Newport daily independent., 1902-05-28

mersed themo as one says, ''he would have had to stand in water from sum- rise to sunset for six months. Such toll would have killed man of iron in less time. The supposition is ab- surd."
 1.-THE ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH BAP- TIzED BY sPRINKLING. The claim that the eunuch was immersed by Phillip made upon the words "And they both went down into the water and came up out of the water" Let us consider them in particular. These words indicate one, the first step being taken by these two men, viz., going down into the water. The words, "and he baptized him, indi- cate the second step, separate and distinct from the first. This analysis unto these two steps is made because those who hold to immersion claim that the first is proven by the second and the second by the first; so that the eunuch was baptized by i'm mersion because they both went into the water. Second that they both went into the water because he was to be baptized by immersion.
 Does the first step prove or even indicate immersion? Not at all. For as has already been shown, people often go down into and come up out of the water for different purpose than for immersion. Especially was this habit in vogue with this people of that day who were required to go to the running stream, to have the clear living water sprinkled upon them to ceremonially cleanse them of the contamination of leprosy and of death and of sin. And such was the meaning of the act in this case, when Phillip and the eunuch went down in to the flowing stream, living spring, that bubbled up out of the desert. The second step was ''He baptized him." How, it is not stated in so many words. But we are not left in doubt on the subject, when we take all the facts stated in the case In verse 35 it is stated that "Phillip opened his mouth and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus." Let us turn over to Isaiah to the passage that they were study ing. The special verse mentioned by the eunuch is the 7th verse of the 53rd chapter. But it is said that Phillip be- gan at the passage. And as we turn over to Isaiah we find that the passage begins at the 3rd to the last verse of the proceeding chapter. Now we read through those verses and the 53rd chaptera we find it all goes to- gether.
 But as we look into the last verse of the 52nd chapter we find what sug- gested the thought of baptism to the eunuch. It is said in that verse speak ing of this same Savior, "who was led as lamb to the slaughter etc., "So shall he sprinkle many nations" :" Both Phillip and the eunuch saw the meaning of the passage instantly that these words were prophecy fulfilled by Christ and his servants in the set ting up his kingdom in the hearts of men. And how would Phillip and the eunuch judge that this rite of baptism should be performed, with these words staring them iu the face, which words were to be fulfilled by this very act of baptism? for the eunuch says immediately "What doth hinder me to be baptized?" Would Phillip have dared go in the face of the clear and explicit directions of prophecy?
 Besides this method of baptism, sprinkling, was the only one known or practiced by the Old Testament dis pensation, and therefore the only one that they had been used to as Jews.
 (b.)-Again immersion was an im- possibility for the reason that verse 26 states that it was desert country through which they were passing. ''From Jerusalem to Gaza, which is desert,n which indicates that there were no streams large enongh to inn merse a man.
 If there were, it lies as burden of proof upon those who hold to the doctrine of immersion in this case to show it, as the supposition of the ex- istence of such a stream is against the nature of a desert country. There can be found no such streams in that country today.