It was known early on in Alexander Campbell's life that he had great mental and argumentative abilities. He would not be content to remain in the sectarian world, swallowing the traditional and unscriptural doctrines found therein. Mr. Campbell was a mover, one who studied his way through issues and changed his views when he saw that they were contrary to what the Bible taught. After sufficient time of study, this is exactly what happened with his views on baptism. Growing up a Presbyterian, he was a paedobaptist, and was himself sprinkled as an infant. After much careful study, he came to realize that Scriptural baptism is immersion, and that it is intended only for those who were believers, not for infants. His subsequent teaching on this greatly upset the Presbyterian community, and brought no little animosity against him. It did, however, make him favorable to the Baptist community, among which, after Mr. Campbell's able defense of baptism in debate with a Mr. Walker, his reputation was greatly increased. Following is a summary of the events surrounding the first debate of Alexander Campbell.

The Challenge Of Debate

1820 was the year that Alexander Campbell gained recognition as a debater (Hailey 70). It began in the autumn of 1819 when a Baptist preacher named John Birch baptized a large number of converts. This occurred near Mt. Pleasant, Ohio, where a Secession minister by the name of John Walker labored. The zeal stirred by the number of immersions induced Mr. Walker to preach a series of lessons which greatly favored infant baptism and was in complete opposition to the Baptist position. Mr. Birch happened to be present at some of these lessons, and thought that Mr. Walker had misrepresented a writer named Dr. Baldwin. After some correspondence and disputing, Mr. Walker challenged Mr. Birch or any other Baptist preacher of moral repute whom Mr. Birch might choose to meet in a public discussion over the issue of infant baptism. Mr. Birch readily agreed, and immediately contacted Alexander Campbell, for whom he had a high opinion. At first, Mr. Campbell was reluctant to enter this discussion due to previous opposition to public debating, but after some time of pleading by Mr. Birch, Mr. Campbell finally agreed to undertake the discussion after convincing his father that it would do no harm (Humble 159).

John Walker, upon hearing of Mr. Campbell's acceptance, wrote a note showing that he considered himself in charge of the situation. He immediately chose Samuel Findley as a moderator, a man who had already been opposed to Mr. Campbell. Mr. Campbell chose Jacob Martin, and the rules for the discussion were subsequently agreed upon.

The Debate

The Campbell-Walker debate took place at Mount Pleasant, Ohio on June 19-20, 1820. The following description briefly overviews the circumstances:

"The debate was on the subject and mode of baptism. Walker opened and Campbell closed it. Walker contended that baptism came in the room of circumcision, and therefore, infants had a right to it. Campbell, who for the past eight years had dwelt on the subject of the covenants, was thoroughly acquainted with his ground, and answered by a general reflection upon the place, purpose, and relationship of the two covenants. The two contenders traversed the usual ground on the mode of baptism, Campbell frequently going out of his way to state the ground on which he proposed a restoration of the church." (West 65)

Walker's first speech was extremely brief, in which he argued that baptism "came in the room of circumcision; that the covenant on which the Jewish Church was built, and to which circumcision is the seal, is the same with the covenant on which the Christian Church is built, and to which baptism is the seal" (Richardson II, 19). Thus, by his fallacious use of Scripture and failing to understand the nature of the covenants, he argued that baptism was exactly to the Church what circumcision was to the Jews. This was Walker's strongest argument (Humble 163).

Campbell replied by showing that the paedobaptists were not consistent in this line of reasoning, since they did not limit baptism to males, administer it on the eight day, etc., as would have been true of circumcision. Mr. Campbell's use of Scripture was much different than Mr. Walker's. Campbell's strongest argument was on the identity of the covenants, shown from Paul's writings. He employed his same basic arguments that he used in his famous "Sermon on the Law," which incidentally had upset not a few Baptists. As a result, "Walker was driven from pillar to post to defend his wholesale assertions, as Campbell poured Scripture after Scripture into the discussion. Finally, Walker was forced to abandon his ground and with it any Scriptural authority for infant baptism." (Murch 69)

Mr. Campbell's use of Scripture completely confounded Walker, who had to give up his line of reasoning. The second morning, Mr. Walker tried to use some Scripture to show that households were baptized, assuming that there must have been infants involved in this. Mr. Campbell's response was to go back to those same Scriptures and put them in context, showing what else accompanied the action of baptism (cf. Acts 10; 16:33). He showed that in these examples, the people also "feared God," were "comforted," "rejoiced," and "believed," etc. His point was that "if these things which are affirmed of all the baptized will not apply to infants, then it is plain there were no infants baptized in those houses" (Richardson II, 22). He thus proved, "with a careful exegetical study of each household baptism," that infants were not involved in being baptized.

After further discussion concerning this and Walker's argument on the covenants, Walker finally abandoned the position and went on to discuss the mode of baptism. Walker assumed the "usual" arguments to try to prove that sprinkling and pouring were acceptable forms of baptism. To answer this, Campbell used the Scriptures, along with the noted Presbyterian scholar, Dr. George Campbell, to show what the root meaning of the word in the original Greek meant. Walker's use of the Bible on this point consisted of his going back to the Pentateuch to try to prove that sprinkling is Christian baptism (Humble 168). Campbell, however, showed the Scriptural meaning to be immersion.

At this point in the debate, "Campbell took over completely. It was evident to everyone that Walker had failed miserably to prove infant baptism a divine ordinance..." (Murch 70). The debate ended abruptly, to the surprise of Mr. Campbell. Walker and his moderator insisted that the debate close after the afternoon speeches. They really only wanted there to be one speech each, but Mr. Campbell agreed to end on two speeches. This abrupt ending was a little disappointing to Mr. Campbell, who greatly desired to have time to lay out the ideal of restoring New Testament Christianity. He was able to point the audience to the Bible, telling them to "go home and read your Bibles - examine the testimonies of these holy oracles - judge for yourselves, and be not implicit followers of the clergy..." (Humble 170). Read Acts 17:11 again.

Mr. Campbell then closed the debate with the following challenge to those of the paedobaptist persuasion:

"I this day publish to all present that I feel disposed to meet any paedobaptist minister of any denomination, of good standing in his party, and I engage to prove in a debate with him, either viva voce or with pen, that infant sprinkling is a human tradition and injurious to the well-being of society, religious and political." (quoted in Murch 70)

Campbell's victory was quite apparent: "There can be little doubt that Campbell won an overwhelming victory in the Walker debate. The community sensed this, interpreting Walker's demand that the discussion be abruptly terminated as a virtual surrender." (Humble 169) The debate was now put into the hands of the people for their judgment. Time would show that Mr. Campbell truly was the victor in this, his first, debate. Richardson remarked, "Even the Paedobaptists felt that he had gained the victory" (II, 31).

The disputants themselves seemed to have handled themselves well; their attitudes were commendable, as should always be the case (cf. Col. 4:5-6). Mr. Campbell attributed Mr. Walker's loss, not to "his want of genius or expression," but to the "badness of his cause" (Humble 169). There seemed to be no animosity on the whole, except for what Mr. Findley apparently showed at times toward Mr. Campbell. Campbell's honesty in searching for the truth was apparent; he had honestly admitted his change of views on the subject due to his own Bible study. Mr. Walker, on the other hand, could not fully be honest, unless he renounced his position, which he did not do. He seemed to ignore Mr. Campbell's arguments on the covenants.

The debate was over, and Thomas Campbell, in his usually dignified way, was called upon to dismiss the assembly, which he did.

The Effect Of The Debate

The Campbell-Walker debate had a great impact on both Campbell and Walker as individuals, as well as the Baptist and Paedobaptist communities generally. For Mr. Walker, his previous reputation as a man of superior abilities was lost. Many thought him to be either unprepared or totally incompetent (Richardson II, 31).

For Mr. Campbell, this first oral debate proved to be an "eye-opener" for his personal views about public discussion: "Though Campbell had entered the Walker debate with genuine reluctance, he was thoroughly convinced by the two days at Mount Pleasant that religious debates were an invaluable means of disseminating religious truth" (Humble 170). From this point forward, Alexander Campbell stood ready to defend his views against any worthy opponent publicly, orally or in writing.

Mr. Campbell's reputation was also greatly enhanced by this debate. Doors were opened in the both the Baptist and Paedobaptist communities for the teaching of the restoration principles for which he stood. Many requested immersion after the debate. As for the Paedobaptist churches, they were "so depleted" that "after they had recovered some aplomb they began a search for one of their most noted preachers who might meet Mr. Campbell and retrieve their fortunes" (Murch 70). Another debate, however, would not come until a Mr. McCalla met Mr. Campbell in debate three years later.

The cause was furthered to an even greater extent with the publishing of the debate in written form. The speeches were written from notes, and Campbell added more material to it. He also invited Walker to add material, but Walker never replied to the invitation. The effects of the published debate had an even greater impact than could have been imagined. It became obvious that the printed page would also be a powerful tool for disseminating the truth of the Restoration cause:

"The Campbell-Walker debate was published, amid wild charges and countercharges, and had a large circulation, further enhancing the reputation of Campbell and extending the cause he represented. The printed page was now to be a medium by which the whole Western country was to be challenged by the new reformation." (Murch 70)

Conclusion

Debates can be edifying or destructive. The Campbells were very much against the idea of public discussions, as they seemed to be primarily for the promotion of a particular party. Sadly, this is often the case today. However, the Campbell-Walker debate ushered in an important way, for those in favor of restoring the New Testament church, to defend truth and combat error. Campbell's debates proved to be effective in the cause for which he stood. This was just the beginning. Many more would be hearing from Alexander Campbell. As for the cause he promoted, a contemporary, writing a few years later, had this to say:

"The Christian world is not prepared, at the present time, to measure in all of its grand proportions the matchless plea as advocated by Mr. Campbell and his co-workers. It is the New Testament plea, in all of its fullness, which has ever been in direct antagonism to denominationalism. Mr. Campbell, in the providence of God, was permitted to occupy a lofty plane, and from this position and in the spirit of his Master, called upon the good of the whole earth to renounce the guidance of fallible, human leaders, come up higher, breathe the pure invigorating atmosphere of apostolic Christianity, adjust the armor of God upon them, and henceforth engage, not in fighting one another, but in contending for the faith once delivered to the saints - for things that make for peace and edify, and go on to perfection." (Rogers 28-29)

The religious world as a whole has still failed to grasp the fundamental principles which drove Campbell to fight as he did. Still, the creeds and opinions of men continually fall when compared to the glory of the New Testament Scriptures. Today, the Lord's disciples must continue to stand firm in the faith and defend its cause (Jude 3). May they increase who give their lives to defend the truth of God's word.

Works Cited

Hailey, Homer. Attitudes And Consequences In The Restoration Movement. Bowling Green, KY: Gaurdian of Truth Foundation, 1975.

Humble, Bill J. Campbell And Controversy. CA: Old Paths Book Club, 1952.

Murch, James DeForest. Christians Only. Cincinnati, OH: Standard Publishing, n.d.

Richardson, Robert. Memoirs of Alexander Campbell. Indianapolis: Religious Book Service, 1897.

Rogers, W. C. Recollections of Men of Faith. CA: Old Paths Book Club, 1960.

West, Earl Irvin. The Search For The Ancient Order. Vol. 1. Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1949.

Doy Moyer