Mr. Durant of Salt Lake City, "That Mormon". Ben. E. Rich
I could not say as to that."
"Do not you and the majority of the others accept of other forms of baptism and in many cases of none at all?"
"Yes."
"Does not that depart from the teachings of the Bible and the example set by Christ Himself?"
"Not necessarily."
"Did not He go down into the waters of baptism and receive immersion at the hands of John the Baptist?"
"Yes."
"And did not the injunction go forth which forms the very corner-stone of His own Church—of Christianity—'Repent and be baptized?'"
"Yes; but He did not say that of necessity all were to be immersed. The Bible is fertile in parables and much that is said is left to the intelligence of the reader for interpretation."
"By the same authority I have warned you already against 'private interpretations.' However, we need not rest the case entirely upon that. Take up your Bible at your leisure and examine well all accounts given of cases where this ordinance was performed, and you cannot help admitting that baptism by immersion was the only way in which the ancients accepted that principle. You will see that the word of God commands, in unequivocal language, the ordinance of baptism by immersion, and His Son set us the example by going down into the waters. Therefore, those who do not perform this have no claim upon the Savior's name, for they obey not His Father's words nor His own example."
"You would hold, then, that those who do not conform literally to such example are not Christians."
"They may believe in Christian conduct and practice righteousness within a certain sphere; they may be upright and just in their dealings and their hearts may be filled with love for their race, but they cannot establish rules of conduct for themselves and claim to act in the authority and name of Christ. He has set the pattern and it is for them and for us to follow."
"I never heard such strange reasoning before, and it reminds me of a fact upon which I have often dwelt—that sophistry and logic may both rest upon the same foundation, not, however, accusing you of dealing in sophistry or claiming that in all respects my words have been those of logic. Now, to follow your theme further in the same vein and employing precisely your method of arriving at conclusions—those who do not, for instance, practice the laying on of hands for the healing of the sick, or for the casting out of real or imaginary devils, who do not, for example, subscribe to all the superstitions and resort to the practices enjoined by the Bible—which practices must have had reference to a time in which the domain of science was so limited that it could not even comprehend the present—that all such people, I say, are also outside the pale of Christianity are pagans, infidels, in fact?"
"You state part of the proposition correctly enough, but your conclusion is unjust—unjust because not a natural outgrowth of the premises stated, and also unjust because containing a reflection."
"I meant no reflection at all."
"So I may readily believe. Now, a man may be entirely outside the pale of practical, or if you prefer it, modern Christianity and still be neither a pagan nor an infidel; while he may be inside it and not practice the things spoken of, by means of which he would be as much at variance with the requirements of our Father and Savior, perhaps, as the others named, and none of them be of necessity bad people, or among those wholly condemned."
"Then you believe in the actual practice of laying on of hands as well as of baptism by immersion?"
"Assuredly I do."
"And practice it, perhaps?"
"Whenever necessary, yes."
"Well, for fear you may not wish to try it here, and it is nearly bed time, I will relieve you of one of the 'devils,' and the power of 'casting out' can be held in reserve for some future occasion."
"My dear sir, you do us both injustice. No one would put you in such a category, and it is not a part of the work of a Christian to come into a circle as I have and engender harsh feelings, far from it."
"Oh, no matter. We might talk again at another time, when I may be pleased to continue our remarks, but not tonight as I only intended remaining a short time, having an important engagement which I was compelled to make since I saw you last evening; so, if you will excuse me, I will wish you all good evening."
And so saying, the churchman, in not a very pleasant mood, withdrew.
Said Brown: "Stranger, I am somewhat familiar with the doctrines of different Christian societies, and from the way you expressed yourself regarding the personality of God, I would like very much to hear your views regarding other differences. If the rest of your views are as reasonable as these you have given expression to, I should like very much to hear them, and you can now proceed without interruption. Do you differ from these ministers very much in other principles?"
"I am afraid the difference on many very important principles is just as great as the difference concerning the personality of God. But if you really desire to go with me in this search after the kingdom of God, and the others are willing, I assure you it will give me great pleasure."
Unanimous approval was expressed at once, and Mr. Brown continued, saying:
"I never before had as great a desire in this direction, and must confess that my curiosity has become quite aroused."
"Then," said Durant, "we will take King James' translation of the Holy Scriptures as the law book, and 'Seek ye first the kingdom of God' for our text; and if we should discover before we have finished that the teachings of men differ greatly from the teachings of Christ, I will be somewhat justified in saying that religionists have 'transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.'" (Isaiah xxiv: 5. Jeremiah ii: 13.)
"Very well," said Mr. Brown, "I will proceed," and obtaining the family Bible he continued: "And should your assertions prove correct, it might perhaps account for the increase of infidelity, and it might also cause others as well as myself to stop and consider. Now, then, to the 'law and the testimony.' Give me the chapter and verse, that I may know you make no mistake."
The doctor then for the first time took part, saying: "I am also becoming very much interested, and think I shall join you with my Bible. Let us all come into the circle."
"All right, we will examine the Gospel of Jesus Christ from the Bible, principle by principle. In order to have a clear understanding concerning this, it will be necessary for us to go back to the days of our Father Adam. Through the transgression of our first parents, death came upon all the human family, and mankind could not, of themselves, overcome the same and obtain immortality. To substantiate this, see first, second and third chapters of Genesis, Romans 5th chapter and 12th verse, and I. Corinthians 15th chapter and 21st and 22nd verses. But in order that they should not perish, God sent His Son Jesus Christ into the world to satisfy this broken law and to deliver mankind from the power of death. (John iii: 16; Romans v: 8; John iv: 9.) And as all became subject to death by Adam, so will all men be resurrected from death through the atonement of Christ (I. Cor. xv: 20–23; Rom. v: 12–19; Mark xvi: 15, 16), and will stand before the judgment seat of God to answer for their own sins and not for Adam's transgression. (Acts xvii: 31; Rev. xx: 12–15; Matt. xvi: 27.) Am I right as far as I have gone?"
"Yes," said the doctor, "I have been following you with your quotations, and find them correct. Proceed."
"Then I have proved one of the principles of some of the so-called Christians incorrect, for they do not believe that the wicked will have the same chance of resurrection as the righteous. Jesus Christ did not die for our individual sins, only on condition that we conform to the plan He has marked out, which will bring us a remission of our sins. The only way we can prove that we love Him is by keeping His commandments (John xiv: 15); therefore, if we say we love God and keep not His commandments, we are liars and the truth is not in us. (I. John ii: 4.) I think I have proved to your satisfaction that there is something defective with their understanding of the attributes of God, and I think I can prove also that they do not keep His commandments. Christ has