Semi-weekly interior journal. [volume] (Stanford, Ky.) 1881-1905, 1893-03-03

in chrictian baptism. The testimony OF
all the facts IN the case ought To be about
indisputable 10 justify snch wholesale
population Of the baptism Of the largest
half OF the christian world. But when
the ground is fairly considered upon
which the highest scholarship of the
pedobaptst world seeks to justify their
practice, the case is altered
The strongest ground held to justify
sprnkling or pouring for baptism, and
that ground most generally occupied 10y
Bible scholars, is the fexibility OF the
gospel 1t is held that the nature Of the
gospel, which is spiritual and seeks to
effect spiritual results, cannot properly
restrict the ordinances to the very exter-
nal form in which it WAS given. but that
| il may be modified 10 meet new condi-
tons Of climate, the health OF the person
or his convenience. Pedobaptist schol
ara generally defend the practice OF
| sprinkling upon the ground OF the flexi-
BILE nature OF the gospel and not upon
the ground OF its apostolicity, while the
Catholic clergy defend it upon the
ground that the Church has the right 20
change both baptism and the Lords Sup.
/ per.
But TO return 90 the fathers OF our plea
for union. They were seeking to unite
the people Of GOT; il not perfectly in one
| body. with one Lord, one faith and one
/ baptism, then to unite as far rs they
could be agreed. Where is the specific
trouble? 1t is this There are very ma
ny godly men aud women whose train
ing has led them to accept that which
the Scriptures do not recognize as hap.
tism. Now what does the New Tesla
ment teach in regard to such persons par
taking OF the Lords Supper aud mem.
bership in the church? There were then
no such parsons in the world. Baptism
had not been changed all knew what it
was and had been immersed. Hence,
there are no examples of such in the
New Testament. The Bible is silent as
the grave on the question. But since
the man OF God isthoroughly furnished
by the word OF God, unto every good
work"
Does the word OF God furnish any
principle by the proper application oil
which the difficulty may be removed
and the union OF the people OF God pro
NOTED? II So, what is that principle
and where may il be found9 The prin.
ciple ia very fully developed in Rom. IL
The christians were then divided in sen
timent on two questions eating meats
and observing holy days. Paurs object
was to unite them, or prevent an open
rupture. On the subject OF c iting meats
Paul knew what was the truth. He knew
that meat offered to an idol did not in.
lure tac meat. lie knew there was but
one God and all idols were but myths
lie knew there WAS nothing unclean 81
itself and therefore no just ground ioI
this division and contention. What did
Paul do? lie told them plainly--,hc
party who believed the meat was un
clean because it has been offered to idols
was mistaken-and lac told ,hoee thai
believed rs he did, that such meat j,
+ proper iooI "a ever, should not dispise
or think less of their brother who didn't
have this knowledge. LET Us not ther
judge one another any more" "to hi,
own Master he standeth or islleth."
why dost thy judge thy brother, or set
; at nau,ht thy brother p" For We shal
all stan before the Judgment seat o
= Christ
: How then does Paul settle this qucs.
ton in favor OF union? Not 10y reouir
: ing the mistaken brother to acknowledg,
: his error when he had no conscience
e that told him OF his error but by enjoin
ing upon all alike the universal law o
love and charity expressed in Rom. li;3
Let not him that eateth despise him
that eateth not, and let not him that eat
eth not despise him that eateth, for Goo
hath received him Paul teaches the
man that cannot receive the truth con
!, cerning meats, as he teaches, to act in
the matter according to the best light or
conscience he has, a. the best he can do,
aud that while "all things indeed are
pure, yet these very things are evil and
} unclean to him whose conscience es
: teems them to be such" Now then, ia
the light OF principle, how would Pau
apply it ii he were here? Precisely as
} he did then. How was that? First and
last he told them what the truth OF the
matter WAS in dispute. lie told then
} there WAS no such thing as God an
swering to an idol. And SO, il he wer,
here to-day, he would say there is NJ
such thing on earth answering to the
baptism ordained by Jesus Christ bu
, immersion into the Name OF the Father
! Son and Holy Spirit; he would speak
, this first and last; then what? Here ar,
, now many godly men and women, wht