concurrence in assigning "immerse" or its equivalent as the primary and ordinary meaning of baptizo. This ought to settle the baptismal controversy. For what says Blackstone, who is almost the idol of the legal profession?—"Words are generally to be understood in their usual and most known signification; not so much regarding the propriety of grammar as their general and popular use." "Immerse " was the "usual and most known signification of baptizo among the Greeks. It was its "general and popular use," as we shall see in the proper place.

To return to the argument derived from lexicons: All English dictionaries give "immerse " or its equivalent as the ordinary meaning of "dip." It would, therefore, be very unreasonable to deny that "dip" ordinarily means "to immerse." Greek lexicons give "immerse" as the ordinary meaning of baptizo. Is it not, then, just as unreasonable to deny that baptizo ordinarily means "to immerse" as it would be to deny that "dip" has this signification? Indeed, there is no argument employed by Pedobaptists to divest baptizo of its usual meaning which may not as plausibly be employed to divest "dip" of its ordinary import; for, though "dip" is a definite and specific word, baptizo is more so. We speak of "the dip of the magnetic needle" and of "the dip of a stratum in

* Sharswood's Blackstone, vol., i. p. 58.

geology," while Pope uses the expression "dipping into a volume of history." If Pedobaptists could find baptizo in such connections, there would be rejoicing from Dan to Beersheba. The man who would attempt to prove that "dip" means "to sprinkle" or "pour" would probably be laughed at; but he could make a more plausible effort in adducing his proof than if he were to attempt to prove the same thing concerning baptizo. Let us see: Such a man might say that Johnson, Webster, and Worcester in their large dictionaries give "moisten" and "wet" as meanings of "dip," and refer as authority to Milton, who uses the following words: "A cold shuddering dew dips me all over." Talking with himself, such a reasoner might say, "It is a fixed fact that 'dip' means 'to moisten' and 'wet.' Who will dispute what Johnson, Webster, and Worcester say, sustained as they are by the 'prince of British poets'? Very well. 'Dip' means to 'moisten' and 'wet.' Everybody knows that a thing can be moistened or made wet by having water poured or sprinkled on it. Therefore, 'dip' means 'to pour' and 'sprinkle.'' Now, I affirm that this argument is more plausible than any I ever heard from a Pedobaptist to prove that baptizo means "pour" and "sprinkle;" yet it is replete with sophistry. It assumes as true the fallacy that if a process can be accomplished in two

different ways, the two verbs employed to denote those two ways mean the same thing. An object may be moistened by being dipped in water, but "moisten" and "dip" are not synonymous. The

same object may be moistened by having water sprinkled or poured on it, but neither "moisten and sprinkle," nor "moisten and pour," "moisten and pour," are identical in import. Though the moistening may result from he dipping, sprinkling, or pouring, the three acts are clearly distinguishable, and definite terms are used to express them.

It is proper to say of the Greek lexicons to which I have referred that they were all made by men who had no partialities for Baptists. A regard for truth, therefore, and no desire to give currency to the practice of immersion, elicited from them the definition they have given of baptizo. Baptists may well felicitate themselves that their opponents bear this strong testimony.

SECTION II.

Distinguished Pedobaptist scholars and theologians admit that "baptizo" means "to immerse.”

No one

Here I shall probably be told that it is unfair to take advantage of Pedobaptist concessions. There is, however, nothing unfair in such a course. can say that there is without calling in question the propriety of what Paul did in his great discourse at

Athens; for he availed himself of the declaration of a Greek poet, and made the poetic statement a part of his argument. I shall aim to do nothing that is not justified by the example of the great apostle. Pedobaptist concessions are of great value, for it may be said, in the language of another on a different matter, "This testimony of theirs, to me, is worth a thousand others, seeing it comes from such as, in my opinion, are evidently interested to speak quite otherwise."

The reader's earnest attention is called to the following extracts.

I begin with John Calvin, a learned Presbyterian, who lived more than three hundred years ago. He was very decided in his opposition to Baptists, or "Anabaptists," as he contemptuously styled them. He wrote in Latin, and I avail myself of the translation of John Allen, published by the Presbyterian Board of Publication, Philadelphia. In his Institutes (vol. ii., book iv., chap. xv., paragraph 19, p. 491) he says, "But whether the person who is baptized be wholly immersed, and whether thrice or once, or whether water be only poured or sprinkled upon him, is of no importance; churches ought to be left at liberty, in this respect, to act according to the difference of countries. The very word baptize, however, signifies to immerse;' and it is certain that immersion was the practice of the ancient Church.”

It will be seen that Calvin expresses two opinions and states two facts. The opinions are that it is of nc importance how water is used, and that churches should be free to decide as they please; the facts are that "baptize" means "to immerse," and that immersion was the practice of the ancient church. With Calvin's opinions I have nothing to do, but his facts claim attention. What "baptize" means is a question of fact, and must be decided by testimony. So of the practice of the ancient church. Calvin gave his verdict on the testimony establishing the facts. The reader will observe the distinction between opinions and facts.

Dr. George Campbell, a learned Presbyterian of Scotland, who lived about a hundred years ago, in his notes on Matt. iii. 11, says, "The word baptizein" (infinitive mode, present tense, of baptizo), "both in sacred authors and in classical, signifies 'to dip,' 'to plunge,' 'to immerse,' and was rendered by Tertullian, the oldest of the Latin Fathers, tingere-the term used for dyeing cloth, which was by immersion. It is always construed suitably to this meaning." In his Lectures on Systematic Theology and Pulpit Eloquence he expresses himself, in Lecture X., as follows: "Another error in disputation which is by far too common is when one will admit nothing in the plea or arguments of an adversary to be of the smallest weight. . . . I