Other Points on Baptism

 •  2 min. read  •  grade level: 8
I do not like the tone of -'s letters. I always regret any question being raised on the subject, because baptism forms no part of that mission from Christ on which the church now stands, though never abrogated. I entirely differ from him as to his views of baptism. The answer of a good conscience (1 Peter 3:2121The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: (1 Peter 3:21)) is a mere mistranslation; but I have no quarrel on this score, no more than I have with views which Baptists conscientiously hold. Were it only the health of his daughter, that might, I dare say, be easily arranged, either by modifying the way of doing it, or, if fully purposing to do it when possible, bearing with the lack for the moment. But what I do not accept is, his imposing his views of it on the assembly, and forcing them to give it up entirely, on the ground of his views as to it. This I could not accept. But on his own showing they ought not to be received; because, if it be what he says, they are not prepared to give the answer of a good conscience towards God. The work of the Holy Spirit in the heart to that effect is not done. But what I object to especially is, that he should impose his views of the matter as the ground of reception. The pseudo-baptist, even supposing him mistaken, comes on the ground that he has been bond fide baptized: there is no setting aside Christ's ordinance, even supposing him wrong as to his manner of doing it. I think the Baptist quite wrong, but he does it bond fide, and I heartily respect his conscience as to the manner of doing it. I am perfectly satisfied from scripture that 's view is wrong; but I leave it there: but he wants the assembly to drop it altogether on his view, and impose his view on the assembly as their ground of action. This I cannot accept. I should convince the assembly, and they had better wait till they see their way clear about it, and not be in any hurry, not as rejecting them, but leaving them time till they see clear. My own disposition would be not to press it, not to have any correspondence about it, but leave it as it is till they see clear about it. At present their ground is, that they are not ready to give the answer of a good conscience to God, but that the assembly must receive them without it. I do not so interpret the text, but does.
Your affectionate brother in Christ.
June, 1871.