Juniata sentinel and Republican. [volume] (Mifflintown, Juniata County, Pa.) 1873-1955, 1888-02-29

Z
: to this position as being glaringl,
assumptive, In that it presumes Il
dictate to the ever blessed God tbs
manner in which he shall addrees hii
creatures He must expressly des
ignate those who are TO come urdel
any of his appointments We objec
to this position as being exceedingly
: narrow and bigoted, in that il sup
{ poses that We cannot know what GoC
Says save when be addresses us in {
particular way, whereas it is a well
known fsct that some of the most I'M
portant truths of revelations are sci
before us IN indirect ways and again
that We may as certainly reach tile
truth upon any particular subject
through indirect as through direct
expression. When Paul says he was
caught up into the third heaven, we
know as certainly that there is also a
first aud second heaven, as though he
had dir, city affirmed their existence.
But we object TO this position of the
baptist a. being Individually false
We waive other instances that might
be specified, and fix on one only
From the first gu oject has been ad-
mitted to positive ordinance, and
this admission is according to truth
and is 70 held by an who observe the
oblisction Of the New Testament
rites, while yet there is no express
Law or example to support 1t to be
fouEd IN all the Word Of God. The
Eubjact to which we allude Is woman
and her admission to the Lords Sup
per. Constructed with reference to
this csse the Baptists first argument
IL Sc follows: Any person having
right to positive institute must be
mentioned as having that right But
women are not SO mentioned in con
nection with the Lords Supper.-
Therefors women have no right to eat
the bread and drink the wine in me-
mortal of the Saviours death and
covenant. And so our Baptist breth
ren are, by their invariably practice.
placed in the same condemnation
With the rest of rs. "True," say they
''you may suppose there were chill
dren IN some of the households all
Of which are said to have been bap-
tized. But woe to the man who builds
his faith upon inferences- When
your Black Log correspondent shall
have cited me to an express warrant
IN the Word of God for tue admission
of a beloved mother, or sister, or
daughter TO the sealing ordinance of
the Lords House, for one will con-
cede him the uncha!lengeable right TO
call upon nee for an express warrant
for imposing the initiAtury rite ofthis
same house upon my infant offspring.
2. The second and chief argument
of the B4ptists against the reception
Of Infants, states syllogisticaliy, is as
follows: The Bible demands faith
or repentance as "A prerequisite to
baptism. But infant; cannot supply
this prerequisite infants therefore
are not proper subjects of baptism
This is the argument that lies at the
bottom of the articles of j. l.. NJ.
Here ought TO make a confession,
perhaps, / failed 10 notice tie article
that appeared IN your issue of Janu-
sry is. But as II would seem to be
u piece Of tue one IN your issue Of
February Is. l make no doubt l an
in general way correct IN r-feTrIug
to the same category The ,gIst of
tins argument Is this-somethIng is
said in the New Testament while
speaking Of the baptism of believers,
that is utterly incompatible with the
state ofinfaDuy; consequently, infants
cannot be supposed To be proper sub
iects of baptism. Now, while 1t would
toe quite easy TO point out the fallacy
of TINS argument, ! wish, before do
ing so. to try the gait of this famous
baptist steed upon n few other paral-
lei, vet seldom Travelled, cOurses.-
Start we him on the line of circUm
cision That children as well rs
adults were authorEtivelv subjected
to this rite under the Old Testament
economy, even baptists themselves
/ will not deny. And yet, in the face
of this historic fact, what more is
needed than the logic of their OVID
hobby horse argument to prove to
the satisfaction of the whole INNER
sion world, that children were very
improperly 50 marked For does not
Paul affirm, Gal. 5:3, Every man
who is circumcised is a debtor to do
the whole law And are not children
OF the tender age Of eight days inca
pablo Of yielding themselves, and 20
beconing debtors to do the whole
law "A child" says ]. E NJ, ''csn-
not yield itself" And saws BishoT
, Sampson, smother war horse on the
ssme path. I'm personal obligations
I no man is bound without his owl
, consent Hence ss circumcision i'm
, posed the obligation 80 keep the ~holt
/, law, q child, that could not yield it
/, self, or give its own consent, was JUS
a. improperly circumcised under tn,
, Mosaic economy, as the o1rpring o.
Z the peodobaptIst are now being bsp
, tized under the Christian. Wonder
{ ful thing this logic of the Baptist
, In the light Of it the wisdom of on
of the most express appointments O
= the Almighty Is seen to be follyl Voc
, therefore even to the thick bosse'
7 of JthovSh's buckler when this bspl
tist war horse rushes upon IT Try
. we gait of this steed on the line o
! the baptism OF Jesus. Was jesus
p baptized Yes Was he rightly hap
I tized Who dare say, No. And ye
. according to the logic Of the baptis,i
, argument nothing is clearer than thn
ne Was not And why not ? Becausi
te,ng immaculate he was neither ca
pable of faith nor insusceptibie I re
--TlIrnCe-the INDISPENSABLE vrereuui
sites, as the bsptists affirm, of tn,
proper imposition of this rite Clear
= ly, either the blessed Master was no
rightly baptized, or this boasted Ar
e gumeut Of the modern Baptist i
g abominablY fallacious- Try we thi
, 4 = ] : Il