5thly. The fifth argument, is taken from those numerous passages of scripture, where baptismal water in the name of Christ, or no doubt, in the name of the Sacred Three, is said to be used. There are in the New Testament, we readily own, several instances, in which the baptism of the holy ghost is mentioned; all of which, one excepted, mean his miraculous influence. And it is to be carefully remembered that when the words baptize and baptism denote either the sanctifying grace, or miraculous gifts of the spirit, they are used not in their natural or literal, but in a figurative and metaphorical sense. These instances I will carefully recite. Once baptism is used by Christ to represent his sufferings, especially on the Cross; Luke xii. 40, and Mat. xx. 22. There are but three, or at most four instances where baptism and baptize mean evidently or necessarily the sanctifying grace or miraculous powers of the holy ghost. Matt. iii. 11, compared with Mark, i. 8, compared with Luke, iii. 16, compared with Acts, i. 5, and xi. 16. These texts all refer to one and the same thing. And most evidently intend the miraculous gifts of the holy ghost. Christ’s baptizing with the holy Ghost and with fire necessarily means his giving the miraculous powers of his spirit, as is fully proved by comparing Acts, i. 5, with the first sixteen verses of the second chapter. In these passages, in the Evangelists, there is a pointed and marked distinction between John’s baptizing with water, and Christ’s baptizing with the holy ghost, of giving the miraculous powers thereof. They are entirely different. But Christ’s baptizing with the holy Ghost and with fire, does not mean the sanctifying grace, but the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost, as now proved from Acts i. 5, and ii. 1–16. Christ’s baptizing with the holy Ghost and with fire, or imparting the miraculous powers thereof, is essentially different from John’s baptism; but it neither proves, nor disproves the ordinance of baptizing by water as a standing ordinance, to be continued in his church, to the end of the world. It hath no reference to such a thing, more or less. What kind of logic must that man have who reasons thus; Christ’s baptizing with the holy Ghost is altogether different from John’s baptism of water unto repentance, and therefore he never intended to have any ordinance of water-baptism in his dispensation of religion, or in the Gospel-church? A man who can suppose this to be just reasoning, or any kind of reasoning, must be disordered in his mental capacities. There is but one instance, where being baptized by the spirit can mean being regenerated by his divine influence. And that is 1 Cor. xii. 13. In describing christian graces and exercises, allusions to baptism by water are many times made, which is an argument in favour of it, and not against it, as will be illustrated, in its proper place. The word translated baptize with its derivatives, in the Old Testament, is the common word used for applications of water, in some form, to the subject. In the New-Testament the words, baptism and baptize, with their derivatives, or compounds, borrowed and brought down from the Old Testament, are used about sixty times; and must necessarily mean the application of water, in some way, to the subject, except in the four instances and their parallel places, now recited. I have endeavoured from the original to make the selection with diligence and care. We know that the first, original, and natural signification of the word, baptism or baptize is, as well as we do know, or can know the sense of any word, in any language. And that the first, plain, original signification of the word, baptize, and its derivatives, is the application of water, in some form, to the subject, all the learned know:—and to them I appeal, as the only proper judges, in this case: though unlearned men may see how it is used, in the New-Testament, to their full satisfaction in the sequel. Whenever the word is applied to denote either the sufferings of Christ, or the sanctifying grace, or the extraordinary and miraculous powers of the holy Ghost, I affirm from scripture, it is used in a figurative and metaphorical sense. To reject the plain common meaning of a word, in nearly fifty instances out of sixty, and to insist on the metaphorical sense, for the sake of expunging from Christianity, a plain ordinance, is having recourse to a strange expedient to establish a point.—And whether it be not a gross perversion of scripture, and contrary to all the rules of a fair and candid construction, is left for all to judge, who have eyes to see, or ears to hear.—We will now attend to those texts, numerous indeed, which directly or impliedly speak of baptism by water, as a standing ordinance in the spiritual religion of Jesus Christ, according to Apostolic practice. Rom. vi. 4. We are buried with him by baptism. Ephe. iv. 5. One baptism. Col. ii. 12. Buried with him in baptism. Heb. vi. 2. Doctrine of Baptisms. 1. Pet. iii. 21. Baptism doth now save us. Acts. ii. 38. Be baptized every one of you. Every one of you. 41 verse, They that gladly received his word were baptized. viii. 12. They were baptized both men and women. No distinction of sex as in circumcision. 13 verse, Simon believed and was baptized. 16 verse, Only they were baptized in the name of Jesus. 36 verse, Here is water, what doth hinder me to be baptized? 38 verse, And he baptized him. ix. 8. Saul received sight, and arose and was baptized. x. 47. Can any forbid that these should not be baptized? 48 verse, Peter commanded them to be baptized. Commanded. xvi. 15. Lydia was baptized and her household. 33 verse, The Jailor was baptized, he and all his straitway. xviii. 8. Many of the Corinthians believed, and were baptized. xix. 5. And when they heard this, they were baptized. xxii. 16. Arise and be baptized, and wash away thy sins. Rom. vi. 8. Were baptized into Jesus. 1. Cor. i. 16. I baptized the household of Stephanas. x. 2. And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud. xv. 29. Else what shall they do, that are baptized for the dead? Gal. iii. 27. As many as have been baptized. These are some of the principal places in the New-Testament, where baptism and baptize are used: and they all, mean the ordinance of water baptism, or allude to the use of it, as a standing ordinance. How numerous are these texts, more so than any one, at first view, would have imagined. How unhappy is our Lot, if against all these, and plain are the most of them, as words can be, we are to believe Jesus Christ never intended to have the sacrament of water-baptism administered, as a standing ordinance, in his Church! So considerable a portion of the New-Testament occupied in giving us a plain account of this sacrament deserves notice. Could reason wish for more? With a beautiful display of divine wisdom, in so fully and so particularly stating the matter, as if, on purpose, to cut off all the cavils and objections of gainsayers—as if, on purpose, to prevent any from denying, rejecting, or explaining away the Ordinance.—It seems utterly unaccountable how a denial of it, can consist with a serious belief that the scriptures are from God, or the only rule of Christian faith and practice.
DISCOURSE X.
Baptism by water not a piece of Superstition, but appointed by Jesus Christ.
MATTHEW xxviii.—and this part of the 19 verse.
Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost.
I proceed, in this discourse, to lay before the audience a plain account, from scripture, of the Sacrament of Baptism as an ordinance to be observed, in Christ’s Church, or the Gospel-kingdom, to the end of the world. This, it will be acknowledged, is a very important and interesting subject. For if there be no such sacrament too long have we, and the christian world, of the various Communions, practised upon it. If there be, we ought to see the scripture-proof of it, and observe it, as we are directed. If it be a human invention or tradition, only a piece of superstition, the sooner the discovery is made the better.—
We finished the former discourse, in taking a concise survey of the numerous texts, which speak of the administration of baptism as an ordinance, in Christ’s house, the Church of the living God; or which allude to it, as an established Apostolic practice.—
6th. During our Lord’s personal Ministry, which lasted as is generally supposed about three years and an half, his own chosen disciples, the twelve, administered water-baptism to all who embraced, or professed to embrace him, as the promised Messiah. It appears to have been the common practice of initiating them into his kingdom by baptizing them with water, as the appointed token or visible sign of their being his professed followers. We must necessarily conclude that our blessed Saviour ordered his disciples, during his public Ministry, to administer baptism by water to his professed followers, and gave them the form of words to be used. And that there was likewise a complete uniformity in their practice, we must necessarily conclude; because we never, in any of the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, find that our Lord reproved them for baptizing converts to his Religion, as the introduction, or intimated to them, in the remotest manner, his disapprobation: or spoke any where against baptism as administered by his harbinger, John the baptist, as if it were a piece of superstition—or an empty form: but he received it himself, which is at least a presumptive argument, that water-baptism was to be an ordinance in his religion; for John came to prepare the way of the Lord, in all respects, and to dispose people in their minds, to receive the Christian System; but if there were to be no christian baptism, how could John’s baptizing unto repentance be from heaven or a preparation for the introduction of the Gospel-System? If Jesus Christ designed to have no such ordinance, to be a standing ordinance, in his Church, to the end of the world, we should have had, we rationally suppose, some direct or implied hint at least of his dislike of baptizing with water. For when he gave his eleven disciples, and virtually, in them, all his true Ministers, the commission in the text, go teach all nations, baptizing them, in the name of the Father—and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost, they could not understand him, but as instituting and appointing the ordinance of water-baptism. As they had been universally, during his public Ministry, in the practice of it, if he had intended to have the practise discontinued, he would have told them so:—he would have forbid them to continue it, and told them it was an idle ceremony—a perfectly useless and insignificant rite—no better than old Jewish fables—and wholly unbecoming the nature of his own spiritual religion. But there is not a word of this. On the other hand he, in the most solemn manner possible, commanded them to go and baptize all that should embrace his religion, professedly, throughout the world. And after being endowed with power from on high, on the day of Pentecost, or baptized with the holy Ghost, that is, invested with his miraculous gifts, they continued to dispense the ordinance of water-baptism, as they had done before. As they gathered and organized Churches over the world, and preached Christ and him crucified, they dispensed water-baptism to all their converts, not one excepted, that we hear of, or know of: and so careful were they about this matter that they even baptized some of John’s disciples over again. In the progress of their labours, they gathered an immense number of churches in Asia, in Europe, in Africa, in all parts of the then known world. And they were uniform in their practice. All the churches were formed doubtless upon the same model. They did not practise baptism in some instances, or omit it in others. They administered it to all, as the standing introductory ordinance. They did this, as long as it pleased the great head of the church to employ them in his work. They had with them, when they did thus practise, the promised comforter: That holy spirit who was to assist them—to inspire them—to secure them from all error in doctrine or discipline—to lead them into all truth: to be an infallible guide to them. All these are facts. And all, who believe the holy scriptures, cannot help knowing them to be facts. I appeal to them as facts. I have proved them to be facts, in the large number of texts cited under the last argument. With an irresistible evidence, then, doth it appear, that water-baptism was the stated universal practice of the Apostles. The union of the Apostles, in the practice, will be particularly noticed and enlarged upon, under another head of proof.—Now, what can be said against baptism by water, as an appointment of Jesus Christ, and not a piece of superstition? Is any truth—is any duty—is any point of christianity more substantially proved, more clearly revealed?—So plain is this matter that it cannot, one would imagine, be contested. However to get rid of the argument and of the ordinance, it is said the Apostles, it is true, did practise it; but did administer it in ignorance—as uninformed and erring men—in weakness, and condescension to the wicked humours of their hearers:—but all along told them it was unnecessary and unprofitable—no Gospel-ordinance—but weak and beggarly elements—rudiments of the world—an abrogated rite—an abolished institution—old things that must pass away.—Strange indeed! Alas, did the Apostles practise this ordinance in ignorance, and to gratify prejudice in their converts? They acted, then, very wickedly. For they have herein set an example to all the christian world, in every age, and land. For all the various communions have followed their practice, for more than Seventeen centuries, though differing about the modes and circumstances of it. If, then, we be in an error, we have been led into it by Christ and his Apostles, by following them in administering baptism as an ordinance, in his spiritual religion. For his kingdom is not of this world, it is a spiritual and heavenly kingdom. Are we not safer in following the Apostles, as inspired guides, in doctrine, and worship, and ordinances, than in listening to such as tell us they were weak and ignorant men?—But be pleased, to consider a moment, my hearers,——Who can believe that, under the baptism of the holy Ghost, his miraculous inspiring influence, the Apostles would have practised water-baptism universally, if it had not been the mind and will of Jesus Christ, that there should be such an ordinance, in his religion?
7thly. It may tend to corroborate the proof that there is such an ordinance to be observed in the church of God, that it was the common received opinion, in the times of John the baptist, that the promised Messiah, the great Saviour of Man, would practise baptism by water in his ministry and kingdom. The people objected against John’s baptism, because he declared that he was not the Christ, John i. 25. Why baptizest thou, if thou be not the Christ? This question most obviously and clearly implies that it was expected that Christ, the promised Messiah, would have baptism by water, statedly practised, in his kingdom or dispensation. Why baptizeth thou, if thou be not the Christ? As many as if they had said, you take too much upon you, in your baptizing: you assume one of the offices of the Messiah. We expect he will have baptism, in his kingdom, as an initiation, or introductory ordinance, representing our need of renovation.—The Jews might be mistaken in their ideas of the expected Messiah, in this, as in other respects.—What is now mentioned is only to show what the common expectation was. And that common belief must have had something to be grounded upon.—