Baptism According to Scripture

by E. H. Hoare

The expressions, “buried with Christ by baptism” and “walking in newness of life” “after the pattern of His resurrection,” seem to imply, that the method of baptizing was by immersion, or plunging the whole body under water, from which it would come forth as by a kind of resurrection. That baptism has been thus administered, and may be thus administered, is freely admitted. But this is no proof that such was the unvarying method, and certainly no precept that it shall always be administered in this way. It may, however, with much reason be argued, that the expressions, “baptized into His death,”—“buried with Him,”—and “walking in newness of life” like unto His resurrection,—were not used by the Apostle with any reference to the mode of administration, but to the events spoken of; namely, Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. Christians are said to have been “circumcised in Christ,” and to be “crucified with Him,” without any outward corresponding actions. But if an argument for immersion may be drawn from this passage, an argument for affusion, or the pouring of water upon the person, may with greater force be drawn from the manner in which the Holy Ghost descended upon Christ Himself at His baptism, and upon the Apostles on the day of Pentecost, and subsequently upon others who were baptized, and from the language used to describe it. When Peter preached to Cornelius, it is said, “The Holy Ghost fell on all them that heard the word:” and again, “On the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.” This is expressly called by St. Peter, their being “baptized with the Holy Ghost.” (Acts xi. 15, 16.) An argument might also be drawn for the practice of sprinkling, not only from the striking similarity between baptism and the water of separation which was to be sprinkled upon the unclean, (Numb. xix. 19.,) but from the connection between the water of baptism and the blood of Christ, of which, as well as of the Holy Spirit, this water is an emblem, and which is called “the blood of sprinkling” from the method of its application to the heart. From all these things, and from the absence of any specific directions on the subject, it is reasonable to conclude, that baptism may be rightly administered in each of the three ways which have been mentioned. And it is too much like an undue magnifying of the sign, when it is attempted to make it in all respects answerable to the thing signified by it.

This is the only passage directly relating to baptism in the Epistle to the Romans.

But there is a statement of the Apostle in the eleventh Chapter, which not only confirms what has been already said of the continuance of the Covenant with Abraham under the Christian Dispensation, but which also bears strongly upon the subject of the right of the children of believing parents to the token of the Covenant, together with their parents. The passage particularly referred to is the 24th verse of the eleventh Chapter. “For if thou wert cut out of the olive-tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive-tree, how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive-tree!” The Apostle is here comparing the admission of the Gentiles into the Church of God, to the cutting off of branches from a wild olive and the grafting of them into a good olive; the good olive being the ancient church, planted, as it were, in the person of believing Abraham. ‘In the view of St. Paul, the establishment of the Christian Church was no dissolution of the Jewish Church. It is the same Society still;—the same Body Corporate. Some of its rules and regulations, indeed, have been altered: a disfranchisement of many of its old members has taken place, and new ones have been admitted: but the same Church,—the same Chartered Company,—which existed before the Law and under the Law, exists to this present hour under the Gospel Dispensation. It is still Abraham’s family. He is “the father of all them that believe.” “If ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” [61] When, therefore, any of the Jews “abide not in unbelief,” and are received into the Church of Christ, it is but “the grafting of the natural branches into their own olive-tree.” They are restored to the privileges which their fathers enjoyed, and are made members of the Church of God. But are their children to be left behind? Are they to be left out of the Covenant? And is this, might a converted Israelite justly ask,—Is this to be restored to our fathers’ privileges? “Circumcision was not of the law, but of the fathers.” That is taken away; and what have we in its place, if baptism, which is now the token of the covenant, be withheld from our children? If circumcision was our children’s birthright before, how can they be deprived of it, and have nothing given them in the stead thereof, and yet the privileges possessed by our fathers not be lessened? This is not to be “grafted into our own olive-tree”!

In the first Chapter of his first Epistle to the Corinthians, St. Paul speaks of baptism; but as it is principally with a reference to himself, it is scarcely necessary to notice it in our present consideration,—except for the statement he is led to make of the great object of his mission; which was “not to baptize, but to preach the gospel:” the latter being the far more important and difficult work; necessary as it was that converts to Christ should be baptized. Divisions had arisen among the Corinthians: “one saying, I am of Paul,”—that is, I prefer Paul before all other Ministers, and others of them preferring others. This state of things caused the Apostle great distress, and he anxiously endeavours to correct it. He indignantly asks them, whether he (or any other Minister) had been “crucified for them,” or whether they had been “baptized in his name.” This shows that baptism implies an entire dedication to him, in whose name it is administered. The Apostle then tells them, that he was very thankful it had been so ordered that he had baptized very few of them himself;—adding, as the cause of this, “for Christ sent me not to baptize,”—that might be done by others,—“but”—He sent me—“to preach the gospel.” The Apostle here cannot intend to put any slight upon Christ’s Ordinance of baptism, as is evident from what he has just said of it, “Were ye baptized in the name of Paul?”—but he intends to show, that it might be administered by persons of inferior station and gifts in the Church. And this is manifest from the very nature of the service.

In the viith Chapter of this Epistle and the 14th verse there is a text, in which (as with respect to the children brought to Christ that He should touch them) baptism is not mentioned, and yet it has so decided a bearing upon the subject, that we cannot but carefully notice it. St. Paul is speaking of the case of married persons, when one party believed, while the other believed not. This he says is not a sufficient reason for their separation: at least the separation should not be made by the one that believed. And to satisfy the mind of the believing “brother or sister” that the children did not suffer, he says,—“For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by (or in) the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by (or in) the husband; else were your children unclean, but now are they holy.” It is with the latter part of this verse that we have to do. The Apostle here declares that children, which have one believing parent, are on equal terms or in the same condition with children, both of whose parents are believers; and thus they are said to be not “unclean” but “holy.” Now, can there be a doubt, that the Apostle uses these epithets “unclean” and “holy,” in the same sense in which they were used in reference to the distinction between the Jews and the Gentiles? The latter were called “unclean,” because of their idolatries and other abominations; the former were called “holy,” because of their connection and Covenant with God. When the Apostle Peter was sent to preach the gospel to Cornelius, he applied this word “unclean” to all who were not Jews. “Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew, to keep company or come unto one of another nation; but God hath showed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.” And the people of Israel are repeatedly called “holy to the Lord,” because of the Lord’s choice of them and Covenant with them. “Thou art a holy people unto the Lord thy God,” was the language in which Moses addressed them. (Deut, vii. 6). And in this description their children were included: for God’s Covenant with Israel embraced them also; and thus every man-child, when eight days old, was to receive circumcision, which was the token of the Covenant. From these things we may learn the meaning of the Apostle in the passage under consideration. The uncleanness of the Gentiles was a barrier against their participating in the Ordinances of the Jewish Church. The holiness of Israel was their title to those Ordinances; and this too in the case of their children. Surely, then, when the Apostle says to believing Christian parents, “Your children are holy,” he must mean that they are entitled to the Ordinances of the Church of Christ! It seems impossible, if St. Paul’s language has any meaning, to avoid this conclusion,—that the children of the faithful, as soon as they are born, have a Covenant-holiness, and so a right and title to baptism, which is now the token of the Covenant. Their holiness, that is, their being in covenant with God, does not date from their baptism, but from their birth. [65] To every believing parent God may be supposed to say, as He said to Abraham, “I will establish my Covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.” Much profit ariseth from this connection, if it be made a right use of. Baptism, like circumcision, verily profiteth, if the baptized child keep the law—the requisition which God makes of faith and obedience; but if he be a breaker of the law, his baptism is made no baptism at all; as circumcision was in such a case made uncircumcision. (See Rom. ii. 25.) And let it be farther observed from this text, that it is of real believers and their children that the Apostle speaks when he says,—“Now are your children holy.” Hence it appears, that the faith of the parents is the foundation of any children’s claim to baptism. “Unclean” is the description which is given of all others.

The only other passage in this Epistle in which baptism is referred to, as a Christian Sacrament, is the 13th verse of the xiith Chapter:—“For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.” St. Paul may here allude to baptism in the former part of the verse, and to the cup in the Lord’s Supper in the latter part of it. But whatever he may allude to, what he asserts is this;—that it was the baptism of the Holy Spirit which made them real members of Christ’s mystical body. The baptism of water was the sign of this; but the sign would have profited them little, if they had not received also the thing signified. The same may be said of the cup in the Lord’s Supper. It is for the nourishment of those who are real members of the Church of Christ by the baptism of the Spirit: in fact, it cannot possibly nourish any other. The essential unity of all baptized believers, and yet the diversity of Offices and gifts belonging to the several constituent parts or members of Christ’s Church, seems to be what the Apostle is here inculcating upon the Corinthians; and this with the special design to show them the inconsistency and the evil of their emulations and divisions. He aimed at curing them of their unseemly strife, by reminding them that one and the same Holy Spirit had made them all “members of one body,” but had set those members in their several and suitable places; so that each should be content with the place assigned him; and without aspiring to something which had not been given him, or envying those who might be in a higher or a supposed more honourable state, should use what he had for the common good,—for the strengthening and well-being of the whole: “that there should be,” as he says in the 25th verse, “no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care one for another.”

The Epistle to the Galatians furnishes us with the next passage in our important inquiry. It is at the close of the iiird Chapter, the 26th and two following verses:—“For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither bond nor free; there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” Here a new idea is introduced;—a fresh practical use is made by the Apostle of the Ordinance of baptism. And a very striking and beautiful idea it is. The order hitherto invariably found to prevail in what the Scripture says on the subject of baptism is observable also here. The Apostle first reminds the Galatians that they were made the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus, and then he refers to their baptism and what they had done by it. As we have considered the expressions, “baptized into Christ,” as they occur in the Epistle to the Romans, they need not be noticed here. But the words, “have put on Christ,” represent to us—what in connection with our subject we have not had before—the clothing or garments which baptized believers have put on, and in which they appear (when things are as they ought to be with them) both before God and before men. This phrase is said to have been taken from the method of dipping or plunging adults in baptism; who, when they came forth from the water, were clothed with their own garments as though they had been new, or with other garments really new. There are two senses in which true believers may be said to “put on Christ.” First, they put Him on as their righteousness for acceptance with God or for their justification; and, secondly, they put Him on—(and this seems especially intended here)—for sanctification; that is, His Spirit is imparted to them, by which they are so changed as to become new creatures. The graces of Christ’s Spirit are sometimes thus described under the figure of clothing. “Put on, as the elect of God, holy and beloved,” writes St. Paul to the Colossians, “bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, long-suffering.” “And above all these things, put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness.” (iii. 12, 14.) The Spirit of Christ ought to be as apparent in those who have been baptized into Him as the garments which they wear. Nay, His meekness, and lowliness, and gentleness, and goodness, and heavenly-mindedness, should become a part of themselves—their very nature. For as the work of sanctification, expressed by the being clothed upon with ‘Christ, is both internal and outward, it may be compared to the natural beauty with which Christ Himself said that God clothes the plants and the flowers: and when Christians manifest the genuine influence of the Spirit of Christ, it may then indeed be said of them, as He said of the lilies, “that Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.” The words in the 28th verse, “There is neither male nor female,”—connected with what follows, “If ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed,”—clearly show that circumcision was superseded, and that baptism now supplied its place.

Upon St. Paul’s declaration in the ivth Chapter of his Epistle to the Ephesians, “One baptism,” it is perhaps only necessary to remark, that it again follows faith;—“One faith,”—the same doctrine of salvation once for all delivered to the saints and to be received by faith,—and then, “One baptism” with water, by which that faith is professed, and in which believers are by One Spirit baptized into One body, and dedicated to the service of the One living and true God. It is One and the same Ordinance for all,—for Jews and Gentiles; and once administered, not to be repeated. The practical purpose for which this, with the other Unities, was mentioned by the Apostle, was to enforce the same lesson as that given to the Corinthians,—that Christians should “endeavour to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” (v. 3.)

In the vth Chapter of this Epistle there appears another allusion to baptism, when the Apostle says, that “Christ loved the Church, and gave Himself for it, that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word.” (v. 26.) It is not necessary to the sense and force of this verse to suppose that baptism is referred to in it; for the word of God has a cleansing and sanctifying power, when applied by His Spirit. “Sanctify them through Thy truth: Thy word is truth;” was Christ’s prayer for His disciples to His heavenly Father. And He also said unto them, “Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.” And as it is a continuous and progressive work, which the Apostle is here speaking of, and not any one particular act,—for the use of God’s “word” in the work of sanctification is continually repeated,—it seems much more natural to understand the expressions, “with the washing of water by” or in “the word,” as referring to the figure of water, and its purifying properties in general, rather than to a single instance of its application. But there can be no objection to refer these expressions to baptism, as being an Ordinance which is supposed to be kept always in remembrance, and to have a constant bearing upon the believer’s life and conduct. Let us take it here, and every where else, in connection with the context, and we shall find that it represents—not an imaginary, but a real—not a temporary, but an abiding—influence upon the soul;—issuing in its final salvation. Who is this that is said to be washed with water by the word? The mixed multitude of professors of Christ’s religion? No:—but “the Church,”—the blessed Company of all faithful people—“the Bride—the Lambs wife.” And what is the effect ascribed to the washing? Her cleansing and sanctification. But as the Church is composed of individuals, every individual member thereof is “sanctified, and cleansed with the washing of water by the word,” and so is made meet to be presented by Christ to Himself at the last in perfect beauty. Let these things attend and crown the use of the Ordinances, and men may magnify them—as Paul did his Office—as much as they please.

The next place in Scripture in which baptism is spoken of, is in the iind Chapter of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Colossians. At the 11th verse he begins the subject. “In whom also,” that is, in Christ, “ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: buried with Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised Him from the dead.” The Apostle’s object here is to show, that the Christian’s completeness in Christ (asserted in the former verse) is not affected by the want of circumcision; for that true believers have that which was represented by circumcision, only under another form and name. By “the circumcision made without hands,” the circumcision of the heart is evidently intended. By “the circumcision of Christ” is probably not meant the circumcision which Christ Himself was subjected to, but the circumcision with which Christ circumcises. This would therefore refer to the Christian Sacrament of baptism, wherever rightly received. This is the corresponding type with, as well as antitype of, circumcision; because, like circumcision, it represents and seals the blessings of the Covenant to believers. The latter part of this passage is so like the one already considered in the vith chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, that it need not be dwelt upon. The death, burial and resurrection of Christ are not only signs and patterns of what should take place with respect to Christians, but they are effectual causes thereof in the case of all who are spiritually joined to Him; and the whole is, as it were, consolidated in baptism. The faith which goes before, and which is exercised in the Ordinance, and the fruits which follow after, are all summed up in and referred to this Sacrament: and well and happy it is, whenever this is truly the case.