7. If Mr. Smith is right, a wonderful miracle is wrought whenever he or his brethren immerse a man or woman in water. Mr. Campbell says, “I am bold to affirm that every one of them who, in the belief of which the apostle spoke, was immersed did, in the very instant in which he was put under the water, receive the forgiveness of his sins.” (Christian Baptist, pages 416, 417.) The believer is cursed with all his sins, exposed to the wrath of God and the flames of hell, till the very instant he is put under water. When under the water his sins are all forgiven, his soul is purified, his nature is changed, God becomes his friend, and the door of heaven is opened to him. All this takes place during the brief time he is under the water. What a miracle! There is nothing in the catalogue of miracles equal to it. And then such wonderful miracles are being wrought day and night in every stream and pond in the land. If there is any truth in this theory, Mr. Smith has performed far more miracles than Jesus Christ ever did. His brethren often laugh at the Methodists, for their notions about the operations of the spirit, and tell them they suppose a miracle is wrought, whenever a soul is converted; but Mr. Smith and his friends believe in greater wonders than the Methodists do, and those too that are not half as reasonable and philosophical.
8. This theory suspends salvation on the will and act of another man. To illustrate: Mr. Smith convinces one of his hearers of the truth of the gospel, and he makes application to be immersed that his sins may be pardoned. Mr. Smith does not doubt his faith, but refuses to immerse him—has an old grudge against him—and the man dies the next day, dies unforgiven, and enters into the presence of his God with all his sins on his soul. Now, Mr. Smith, by not doing his duty, has sent that man to hell. It may be said, that Mr. Smith will be sent there too for this sin of omission; but that would not help the poor man who went there before him. If this doctrine is correct, thousands may be lost by others refusing to immerse them. Again: a son or a daughter becomes a penitent believer, and desires to be immersed, but the father forbids it, and the youth dies unimmersed, and consequently goes to perdition. It may be replied, that God does not require impossibilities, and in those cases he will take the will for the deed. But Mr. Smith affirms, there is no salvation without baptism. If Mr. Smith is right, all such unfortunate persons are lost.
9. This system enjoins an impossibility, and then damns a man for not performing it. On the desert a man becomes a penitent believer, but dies ere he can reach water in which to be immersed. A traveler in the arctic regions makes the good confession, but freezes to death before he can melt water enough to be dipped in. All such souls are lost, for Mr. Smith and Mr. Campbell tell us, there is no salvation on the desert, nor in the polar regions, without immersion. And this is called the glorious gospel of the blessed God! A solitary traveler in an uninhabited region, exclaims from the heart, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God,” and wills to be immersed; but he is in a bad fix. There is no one within an hundred miles to immerse him, and he cannot immerse himself. He makes a desperate effort to find somebody to immerse him, as the salvation of his soul depends on his success. But his effort is fruitless, his exertion brings on a fever, and he dies alone on the desert. According to Mr. Smith, he goes into the other world a sinner, and as there is no water there to be immersed in, he must be immersed in hell-fire, not for a moment, but for all eternity.
10. It encourages superstition by attaching an extravagant importance to immersion. It elevates an ordinance far above every Christian virtue; above faith, hope, charity, love. In fact, it makes almost a god of water baptism.
11. Mr. Smith’s superstitious notions of baptism lead directly to infant baptism—are the father and mother of infant baptism. Speaking of the origin of infant baptism, the learned historian and critic, Salmasins, says, “An opinion prevailed that no one could be saved without being baptized, and for that reason the custom arose of baptizing infants.” Professor Hahn testifies to the same: “Infant baptism arose from false views of original sin, and of the magical power of consecrated water.” (Prof. Hahn’s Theology, page 556.) Another noted critic says: “The immediate occasion of infant baptism it cannot be denied was its extravagant ideas of its necessity to salvation.” (Dressler’s Doctrine of the Sacrament of Baptism.)
It is evident, then, that Mr. Smith’s idea of water baptism is the legitimate parent of infant baptism; and it is a mystery to me that he and his brethren do not baptize infants to save their souls. According to Mr. Campbell they need salvation. Hear him: “Our nature was corrupted by the fall of Adam before it was transmitted to us; and hence the hereditary imbecility to do good, and that proneness to do evil, so universally apparent in all human beings. All inherit a fallen, consequently a sinful nature.” (Christian System, pages 28, 29.) Now, as there is no salvation without baptism, why not baptize infants? Will it not save little sinners as well as large ones? It would not astonish me to learn that Mr. Smith is immersing infants. I wonder he has not been doing it these many years.
12. According to my friend’s theology, a man may be full of faith, and love, and good works, but if he has not been immersed in water he is in a lost and ruined condition, and on the broad road to everlasting destruction. His faith, and love, and good works, avail nothing without immersion. Stating such a proposition in simple language is enough to condemn it.
13. This theory is worse than infidelity. Thomas Paine, the noted infidel, says, “I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow creatures happy.” (Age of Reason, page 6.) According to the theory in question, our Creator has no respect for these religious duties, unless we are immersed in water. He will neither bless us with salvation in time or eternity, if we religiously perform all these duties, unless we are immersed. With all due respect to my friend, I must say, that of the two systems, Paine’s is the best, as far, at least, as religious duties are concerned. My correspondent will doubtless reply, that he believes in the duties Paine names, and urges his fellow men to observe them. No doubt of it; but then he spoils his faith and exhortation, by telling his hearers, that the observing of them will avail nothing in the way of salvation without immersion in water.
14. This theory is worse than Calvinism. With all its cruelty and savagism, it does not make our salvation depend on immersion in water, whether there is any water to be immersed in or not, whether our health will admit of immersion or not; whether we can find one qualified to immerse or not, and whether if we find such an one he will accommodate us or not.
15. We have not a particle of evidence that one of the twelve disciples of our Lord was immersed. Matthew, one of the number, thus records the call and acceptance of several of that chosen band. “And Jesus, walking by the sea of Galilee, saw two brethren, Simon and Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea: for they were fishers. And he said unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men. And they straightway left their nets and followed him. And going on from thence he saw two other brethren, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in a ship with Zebedee their father, mending their nets; and he called them. And they immediately left the ship and their father, and followed him.” Matt. iv. 18-22. In the tenth chapter we are informed of the other disciples being called. There is not the slightest intimation in the New Testament that one of the disciples was immersed when they were chosen by the Master, or at any subsequent time.