Mexico weekly ledger. (Mexico, Mo.) 1855-1956, 1893-11-16

impression next morning they had
not been out. Fourth. This being
a household baptism in the might
and in the prison strongly suggests
affusion as the mode. -
/ All this is entirely without weight
unless Bro. Jackson can prove that
they did not go out of the prison
and that there was not sufficient
water in the prison for an INNER.
sion. If he will prove these two
points We will acknowledge that the
ijailer was not immersed, and that in
this case baptizo must have some
unusual meaning. But to suppose
they did not 60 out, and to suppose
there was no water there, and then
build an argument on these supposi-
tions against immersion, especially
when, according to the common
usually accepted meaning of the
term baptizo, the Scriptures say it
was an immersion, is trifling. Such
reasoning shows the weakness of his
cause.
This much the Bible tells US !:
The jailor took Paul and Silas
somewhere; Paul preached to him
and to all that were in his house
the iailer and all that were in his
house believed and were converted; !;
the jailer, after his conversion,
took Paul and silas where there
was enough water to wash their
stripes; the jailer was baptized (im-
mersed, according to the usual
meaning of 5 the word); he took
Paul and Silas into his own house
and set food before them and had a
season of rejoicing. l am sure no
unprejudiced mind can find any
thing whatever here to even suggest
affusion. If there was time and
means for all this, there certainly
was time and means for an INNER
sion. The supposition that there
were, within the prison inclosure,
places for prisoners to bathe is far
more reasonable than the supposi-
ton that there were no such places.
Thirteenth. Bro. Jackson says:
"Acts II is additional proof that
Johns baptism was by affusion. ;"
Well, if he finds any proof in it let
him enjoy it. tits a hard case that
must resort to such proof. 1 show
ed in my last article that with
water" and with the Holy Spirit"
could just as we'll be translated Sin
water" and "in the Holy Spirit"
Cornelius and his household were so
completely submerged in the Spirits
influence that it reminded Peter Of
Johns immersion. 1t would Ger.
tainly have been a very small
demonstration of the Spirit to have
reminded him Of the few drops of
water applied by those who practice
affusion.
Fourteenth. Bro. Jackson says:
"The water, Spirit and blood men,
toned in 1 John 5:7-S are always
applied by effusion." 1 deny that
statement and call orproof. This text
to wh ch Bro. Jackson here refers:
"And there are three that bear wit
ness in earth, the Spirit, and the
water, and the blood: and these
three agree in one," affords strong
and beautiful argument in favor of
immersion, but it would take too
much space to elaborate it here.
Fifteenth. Bro. Jackson's 18th
reason is, that Rom. GA, "Buried
with him by baptism into DEATH"
has no reference to water baptism
whatever, but is purely spiritual.
On this point l will let pedobaptist
scholars speak:
Bloomfield (Episcopalian): "We
have been (thus) buried Gin the
waters of baptism.) There is a
plain allusion to the ancient custom
of baptism by immersion. Greek
Testament with Eng. Notes.
Wesley (Founder of Methodism):
1--WE are buried with him. Abiding
to the ancient manner of baptlzing
by immersion. Notes.
Adam Clark (Methodist:) cal
luding to the immersion practiced
in the case of adults, wherein the
person appeared to be buried under
the water, as Christ was buried in
the heart of the earth, His rising
again the third day, and their
emerging from the water, was an
emblem of the resurrection Of the
body" Com. on Col. 2:12.
Conybeare and Howson (Episco-
palians:) "This passage cannot