting was done
sem the river-still it was not an
immersion. Oil is never said to be
anionted upon anyone, any more than
water is said to be baptized upon the
person. But they were anointed
with ("en'') oil and baptized with
water. Amounting is a divine ordin-
ance as much as baptism. Paul says
that "Moses sprinkled both the book
and all the people" (Heb. 9:1O and
l suppose he did not have to grind
them up into powder either.
What does Disciple mean by "pri-
mary meanings? If he means the
first put down in the Lexicons, then
l say the Lexicons differ very much
among themselves, and many of the
best put first ''to dip repeatedly"-a
meaning that Disciple will himself
admit is false and fabulous. The
real ''primary' use of any word is its
first use in the History of Language.
In neither sense is the New Testa-
ment use of Greek words the pri-
mary sense. Every Greek scholar
knows that. I challenge Disciple
to point out any important word in
the New Testament that is used in
the primary Greek classic sense.
Disciples examples from the classics
are enough to show his readers that
"dip or immerse'' is not the primary
meaning of Baptizo-nor any other
kind Of meaning.
Certainly, the ''divers baptismus'
9:1O) were "divers sprinklings.' >
l-"Divers" ("diaphorvi") signifies
"dlferent' will Disciple please tell
US wherein one clipping" is different
from another "dipping?" Please do.
Disciple kept calling for the proof
that the Baptists practiced sprinkling
till 1641. And now after 1 have
brought forward as many of the rec
ords as l had space to publish, he
has no time to examine them! And
it is not his fight any how-''let the
Baptists attend to that!!" All! but
A. Campbell said "the church was
with the Baptists till he preached the
Reformation" So it is your fght
after all 1 called for an example il
the Bible where the proposition "eis'
means "into," and where "ek'
signifies "oM Of" and he does no
even attempt a reply. Now that il
is too bad! No "dip" in Baptizt
and no 'into" in "eis" and no "ou
of" in "ek"! Truly his occupation
is gone!
1t is far easier to quote (and mis-
quote) the TRADITIONS of the Elders
Elders Catholic, Episcopal, Presby
terian, Congregationalist-all eithe
Catholics, or those misled by Cath
olic errors and blunders. And al
the authorities he quotes talk abou
"immersion"-but their simmerse'
did not put the head under the water
1t was not what Disciple or the Bap
fists now practice. Again I asl
where is the honesty of quoting tina
kind of immersion to support tn
modern dipping over head and ears?
1t is species of disingeniousnes
that ought not to be indulged in, ant
. l am sure that if the advocates Q
"dipping-submersion' had anythin,
better they would not rely SO much o
| the erroneous "traditions of tn
Elders" and thus "make void th
law of God.'
l am sorry Disciple has retired
even for time. 1 have "enliste'
for the war; But as Disciple ha
, two articles before l began, 1 fee
that would like to have an articl
occasionally for the sake of the man
readers Of the LEDGER, who, know
are deeply interested in this subject
, Many thanks for space already used
Let truth prevail, and error be owe,
thrown. 7. GALLAHER.