IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) % <^ 1.0 i.i U£ UiS 12.2 1*0 12.0 ■u u I IMJ L25 iu 18. 1^ P '^^. J% /a "> ^s^ s^ V 7 Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14S80 (716)872-4503 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical IVIicroreproductions / institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Tachnical and Bibliographic Notaa/Kotas tachniquaa at bibliographiquaa Tha Instituta has attamptad to obtain tha bast original copy avaiiabia for filming. Faaturaa of tiiis copy which may ba bibliographically uniqua, which may altar any of tha imagaa in tho raproduction, or which may significantly changa tha usual mathod of filming, ara choclcad balow. □ Colourad covars/ Couvortura da coulaur r~n Covars damagad/ D D D D D D Couvartura andornmagte Covars rastorad and/or laminatad/ Couvartura rastauria at/ou palliculAa ^~^^ Covar titia missing/ La titra da couvartura manqua I I Colourad mapa/ Cartaa gtegraphiquas wn coulaur Colourad ink (i.a. othar th^in blua or blacic)/ Encra da coulaur (i.a. autra qua blaua ou noiral r~~L Colourad plates and/or illuatrations/ Planchas at/ou illuatrations wt coulaur Bound with othar matarial/ Ralii avac d'autraa documents Tight binding may causa shadows or distortion along intarior margin/ La re liura sarrie paut causar da I'ombra ou da la diatorsion l« long do la marga int^iaura Blank laavas addad during rastoration may appaar within tha taxt. Whanavar possibla. thasa hava baan omittad from filming/ II sa paut qua cartainas pagas blanchas aJoutAas lors d'una rastauration apparaissant dana la taxta. mais, lorsqua cala Atait possibla. caa pagaa n'ont pas iti filmtes. Additional commants:/ Commantairas supplAmantairas: Th to L'Institut a microfilm* la maillaur axamplaira qu'il lui a itt possibla da sa procurar. Las details da cat axamplaira qui sont paut-Atra uniquas du point da vua bibliographiqua. qui pauvent modifier una image reproduite. ou qui peuvent axigar una modification dans la mAthoda normala de fiimage sont indiquAs ci-dessous. I — I Coloured pages/ v/ D Pagaa de couleur Pagaa damaged/ Pages endommagtes Pagas restored and/oi Pages restcurtes et/ou pelliculAes Pagaa discoloured, suined or foxet Pagas dicolorias. tachatAas ou piquias nri Pagaa damaged/ r~~l Pagas restored and/or laminated/ I — "1 Pagaa discoloured, suined or foxed/ Th po of fill Or be th Si. Ot fir si( or □ Pagas detached/ Pagas dAtachias Showthrough/ Transparence I I Quality of print varies/ Qualiti inAgale de I'impression Includes supplementary materiel/ Comprend du matirieS supplimantaire Only edition available/ Seule Mition disponible Th sh T! wl Ml dil en' be rig re< m« Pagas wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pagas totalement ou partiailemant obscurcies par un fsuillet d'errata, una paiure, etc.. ont iti filmAes A nouveau da fapon it obtanir la mawleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiqu* ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X ^X 28X 30X y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X tails t du odifier una maga Th« copy filmad h«r« has bMn raproduead thanks to tha ganarosity of ^ Douglas Library Quaan's Univarsity Tha imagaa appaaring hara ara tha baat quality poaalbia conaidarlng tha condition and lagibility of tha original copy and in kaaping with tha filming contract apacif ications. Original capias in printed paper covara ara filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on tha '^st page with a printed or iiii^stratad impres- snwii, or the back cover when appropriate. All other originei copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated Impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain tha symbol — ^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or tha symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. L'exemplaire film* fut raproduit grice A la ginirosM de: Douglas Library Queen's University Les images suivantas ont AtA raproduites avac la plus grand soin, compta tenu de la condition at da la nettetA de rexempiaira f limA, at en conformltA avac las conditions du contrat da filmage. Les exempiairas originaux dont 3a couvarture an papier eet ImprimAe sent filmAs en commen9ant par la premier plat at en terminant soit par la darnlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impreaaion ou d'illustration, soit par la second plat, salon la cas. Tous les autres exempiairas originaux sent fiimAs en commenpant par la premlAre page qui comporte una empreinte d'impraeaion ou d'illustration at en terminant par la darnlAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un dee symboies suivants apparaftra sur la darnlAra image de cheque microfiche, seion la cas: la symbols »► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols ▼ signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, stc may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Thoss too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, aa many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre fiimAs A des taux de rAduction diff Arents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atra raproduit en un seul cllchA, 11 est filmA A partir da Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, et de haut an bas, en prenant la nombre d'images nAcessalre. Les diagrammes suivants lilustrant la mAthode. rrata :o palure, 1 A D 32X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 9 6 V s «^»l»i>»«>»i> Wi^> "--'•yS'ji*^^*' ^i-}f!\t-J,\'V,''r _ ■•^ V t^^^t*ttHl»«i»*****»^lMJ>^*t''t^*t**»*****^*i»*********************************»**************** CHRISTIAN BAPTISM SCRIPTURALLY CONSIDERED. i|l» #^ *-^m'- m i: j'IStT?!'^ rw 5r [t < ' c^ >f-K f- .1 --f ^'^ . a' iiUiliaiiuii ''^- • * . » » » »♦ CHRISTIAN BAPTISM: ,••• • .»jt.; • « • iji«» • • • * • • t * » « t 1 ' • • • < • • » ■-"t'li :•• • • • • • • «» ••• • • SCRIPTURALLY CONSIDIiREI)r M'M .rx- •:-■>, • » • . •• •• ''», ' at BY BENJAMIN NANKEVILL, WESLEYAN MINISTER. 393 )• »4;0I J • ••« • • » J J ' .1 J J t l» « • • • > '*' » , : 1 1 ' .•* J > .1 > > * •* « t (I -0 1 o *• • « 4 f « • • • » •• n* • •• ..• • • •• • > t • a > * • 1 >« " To the law and to the testimony : if they speak not according to' 'this word, it is because there is no light in them."— Isaiah viii. 20. '•\: / ^-■:,.:., TORONTO: ; 'i^''';- '^"•' '"?"' PRINTED FOR THE AUTHOR, AT THE CHRISTIAN GUARDIAN OFFICT, . No. 9, WELLINGTON BUILDINGS, KING STREET. 1844. ^'4'^. • •1 • • t « t * » • • • • r t " •••• • • • < • « • » • *• • ' • • •« ••••• •••■• •• • ••••• ••••« ...» °. •.• •• •• • • • • •• .• ••. • * t • •• « • , • • • * < '^j' » ♦• • • •• '• »" •»• •• «•• •. < • • • » • « • •• i;/('c ','.,? '• -'^u-^'^ ■-'\V' • '> n It ift perhaps he«dful to apprise the reader of iny reasoiu for this imblieation, and to make a few prefatory remarks : — ^The following Tract is the substance of a Sermon preached to a congregation of several hundreds, convened for that purpose, in the centre of the Township of Augusta, C. W., upon the Camp-ground in that neigh- bourhood, on Sunday, August the 6th, 1848. My reasons for thus publicly and formally discussing this subject at that time were— motives of self-defence. Our Baptist brethren in these parts had been publishing and urging their peculiar views relating to Baptism with the industry and pertinacity for which they are characterized ; and not only had they made some converts from without, but a few of our own people began to be unsettled. These facts and circumstances, backed by a very strongly-expressed wish on the part of friends and others, induced me *' to stand for the defence of the Gospel." The Sermon is thought to have set the subject at rest in this vicinity ; hence it was the wish of several who heard it, and of a number of ministerial and other reli^i^ms friends who only saw it in manuscript, that it should be publisheo. Phis request, together with the considera- tion that a summary work, such as this, was a desideratum among thoso who have not much time for reading, and but limited means for the purchase of books, overcame my natural aversion to an attempt at authorship. It will be observed that I have dropt the text and laid aside the form and arrangement of a Sermon. This I have judged it best to do; as it has enabled me to bring forward some important matter which could not otherwise have been so conveniently disposed of— while at the same time it has enabled me to discuss the subject more consistently. . ^w\trt%:i..:-;.iiM&it'r^'- It may be just and proper to observe that I have helped myself liberally to the thoughts and arguments of others, whenever they would assist me in my purpose. Sill!, I have but seldom distinguiBucu 77919 ■\ V such passages by marks of quotation'— (1) because they are so seldom quoted verhatinit or anything more than in substance ; and (2) because they are so completely woven into the very texture of my argumenta- tion. I would, however, just say to the reader, that the authors on whom I have most frequently drawn are Wksley, Merritt, and Clinton. The natxme o^f Baptism I have only incidentally discussed, that being a branch of the main question concerning which there is but little controversy. A word or two will be expected on the literary character of this production; On this subject the courteous reader will allow me to say, that to a highly-cultivated literary taste I make no pretensions. Hence« in this performance, I have not taken that pains to form and polish my seoteoces which, perhaps, I might have been expected to take. One reason has been— -I have got it up in haste^ under the pressure of many important duties and engagements. Another is — ^I have been chiefly anxious to make myself understood ; and I have eschewed all attempts at ornament, as unsuitable to the style and character of a work purely argumentative and controversial. \^..i ,^k^ a ,u: i^-*'^'' •''«•" ^4.k.*i..i;i*..^ "^ It only remains for me to say, that, in giving this essay to the Public, I am influenced by no other motive than a desire and a hope to subserve what I conceive to be the cause of truth and christian unity. Hi^ying thus endeavoured to accomplish my undertaking, at least in the spirit of candour and kindness, I commend it to the impartial and attentive perusal of a Christian community, devoutly imploring the blessi of th^ IMIost High upon it. •3dv --fiS-.i'. b;i^I f>iit; i^-"»: '^i.' ; f »;■ ■^v}:.M *^ Teui ■! ♦.;• ■;.^ THE AUTHOR. ! -'o ; 'w/iil mlw WWII* ■' /■'•"■.•Ji» •'"• >''.' *^ .m ■U sft'l ;'•^Ij <>?> triltJRm tfn'lT vrrni' 'Mfcy f»i>jv;'ial :«:?""• ' <■. iv/'i'sjl:! I It ! ii;o-> rbjiiw r.'.n/tv 1 «jf ^r/^'f <*f ei^'> so seldom 2) because r^menta- authors on RiTT, and discussed, ch there is ter of this me to say, s. Henee, polish my tke. One >e of many en chiefly 1 attempts >rk purely •' . »■ lay to the ,hd a hope tian unity. it least in lartial and bring the r'r'-tj-iUL'ii rnoR. '.wn tT i! r,'T ; (tl) o < fiOidw •tc eliiiw ■t»f(r;i.'jwfii rfil^. birij liClmiSTIAN BAPTlgM,.w^.trii ..-' ^»..,jv vz-'v*'-i?sr. SEC TjI O.N- .1. i l>flii5' kiB.t^t iiim^ 'Fii^t, I shall rtotiee tlife subjects of BaptiiSi^; 9xd erid^avDUr to prove and Yindicato the Divine right of Ittfkht Baptism, as briefly and plainly a«' I ca«. But previous to entering on the proof of the point before us, let it be observed and remembered, that there is ndthing in the New Testament against Infant Bap-* tism'. It isnoAVhere said or hinted that the Apostle* forbade, or refused, or declined to baptize'infants ; of that any child of a. believer was, after he was grown" up, baptized upon a profession of faith. It must ais© b6 acknowledged, that infants are capable not only of the outward sign of Baptism, but also of having" an interest in the blessings and grace of the new covenant, and of coming under its bonds, which is the thing signified in the ordinance, and that they need those ne^y covenant blessings. Further, it is nowhere declared in Scripture, either in express or equivalent terms, that adult persons only, or that none but those who believe or profess faith, are to be baptized. In short, there is absolutely and certainly nothing that stands in the way of our embracing the doctrine of Infant Baptism. Since there is nothing against it, we shall inquire if we can find any kind of evidence in favour of it, and I think enough may be collected from the Scriptures to put the matter beyond all reasonable doi.bt. This controversy having made so wide a breach in the Church of Christ, the subject becomes important Let us then with christian candour, in the fear of God, examine the subject and search for the truth. Truth is always important, and what concerns us all to know. If our faith and nractice are consistent / \ with the word of God, if our ordinances are yalid, if our standing in the Church of Christ is regular, it is a matter ief importance that ive ^ould know it, and be steadfast in the truth; if not, it is a matter of equal importance that we be convinced of our error. Let truth stand and let error fall. If any deny the Baptism of infants, it is for them to show that their right to it has ceased, and that Jesus Christ has left them out of the church. The silence of the New Testament, if it were silent respecting infants, would leave them exactly where they had always been respecting their right to church membership. But it is not silent ; it takes notice of infants, and that in a way to show that their right to their standing in the ohurch has not ceased, but is acknowledged and con- firmed by Jesus Christ himself. Mark x. 13, 14, 16. 'And they brought youn^ children to him, that he should touch them : and his disciples rebuked those that brought them. But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them. Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. And he tock them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them.' Here we see young children brought to Christ. We see Christ much displeased with his dis- ciples, when they rebuked those who brought them. He says, * Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not.' How tender and how emph^ti- cal does the blessed Saviour ^pef^k ! ;,* Su|59r..t.hQ.lit;t;le children to come unto me.' . r,-}- .,-v--** - : ifr n^! rtminT > f When God's visible kingdom was established in the world, he made provision for the little children. Being members of this kingdom, Christ owns and acknow- ledges them; because of this, they must be brought to Christ. It is in vain for any to say these were adult believers. They are called * young children' and Vlittle children.' They were 'brought,' and Jesus 'took them in his arms.' Luke says they were 'in- fants,' xviii. 6. And why were they brought to Christ ? ralid^if ar, it ig it, and »f equal >r. Let to show s Christ of the infants, ysbeen But it lat in a If in the ind oon- 14, 16. that he d those he was he little not: for >k them blessed ight to his dis- t them, nto me, mphj^ti- ii%litj;jle lin the Being cknow- t)rought re adult n' and Jesus re *in- [^hrist ? if ■I ■m Matthew tells us, xiz. 13 — * They were brought, that he might put his hands on them and pray,' which was the common mode of blessing. Matthew, Mark, and Luke, all tell us that Christ said — ' Of such is the king- dom of God.' Had not these children been members of the covenant and kingdom, Christ would not have treated them in this manner ; but it may be inquired, what are we to understand by the kingdom of heaven? I answer, it is plainly the church whidi is here meant : for Christ declares, that these children were then mewt- hers of the kingdom of heaven. The plain meaning of our Lord is, that infants belong to him as his subjects— are subjects of his kingdom in whatever sense you understand it. And what better evidence can there be, that any are the subjects of the kingdom of heaven, than the testimony of the Kins himself? Though infants are not able to speak for themselves, yet Chnst has spoken for them, declaring that of such is the king- dom of heaven. Will Jesus then suffer the little chu- dren to be neglected now ? Has he lost his love for the little children ? Will he disown them, and be offend- ed because we bring them unto him ? No, he has not lost his love for them. He has not left caring for them. He has given directions that they be received in his name. Matt, xviii. 5. — * Whoso shall receive one such little child in my name, receiveth me.' Christ's disciples and his church are to receive them in his name. ' In his name.' How is this ? It is to receive them into covenant, and call his name upon them, as the Apostles received the household of Lydia and the Jailor, and all others to whom they administered Baptism. For of such is the kingdom of heaven. The common exception, that these infants were not baptized by Christ, nor were brought to him for any such purpose, is altogether irrelevant: for we do not argue, that infants are the subjects of Baptism, because we suppose that these infants were baptised by Christ ; but that infants belong to the Church, is here plainly asserted, and that all such as belong to the church are the subjects of Bap- 6€Aiiw dlMroh r • Before itteri ui^0 dubh^ 4t»6dtfcftS, t^ shdtM lii^k^ it appear lltAI^ tH^i^ itlfaints^ had ttbi Mplk^Mtite or itoti kof ii6>lb^t1;ai!^-to tkk* Fo^ ii^ Ghi$)iif did iicyl b^pl^e fhei^^ «ihMreii, y^t he ^te tb^tifi ^ We^ ^Mi^n 6^ chiii^h m^ii^b6^^^ ilii«tf/'%heti^ *^h^ laid his hahdd up6n them and^bl^^A^i tb»«if." K is ftirthet objected; ehrisfs emc& ^ileiiW sibd^fi Iiifaht m^tisiA, a« this liiiie, has ho fmmm^ aspiBtJt cm such a practice. I answer, Ghrikt havi«gf AiM6rted the ehurch riiembeitehip of infants, ailld: Solemn^ bl^is^d th^ni^ith impositioh of h^nds, and having said nothing against the baptism! of theih, more thah of adulf#; thdise tnings haye a. very favourable aspect on the prid-' ticj^of Infant Baptism, and imply a good warrant for it. This th^i. is >)7hat I contend for, that infants are mem^ bend of Ghtisf s church, and of his kingdom ; and, con- sequently, fit subjects of Baptism. 'Again, there is undeniable proof that Christians are ii6w under the covenant made vv^ith Abraham, which covenant included his infant oflfepring. The Abrahaiiaici and Christian covenants are the same. Gen. xvii. 7. — *I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after thee.' Gal. iii. 14, &c. — * That the bless- ing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus' Christ.- 'Brethren, I speak after the manner of men ; though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannuUeth or addeth thereto. Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not. And to seeds, as of many ; but as of one. And to thy seed, which is Christ. And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, th© law, which was four hiHidred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of no^e MAU<nt^^i$3^hn^kif OMri^ Jetfui.' ' ■ Aiid^ if ye be ©htisfj'i?,' th^nr aiite^5i*> A'lM^hamfs seed] Wnd 'heirs^ aecotding^i to) thestn^miifo^^' We niay^ further observe, tti^iit ' ha*' tXwa^: l^feeii J^trfh* te«)i^lbr^dhildr6Yy<1lo be ii^M^ in^ ^ovenaftUli H^^ th« paretits, to c6Me nndef the btdds atkflfnedehwthei in#ileg€»s therein; sttpttlated.J*' R i«' ate certaiii; ii«tJ wMh'G^d has been ^leai^d td ddveiyanttiriijh nttkinkind<- thb'o&ildlfenias wellas the' jjarentS' haH^ bedrodifo^fewi h«ttflfed. TPhi« appears tb' have %^en the^ been the oa^e in all God^s federal iraiisadtiOtiP with the dhildreti of men. Hence ' the Apostleis are? ^so fair from teaching* that Christ has annulled^ Gdd*s graei*? bus covenant with the fathei^s/or takfen* away any bfth^* privileges therein granted to them or their emldrenj'^at> S*. Paul asserts the i contrary, in Rom. xv. 8ii--*Now 1^ say, that Jestts Christ was a minister of the circumcisidn^ fut* the truthiof G^, to confirm the promiseSs 'madettntd the fa^hersi' Hence^ our children are still childi^tf of the cdvenantv to greater advantage than ever." "■^^ *'' Thfe Apostle tdki us a^ain, that the covenatit i^h» Abraham Wks * confirmed of God in Christ;* and- that the law, which was' four hundred and thitty year* after, * could nbt disannul it.' Indeed, the third chapter of Galatians, and fourth of Rbmans, are proofs that the covenant with Abraham abides in force^ under the Gospel dispetisation ; and that the Gentile believ- ers; with their children, have an interest in it which can never be evaded. The Apostle says, that 'they who are of faith are the children of Abrahanl.* And being his adopted children, * they are heirs.' They inherit the blessings of his covenant and all those privileges of church membership which were granted to Abraham and his seed. The Apostle adds, ' Th^ blessing of Abraham is come upon the Gentile* through Jesus Christ ;' which is as if he had »aid^ ^ K«tiiflg|t itmd >n?il0gt»8 granted In lik9 cioymtkH. w^hiAhthhtmhelongi and ate convejred to^ t^ Gtv^ $ clmreb<;-T-tlie veiy sitme privileges; without an^ dmm^ utioQv h0\ih for ihem and their children; 4t ye axQ Cliii8t\i, then are je Ahrahatoi's seed* and heirs accord- ing to ^ promise.' The Anti'PedoWptists endeayoiir to confound the Abrahamio covenant with the cere- moilial dispensation^ with a view to prove, that as llie o^ waS' aboMshed when Christ died, sq> the other mvm% he also. Tliere are no two things in the Bible mdre; distinct than these, and none more olearlj illus- trated by the Apostle, Gal. iii. 17;^—^ And this I sajr, that)the covenant, that was confirmed before of God la Christ, the Law, whi<^h was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect' This passage teaches us, that the covenant made with Abraham was confirmed of God in Christ, and had no connexion with, or refer- ^ce to, the ceremonial Law; that the ceremonial Law was four hundred and thirty years alter, and wa& a temporary business ; but the covenant with Abraham was indissoluble in its nature, having Christ for its foundation; and was never so completely realized as under this last dispensation of Gospel grace. I know a celebrated writer of the Baptist order, Elder Merrill, says, * The Covenant of Circumcision appears to be annexed to this Law;' and that 'the Covenant of Circumcision, which was incorporated with it, hath passed away.' The Law of Ceremonies, we ail know, is abolished. We have no dispute here. But to say the covenant of circumcision was annexed to this law, or hath passed away, is grossly absurd. To say the covenant made with Abraham, which was the consti- tution of the church, was annexed to the law of cere- monies, and became null and void, when that law ^as no longer in force, is to say, God has ceased to be: AbrahEm's God, and the promises to the believer and his seed are to be relied on no more. Perhaps I dhall .he, reminded, that this covenant, Gf^\ $■ ' duMii- ye ai9 eayour oew- as 1^ other Bible y iUu«- 1 8«y, Godia I thirty ike the hes us^ ifinned >r refer- »moniai tnd waa braham for ita iized as I kttow Merrill, ( to be nant of k^ hath [ know, ; to say ^is law, say the consti- f cere- lat law ised to •eliever Keaant, U y^ikhifm^i he mBA^tY^ Im^^.mi^ i^jij years l^ore the l^w^ whQrea^ithe coir^BanliQl circumcision was about four hundred ;andjia;oye|ii| before the la^^ wi^ which^ ^rouinoisiob Was uniied. His trjue» the dates of the $ible make it abo^i^four hundred and thirty years, from tiie time^he?|.(|^«d appeared to Abraham^ (Gen. gciip) to tn^ giving of itifi Law. And what, then^ What God prop£sp4» ioi" pXiomised, in the 13th chapter, be did in the 17th reu^w^ ratify, and confirm by a fixed seal. It is eviden^dy 1)U| one and the same covenant of grace, because ^t^ promises made to Abraham^ and the conditions requii^e^ of him, in each chapter are, for matter and, substanc^^ the same^ Neither does St. Paul say the cpnfiripation was four hundred and thirty years before the law. If the confirmation was delayed for the space of twentyrthree years aft r the covenant was propos|pd» thut makes nodi^e.rence, so long as it was coi^rmed and circumcision was made the visible seal; and thia St, Paul hath plainly told us — 2 Cor. i. 20-—* For all the promises of God in him (Christ Jesus) are yea; mfid in him Amen.' Does not the 17tb chapter contain promises, as well as the 1 2th ? Rom. iv. 1 1. — * And he received the ^ign of circumcision, a seal of the ri^h^e^ ousness of the faith which he had.' Was circumcision a seal of the righteousness of faith in Christ, and the covenant not confirmed in Christ?. Rom- xv. 8. — * Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers.^ To deny that the covenant, of which circumcision waa the seal, which was the covenant confirmed of God in Christ, is to deny a plain Bible truth, and make the Apostle palpably contradict himself; because, all the promises in Christ are yea and Amea * Circumcision is a seal of the righteosuness of faith.' And Christ is 'a minister of the circumcision.' Circumcision and the promises in Christ cannot be separated^ Hence, such a shift as our Baptist friends have to resort to, when they deny circumoisioii to be the seal of the righteousness of p ',.( 1^ fi^lto their cm&ilA'- '<-'■'' ■'''■■'- ^' •■ ^^'Ji^-- ='-'■' ^^ f ' Iti this coveneii^ ' ^Sh€ (ONds^di^ Wtie^ ^dfadied. 0^1. iii; ai -iii* Tl^ scfri|jtitt«i fbres^ibgf Aat God' would* justify thel iMb^'^l^oii^h! faith, preached befo«id'^^>^spelutt«^ Abraham,' ^yin^, Ih thee shall ail n«^u'A^^^^i>£jl-^«?i»i',r . >mKii i?oq« Circumcision being continued, under the ministry of the: Apostles, and by the guidance of the Holy Ghd'st, it must be used with the same spiritual meaning it had before i that is, as a token of God's covenant and seal of the righteousness of faith. > The covenant interest of children, the institution, and mode of baptism^ were taught in the writings of the prophets. Hence, the apostlie says expressly, and with thd greatest solemnity, that he had taught ' none other things than the prophets and Moses did say shoulck come.' Acts xxvL 22. One fact, which carries irresisti- ble conviction along with it, we will here introduce;' it is this :— The language of the prophets was, VThna saith the Lord;' but the language of Christ and the apostles was, 'Thus it is written ;** What saith the Scriptures ?*' The Scripture saith,' &c. Did Paul preach none other things than' the prophets and Moses did say should come ? • No,' says Paul ; * nothing else.' TJse v/ritings of the prophets and Moses was tlie rule of his preaching, and from this rule he says he had iMnribr departed* ■ '.u ■■^■n^a .^ ^■lull num. u^ ifta. ,'uij \s^' IB )'Wo wiH, then, try the streneth of thift groiuid idth the Anti-Pedobaptists' side of the question in dispute; Did Moses or the prophets say, that the time should ever eome when the children of believers should bv denied the privileges of covenant interest and standing)? —that they should ever be denied the seal of the covid^ natit? These are the proper questions to be asked And what are their answers ? No, truly, no! Neither the prophets nor Moses say any such thing. There is not a syllable of any such thing in all their writings. It is then certain that Paul never taught any such thiiiig as our brethren hold. The plain testimony of Scrips ture truth stands directly against them, and they can- not remove it. Again: Did Moses and the prophets teach and require believing parents to give up their children to Grod in covenant, and put the token of the covenant, the seal of the righteousness of their faith, upon them ? Truly the Prcphets and Moses did so ieach and so require. ! .rrrrivKo'* ivrf^^Mj ffritt'm«^\Tij'>iiO To make this matter plain we will look among their writings, and see what is said on this subject. Moses, in the 17th chapter of Genesis, records the whole tran- saction how God made a covenant with Abraham, and commanded him to put the token of the covenant upon his children. This token St. Paul calls ' a seal of the ^righteousness of faith.' Moses further tells us how God promised to be a God unto Abraham, and to his Seed thus given up, and how this covenant should en- dure forever, and how the Gentiles should be brought to the enjoyment of it, under the Gospel, as has been shown before. Again : Moses, in the 29ih chapter* of Deuteronomy, leaves it on record how he took the ehilr dren of Israel as God commanded him, and required them, old and young, parents and babes, to enter into covenant with the Lord, — verse 10. As seen before^ infants were included in all great covenant transbci- uons, ariu^ according to God-s institution, were capi^ ble of entering ihto covenant, and were required lio to do; and no man has a right to deny whhtifOod dispute; ) should ouM bff andingi? le coW!» e asked. Neit^ex^ There is vrritings. chthiiiig tf Scrips ley caDf- irophets up their n of the eir faith, s did 80 }ng their MosesI, Lole tram- lam, and ant upon Ell of the us how nd to his iould en- brought iias been tiapter' di theehilh required nter into a before, transbci^ re capj6s- rMfitrirMk Such ift' the* fijgplrt'VhiQh* 'Moms * Neither as being lords over God^s heritafi^e/ Hen0fl(> children are members of the church, and It subjects erf' ba^ptism. The prophet Isaiah, foretelling the comuig of Christ, and the Gospel day, says, (22, 24,) *And they shall hang upon him all the glory of his fathei^S' house, the offspring, and the issue.' * The offspring and: the issue' shall be hung upon Christ They belong to God's house, which is the church. Heb. iii. 6.-^-* Aadf Moses, verily, was faithful in all his (God's) house, hut^ Christ as a son over his own house,' that is, the church; Here we see children hung upon Christ. They belong^' t#' God's house, and are fit subjects of baptism. - hmn (The success of the Gospel, and the ingathering <^\ the Gentiles into the church, is foretold, Isaiah xlix. 22 : ' Behold, I will lift up my hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people : and they shall bring the» sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders.' Isaiah Ixv. 23 : 'For they «» the seed of the blessed of the Lord, and their offspring with them.* Jer. xxx. 20: 'And it shall be with theS^ children as aforetime, and their Congregation shall be established before me.' All these, and many otheanT which might be mentioned, are clear prophecies of the' gospel day, and expressly mention that children muMi be in the same circumstances as they were before. Thofl^ God, in his holy and everlasting covenant, has fixed tfa»' standing of children. This then was what the Apostle i Paul taught, 'none other things than those which the'< prophets and Moses did say should come^'i ',.m»*mi i^^k j* We have another unanswerable proof thit the childveib^ of believers are to be members of the vi^bl^ chuisdli^^ and consequently subjects of Baptism^ 1 Cor. ^ii. Wr '^The unbelieving husband is sanctified by t^ ^if e,'WSii^ tko vnbolievtnff /wife is sanctified by the htisbattd,i elfNi were your chudren unclean, but now are they holy.!j Now since we find that the title, or appellation 'holy* iSiiiaver given to any person in the world, except he be of: the church — and suico the Apostle declares that the chilidren ore holy — it is a plain and undeniable conse-, |uence, that such children are of the church, and are the proper subjects of Baptism. The Anti-Pedobaptists have endeavriir< d in vain to, wring and wrest these words of the \; st > to a com^ pliance with their tenets. In the ti it place; they would parsuade us that the holiness wiiicl 'he Apostle herei intends, cannot be that whi^'i } implied, in, and con* liected with, church mombeiship. For they say the same holiness which is ascribed to the children, is also^ attributed to the unbelieving parent. If the children are ' holy,' the unbelieving husband and wife are also said to be * sanctified.' I answer — The Apostle's word* plainly show that the unbelieving yoke-fellow is only ' sanctified' to the believer, as all the creatures of God; me said to be sanctified to the saints, so that they may have a holy use and enjoyment of them. Thus, again, M^ see infants are legitimate subjects of Baptibm. And what reason can be assigned why it should not be so t. Qonot infants belong to Christ as partakers of the Atonement ? Has he not died for them, and risen again* delivering them from the curse of the law, having been made a curse for them ? Are not infants as well as believers in a j : AJ n'id state, according to Paul 1 Horn. y. i«8, 19: ' The^'f f;v ^ ■ j; by ti offence of one judgment came upon &.. .uen to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by One man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.' Here, it may be observed, that the infant and the believer i»iand in the ss relation to Christ as partakers of his death. They oth justified, as having no actual sin lying against f .Why, tk^n, should they not be acknowledged Ley may I, again, II. And I; be so 1, i of the: n again, ng been, well as. Horn. y. ' idgment ) by the; lenunto >edience: of one nay be 1 in the , They against, ivledged W AS his, and treated aobordingly, by being adiniittediiiiti his Church, and having the seal df tl^ covenant 'ptti upon them, which seal is Baptism? I'm UUk ^ erf 'infant Baptism has been the practice of the chundif from the apostolic age, according to the testimony of the earliest writers. The fact, in short, is this, that the Tslidity of Infant Baptism was never denied by any christian sect till about the year 110' It was fini denied in France b/ Peter De Bruis. Thib -nan assert* ed that infants were not capable of salvati '^ and on that account ought not to be baptized. He h I only s few followeris, and his sect soon becam' exi net. It was next denied in Germany, by a sect called Ana- baptists, about the year 1522. The who history of the church is against our differing brethren. Tustiii Martyr, who wrote a'^out forty years after e minilB* tuition of the Apostles, mentions some age< rmstians "who were made disci nles in or from thr fancy;' while, in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew page 69, he plainly speaks of Baptism as being to chrL ans 'in the stead of circumcision.' He wrote that pology within forty years of the death of the Apost ; and seventy years, reckoned back from that time which was the age of Justin w hen he wrote, will jstretoh backwards into the midst of the Apostles' time.^-Irenseus, born about the time of St. John's death, mer ons the baptism of infants. Take notice how near this man was to the Apostles' time. In an age so nigh the Apos- tles, and in a place where one of them had so lately lived, the christians could n it be ignorant of what had been done in their time, in a matter so public as the baptizing or not baptizing infants.toi5'»B mn'^wtW r* '^i?* Origen, who also lived within one hundred years after the Apostles, declares 'that infants are by the usage of the church baptized' and that an order for the baptizing of infants had been delivered to the church from the apostles themselves. Now, since Origen was bom in the eighty-fifth year after the Apostles, (for he was seventeen years old when his father sikffered iMnn f2 Q^dmy) bib gTADolfatber, or at least Kis great-gmod^ fiil|L^, must haive 'lived in the ApostlesVtime. And ai he could not be ignorant whether he himself was bap* t^d in inf&ncj, so he , had lio farther than his own family to go, to inquire what was practised in the time of the Apostles. Cyprian, who lived one hundred and fifty years after the Apostles, gives as full a testimony is possible to the practice of Infant Baptism at the time be lived. At an assembly of sixty-six bishops, who i{K)ke of InfaUt Baptism as a known, established, and uncontested practice, one Fidus questioned whether infants were to bo baptized so soon as between two and three days after their birth, and whether it would Hot be better to defer their baptism till they were eight days old, as was observed in circumcision ? which soru- jAes he proposed to this assembly, desiring their resolu- tion. This was complied with, and a letter sent to him, part of which I transcribe : — i ; : j ■s a'' * Gyprian, and the rest of the bishops who were pre* aent at the Council, sixty-six in number, to Fidus our brother, greeting: — We read your letter, most dear brother; but as to the case of infants — whereas you jtidge that they must not be baptized within two or three days after they are born ; and that the rule of circum- eision is to be observed, so that none should be baptized before the eighth day after he is born : we were all in our assembly of the contrary opinion. We judge that no person is to be hindered from obtaining the grace by the law that is now appointed ; and that the spiritual circumcision ought not to be restrained by the circum- cision that was according to the flesh : but that all are to be admitted to the grace of Christ. This, therefore, dear brother, was our opinion in the assembly — that it is not for us to hinder any person from Baptism and the grace of God, who is merciful, and benign, and affec- tionate to ail : which rule, as it holds for all, so we think it more especially to be observed in reference to infants newly born ; beoaulse, by their cries and tears at their And as as bap his own he time ed and stimonj the time )s, who ed, and whether een two t would re eight ch scrii* r resolti- t to him, .'f ,;:«'^fd'*/ ^ere pre* idus our ost dear eas you or three circum- baptized re all in dge that grace by spiritual circum- t all are lerefore, —that it and the nd affec« iT-:_i. fVt; ujiiiflh ifirsitentrai^c^ into the wAfld^^theyi^dp intiiolatai nothing so much as that they implore compassion.'; i/«'J ii: . -* f » From this piece of history it appears tiha^t both the persoin who*movied th^s doubt, and all the persons who resolved it, unanimously agreed in thi^, that infants were to be baptized, and that it was the seU;led custom of the church to baptize them. If the assembly had been against Infant Baptism, they would have answered, *^t is so far from being necessary to baptize children v; i the eighth day after their birth, that they ought not k> be baptized at all, till they are of age to judge and act for themselves.! But none of these bishops held this sentiment. They all looked upon it as a thing uncon- tested, that infants were to be baptized. ■'.;k lii^AR were baptized in the cloud, and in the sea.*t-^' ' 'Thus, then, we have Scriptural examples for our baptizing our dear little ones tind bringing them into are called God's- children, Ezekiel xvi. 21. The result of our inquiry thus far is this, childreii are comprehended M receired iples. of Usehold if Israel, were in , at th« jtle say9, ould be e cloud, aptized 5: 'Now e should I' The ir at the must be saith St. Baptism By faith [!;') so is tirist; 60 sm, they t Christ, ) do the Ids; the mgh the xtent of ie times jedingiy ja.'ioiis, for our 3m into i %a}l the covenants God hals made with mail, andlienoe they are comprehended iii the commands for Baptisin, and many circumstances concur to agree with the fact that they were baptized. Through the New Testanient^ the highest qualifications requisite for Baptism in adults^, are expressly ascribed to believei^' children. And what itronger evidence can we need, that children have the same standing in the chtii'ch and covenant under the latter as under the former dispensation? If indeed" to be *holy,' if 'to belong td the kingdom of God,' &c. are qualifications sufiicient to entitle adults to Baptisni^ the same qualifications will entitle their children to Bap- tism ; and this argument does irresistibly prove the fact^ ^at the Apostles did baptize them. The Baptism of households and of the Israelites at the Red Sea conoiir in the same idea. ■ "<■'•■ '^i^^'^M^i^H^ .'uii,.hnit^.f\f^> tt,rk;.?iMil Here I anticipate an objection. Believe, and be bap^ ti^ed ; infants cannot believe; hence they must not to baptized. tmi.jni% ■ {ni^-mt^u ^Ih -^Bwrn^^^^^iMMi^wt^mk i I answer — God hath made the parents perform Ih^ child's act. The parent is the head, the representative, and proxy, for his children, while they are young. Those infants which Christ took in his arms were brought to him. And who brought them ? Those who had faith to obtain a blessing for them. Christ received and blessed them not according to their own faith, but according to the faith of those who brought them. Children, by the want of actual faith, are no more disqualified for Baptism than they always were for circumcision. Further: the same argument, "Which proves against the Baptism of infants, will prove against the salvation of infants. *He that believeth not shall be damned.' It is certain then that faith, as a condition, is required of none but such as are capable of the exercise. Christian parents, we see our duty and obligation to give up our dear children to God in covenant, to be faithful to instruct them in the fear of God, in the prin- ciples of our holy religion, and to be importunate in our prayers that they may be the subjects of God's grace, ' 1^ «od?thi8;heuv9 of his etetnalglQry. : Why will younegl^t a piiivil^ge ^o pri^ious ? Do not say; 'Baptism canijlp ihem iio good.' Tbis is limiting God. It is God's iur stitution ; and how muoh gqod it may do them you cs^n- not tell It is certainly unnatural towards them, as well as undutiful towarcls God, for you to neglect them, r, ^ Again: we challenge those who will not admit theat views to produce an authentic injunction, or a precedent, for this their refusal. For certainly there is neither order nor precedent for excluding them from the church, or from the initiating rite, which rite is Baptism* ij, -- V Neither is a profession of faith always required, as'a condition for Baptism: hence St. Paul was baptized without any profession of faith whatever. Neither caa we suppose that Ananias den^irred against baptizing him, for he had the authority of Jesus. The same authority have we for the Baptism of children, without a profession of faith. For Christ saitiii * of such are IhP kingdom of heaven,' (the church) : and hence they arfe the legitimate or proper subjects of Baptism. Neither can I find in the Bible that justifying faith is ever reh quired. * John ba ptized unto repentance,' and the ApostlflS *for the remission of sins;' but in no place did eve?" John, or the Apostles, require justifying faith — ^but faith in the Messiahship of Jesus only. Perhaps I shall here be reminded that the Apostles were commanded to bap- tize believers, Mark xvi. 16: *He that believeih and is baptized shall be saved.' I answer, the Apostles did not understand the Redeemer to require justifying faith ; for the first time they administered the ordinance they baptized * for the remission of sins.' Here observe, the Apostles were inspired men, and could not misunder- stand the Saviour. This, I think, is a clear proof, yea a demonstration, that the blessed Jesus did not require justifying faith, but faith in his Messiahship alone. Again : I shall be reminded of the saying of Philip to tlno W.uniinh. A Afa it\\\ ^'7 • * Tf 1-Vir»n hfiJ/ifit^fivf -wrifli nil inn V AAA* «/a.AV# vtt «^%/v«*w«^«^v thine heart, thou mayest.' Notice the confession of faith the £unuch made: 'I believe that Jesus Christ is canijp rod's i^ asweU lem. ;, lit the«9 [ecedQBl^ lev order luroh, or •ed, as:{i baptized ither cfui >aptiziQg le same without li are il^p they are Neither ever ro- Aposttefi did ev^r but faith ball here 1 to bap- h and is sties did istifying dinance observe, isunder- oof, yea require ) alone, ^hilip to ; with all ?sion of i^hrist is the Son of God.' And on this confession Philip bap- tized him. There is no confession of justifying faith here ; but faith in the M essiahi^ip of Jesus. Again : I may be reminded that * ^^imon himself believed also, and was baptized.' Acts viii. 13. Very true. But Simon was * in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of imquity.' Surely this is not justifying faith. And what i» said of the faith of those who were baptized with Simon ? * they believed Philip preaching the thing* concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ' Here again there is nothing about justifying faith. It is never required as a condition for Baptism.; nor have we any account that ever such a confession "Was made by those who received the ordinance. Neither have we any precedent for baptizing justified believers, save Cornelius and his friends, on whom the Holy Ghost foil prior to their being baptized. Here I would o\y- serve, that the pouring out of the Spirit on Cornelius and his friends, and Peter's vision, was to show the Apostles that the blessings of the Gospel were designed for the Gentiles as well as the Jews. Acts x. 45 : * And they of the circumcision which believed were astonish- ed, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost* Why, then, do our differing brethren require of us a * thus sa^th the Lord' for the baptism of our dear little ones, while they at the fame time require as a condition of their candidates what neither John nor the Apostles ever required ? Neither have they any warrant from the Bible for their conduct Thus, then, we think enough has been said to convince any unprejudiced mind that infant children are members of Christ's king- dom on earth, (his church ;) and consequently are the proper subjects of baptism. / i- » ! * . nm m II i**^ ^iia THE MODE OF BAPTISM^ -Him^m ^* -We shall now, in the next place, consider the Mode; And before I enter on this subject, I must express my regret that our differing brethren cannot recognize us as belonging to the Church of Christ; hence we are told that * there is but one door into the sheep-fold. And ho that entereth not in at the door, but climbeth up some other way, is a thief and a robber. Christ is the door, and baptism is the way to Christ.' Here, I think, there is a glaring inconsistency : thejf require a man to come to Christ first and be converted, and then to be baptized. Thus, on Baptist principles; Baptism is not the way to Christ; inasmuch as the Baptists expect their candidates to give an account of their conversion, and of their being justified by faith in Christ Jesus, prior to their receiving the ordinance. ^ I know that some of our Baptist brethren will admit, that members of other churches will be saved. Then I answer, They cannot be thieves and robbers ; foi* none such can enter heaven. They must, then, have entered in at the right door, and have come in the right way; which is not by a mode of baptism, but repent- ance towards God and faith in Christ Jesus. Our Baptist brethren affirm that there is but one laode; that the mode is essential to baptism, and that mode im- mersion. This, they think, is fully proved by Paul, — Ephesians iv. 6, * One Faith, one Lord, one Baptism.' I answer, the Bible does not say one mode of Baptism, but * One Baptism.' Now, I believe in one Baptism-^ the christian Baptism with water, in the name of the Trinity. We never re-baptize. But, any attempt to ^.^..>« A.^.^ *-i.^ "Dcui^ 4.1^-4. ,■ ^: :^ 4.x, ^ 1 j« piuvc iiuiu luc jjiuic iuai< iiiiixicioiuii is tuc uiiiy riiuuc, is a vain and a fruitless effort. I am free to admit, that I cannot prove immersion to be Baptism, from God'a {pouring f tised b^ [ applied Iter to a that the [ I again I word b I after. ' in Jor I there.' iaud al jbaptisi virhere sprink require but ab at leas Judea, baptiz the id< by imi been i it is i it is u ing hi baptii comel not w Ghos baptii theE with ' Hjohn ^ with y : they nverted, inciples; h as the count of ' faith in mce. w 11 admits .' Then ers; foi* in, have he right repent- s. Our le; that lode im- Paul,— . ptism.' baptism, ptism— i of the 3mpt to Y mode, lit, that i God'9 meaning of the word, as explained in the Scriptuves/ [nor from the mode as practised by Him. For if I searek I the Bible to find God^s meaning of the word baptize, it will always bring me to effusion, either by sprinkling or {pouring, but nowhere to immersion. His mode prac- tised by Him is the same. Hence I believe that water, (applied in the name of the Trinity, by a proper Minis* [ter to a proper subject, is Baptism. But I cannot prove, [that the application of the subject to the water is Baptism. |l again repeat it, neither from God's meaning of the word baptize, nor His mode. But more of this here- after. I know that great stress is laid on John baptizing ' in Jordan' and * at Enon, because there was much water there.' But when we see 'Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan,' going to hi« baptism, we can easily conceive why he chose a place where there was * much water,' though he baptized by sprinkling; for great quantities of water must be I required for other purposes. John, whose ministry was ibut about a year and a half in continuance, is supposed at least to have baptized two millions of people. Matt ;iii. 5. — 'Then went out unto him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, and were baptized of him.' The shortness of his ministry forbids the idea that John could baptize such vast multitudes by immersion. It would be scarcely possible had he been in the water continually. But while John baptized,, it is invariably said, * He baptized with water.' And it is unaccountable that no other term is used concern- ing his mode if he immersed. Matt. iii. 1 1. — * I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance ; but he that Cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear : he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.' Mark i. 8. — ' I indeed have baptized you with water ; but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost' Luke iii. 16. — ' I indeed baptize you with water, he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost' John i. 26. — ' John answered them, saying, I baptize with water.' 33rd verse, — 'But he that sent me to ill baptiie mth water, the same said untome^ Upon whom diou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on Mim, the same is he which baptizeth with the H0I31) Ghost.' Acts i. 6.— 'For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost' Observe, John admits * he was sent to baptize with water.' The Apostle says, * John truly baptized with water.' This implies the application of the element to the subject, and not the subject to the element; and agrees with God's mode, to which the Apostle refers, which was by effur sion. What right have we to say they did it differently, when the same word is used to denote both ? Because John baptized at Jordan, which was a great river, and at Enon, 'because there was much water,' some have considered this a proof of immersion. 'But Jesus (John iii. 26 ; iv. 1,) made and baptized more disciples than John, though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples :' and neither Jesus nor his disciples went to these places. Baptism could be performed anywhere. It is evident that John did not go to these places on account of their being more convenient for baptizing tlian others. He might have baptized in any place. Indeed, John did not always baptize at Jordan and Enon. He began to baptize in * Bethabara beyond Jordan,' where we read of no river. The disciples could baptize anj'^where, and on the shortest notice; and they never frequented rivers and large collections of water. Still, though they baptized such multitudes, this lack of water seems to have been no hindrance, nor inconvenience. These considerations, to a candid mind, certainlv render immersion incredible. Great stress is laid on John baptizing the Saviour in Jordan; but, although John baptized the Saviour, yet he was not baptized with John's Baptism ; John bap- tized ' unto repentance,^ and 'for the remission of sins!* Hence it is evident that the Saviour was not baptized unto John's Baptism. John saw an impropriety in the Saviour's coming unto him to be baptized. Matt. iii. 14 : ' But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be bap- whom ning OB le Holy) water; )bserve^ Th© This ect, and 1 God»8 )y effd-i Ferently, Because ver, and ne have It Jesus disciples ;, but his I went to lywhere. )laces on )aptizing y place. dan and beyond disciples t notice; tllections tltitudes, ndrance, a candid iviour in iour, yet )hn bap- of sins."* baptized y in the I;, iii. 14 : be bap- ftised of thee, and cbmest thou to me?^ UntilJepnai [informed John of the nature '^f the ordinance he required^ I by saying, ' Suffer it to be b, now ; for thus it becometh ! us to fulfil all righteousness.* * Then he (John) suffered him.' I ask, what is impUed in that expression ^all righteousness .^' and answer, the meaning of our Lord is, *that I may fully perform every part of the righteous ; law of God, and the commission he hath given met.* Then let us inquire, what law required Jesus tube bap- Itized? Not the Moral law; for it says not a Word about it. Not John's law ; for John forbade him, which he would not have done, if hi; B-aptism * unto repent- ance and the remission of sins' required it. We find the term law, used in the Bible, only in reference to the Moral and to the Levitical law. Jesus was about to commence his great work of atonement. This he was to do in the character of priest — Heb. 6th. The law required that every priest should be washed, purified with water. Jesus must fulfil this law. None was so proper to baptize him as John : his foreruimer— a pro- phet — ^the greatest among those born of women — of the Iribe of Levi — himself, according to the law, a Priest. 'Hence Christ's Baptism was a law requirement. He must enter on it at the age of thirty. Numb. iv. 23 : * From thirty years old and upward, all that enter in to perform the service, to do the work in the tabernacle of the congregation.' Luke iii. 23: 'And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age.' He was as capable and as well qualified at twenty as at thirty ; but he mast be conformed to the law. And the law which required all the priests to be baptized, or washed, or purified, also required them to be sprinkled. Exodus rxix. 4 : * And Aaron and his sons thou shalt bring unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and shalt wash them with water.' Chap. xl. 12 : * And thou shalt bring Aaron and his sons unto the door of the taber*- nacle of the conffresation, and wash them with water.' And in Numbers viii. 7, the mode is fixed : * And thus shult thou do unto them to cleanse them : sprinkle water *l of f^iirifjinff upon them.' The Bible speaks of /no other law that required Jesus to be baptized. If he were fulfilling this law, ('and he came to fulfil, not to destroy,^ he certainly was not imm-crscdy but sprinkled., 1 In default of all other evidence, the case of the Eunuch — ^Acts viii. 39 — where it is said, * And they weut down both into the water,' ' and when they were come up out of the water' — is considered by our Baptist bretLren a sure proof of immersion. But I ask. Does the Bible say that Philip immersed the Eunuch ? It says no such thing : there is no proof of immersion here. You agree that Philip did not go under, yet he * went down into the water, and 'came up out of the water.* How do we know that the same was not true of the Eunuch, that he did not go under ? Does the Bible tell us how deep they went in .'* No ; it tells us nothing about it. Is it right then for us to say that the Eunuch was immersed, merely because it is said * they went in' and ' came out of the water,' when we know the same thing is said of Philip, who did not go under ?i inf\(i%-; Now, I bave a reason from the Bible, which induces me to believe that the Eunuch was sprinkled and not immersed. As Philip was travelling, he found the Eunuch sitting in his chariot with- the Scriptures in his hand. He was reading a prophecy concerning Christ, which begins at the 13th verse of the 52d chapter of Isaiah, and continues through the 63d chapter. 'At, this scripture Philip began and preached Christ to him^' Acts viii. 35. Near the beginning of the prophecy it was foretold that Christ should institute Baptism by sprinkling. ' Behold my servant shall deal prudently;i he shall be exalted, and extolled, and be very high. So shall he sprinkle many nations.' As they travelled along they came to a certain water ; and the Eunuch said^ * See here is water ! what doth hinder me to be baptized?' From the Eunuch's remarks about Baptism, it is evident that Philip had explained this ordinance to him, or he would not have asked that question. Now would Philip have attempted to immerse him after they had both read 1^ morfi 8 I, of /HO If he not to of the Ley went re come Baptist k, Doei ich? It ion here, went e water.* e of the Bible tell nothing* Eunuch went in' he same induces [ and not und the. es in his ^ Christ, lapter of ;er. * At t to him^' ►phecy it ptisin by udentlyii ligh. So led along iich said^ aptized?^ s evident m. or ha lid Philip 3oth read that sprinkling was Baptism, or the ^a whic) irator was to be used in the Redeemer's chvi h. It ^ then more than probable they went down b( i. to thp side or into the edge of the water, where Philip might take some in his hand and sprinkle him, according to the prophecy which he had just explained to him. And it IS unreasonable to believe that Philip, with this Scrip- ture before his eyes, would administer the ordinance without being in conformity to it. And where is this prophecy fulfilled, if sprinkling is not a mode of Bap- tism ? All things written in the Scriptures concerning Jesus must be fulfilled ; and these prophecies must be , fulfilled too. But if sprinkling is not a mode of Bap- tism ; if there is no pouring or sprinkling of water in [his church ; then are the Scriptures not fulfilled. Hence (we see the awful conclusion to which we must arrive : namely, that these prophecies have not had their fulfil- lment in the person of Jesus ; and consequently, he can make no claims to the Messiahship. Bo this as it may : I have given you my reason, from the Bible, why I beUeve that Jesus and the Eunuch were sprinkled and not immersed. Our Baptist friends think there is an allusion to immersion in Romans vi. 4 : * We are buried with him by Baptism;' and in Col. ii. 12 : * Buried with him in Baptism.' On these two passages, which speak of being * buried with Christ by Baptism,' and are thought by some to favour immersion, I shall make a few remarks, after ^quoting the passages in full. * Therefore, being buried ^with Christ by Baptism, into death, that like as Christ -was raised up by the glory of the Father, so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection : knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should no niore serve sin,' CoL ii. 9-12 : * For in him dwelleth ^\\ the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are I,: ■f'-'T'^-^ hr ;>i; ;^"!i5 '.}!*■ (>\: ,.H ■ '^miSf CK)M{)let6in'hin), which isf the head of all principality and power: in whom also ye are circumcised with the^ circumcision made without nands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: buried with him in Baptism,' &c. These passages are highly figurative : * Burying/ * planting,' and ' crucify- ing,' are alluded to in Baptism. * Planting,' in Scripture, is setting out trees, herbs, and vines, called plant . These being different figures, it is impossible, in the mode of Baptism, to imitate more than one of them in one operation. But all are required to be imitated, or none; all cannot be ; therefore no imitation is required. Indeed it is iir]^:opeT, in the mode or ceremony of Baptism, to imitate either of them. The Rev. Matthew Henry, in his Exposition of the Bible, expounds these passages as follows : — * Our conformity (to Christ) is complete ; we are in profession quite cut off from all commerce and Communion with sin, as those that are buried are quite cut off from this world : not only not of the living, but no more among the living, having nothing to do with them. Thus must we be as Christ was, separate from sin and sinners. We are buried, namely, in pro- ifession and obligation. We profess to be so ; we are bound to be so. It was our covenant engagement by Baptism; we are sealed to be the Lord's, — ^therefore to be cut off from sin.' Why this 'burying in Baptism' should so much as allude to any custom of dipping under water in Baptism, any more than our baptismal crucifixion and death should have such reference, I con- fess I cannot see. It is plain that it is not the sign, but the thing signified, that the Apostle here calls being buried with Christ. ' It is not,' says he, * the sign, i. e. the ceremony, but the thing signified by Baptism, which the Apostle calls being buried with Christ.' When we in the same Baptism are said to be 'crucified with Christ' it implies, that we must ascend a cross and be fastened there, as much as when we are buried with hihi we must be put under water. He might have added — when, by the same Baptism we are said to be '-^plah tiled •ay w orBa 'liken thath ^ Chris |vfiedT» The! S cross, nzune sent t shouli But r( Baptii sion. mode by rei f|)our I when body IWei thrust ^^ done M Bapt' unde the b( this the e does of th using lent, he ba not k fcno k *hew tfiit ai 1! \ acipaiity with the the body ' Christ: agf 3 are ' crucify- Jcripture, i plant . e, in the em in one or none : . Indeed Baptism, Henry, in ssages as )lete ; we lerce and are quite le living, ing to do , separate y, in pro- ) ; we are rement by erefore to Baptism' )f dipping baptismal ice, I con- ) sign, but alls being J sign, i. e. sm, which When we ified with iss and be 111 LKjKX tt xvxa ight have said to be U I ' plahted in the likeness of his death,' we must h« bapH tiled in the mode of planting. The Apostle does net •ay we are buried with Christ in the likeness or mode CM Baptism ; but, that we are by Baptism buried into the 'likeness of his death,'' not his burial. He shows plainly that he did not refer to the burial, but to the death of Christ. * Knowing,' says he, * that our old man is cruci- al fied with him, that our body of sin may be destroyed.' The death of Christ was the accursed death of the cross. There certainly is no resemblance between immersion and crucifixion. Yet if Baptism is to repre- sent the death of Christ, and not his burial, the mode should resemble crucifixion, not interring under ground. But really, if it were intended to represent the mode of Baptism, it is more in favour of sprinkling than of immer- sion. As an illustration we will give an account of ths mode of burying in this country. We dig out a grays by removing the earth. We then deposit the body, and pour the earth back upon it. Now this is what we do when we baptize. The element is first removed. The i)ody is presented ; and the water is poured upon it. IWe always apply the element to the body ; but never thrust the body through the element. This is never done in burying. Our Baptist friends assert, that in Baptism the body must be dipped or plunged entirely under water ; and that, in order to be correctly done, the body must be applied in and under the water. Now this is not the mode of burying ; for we pour or sprinkle J the earth upon the body. Their definition, therefore, I does not hold good in burying. You cannot even speak -' of the mode of burying, nor perform the act, without using the term pour or sprinkle, or some word equivar lent, and acting in the very way that God does when l^he baptizes — viz., apply the element to the body, and not let the body fall through the element. But there is no kind of resemblance in our mode of burying and if the way in which Christ was buried. He was deposited 'in a sepulchre cut out of a solid rock, large enough to llfiit and stand in j and his body was not covered with '' f^el«!ci©li(e. Tethtipk A qiie^tiott niriy here atiw^ Why did the Apostle then say, *We are buried with Christ in Baptism,' if Baptism has no reference to a mode of burial? Now, as we wish fully to investigate this subject, I answer, the Apostle said: *We are buried;' 'planted into the likeness of his death;' * crucified' by Baptism. Those who made a profession of faith in his name, looked to his death for atonement, and to his resurrection for justification. Romans iv. 25: *If we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead: who was delivered for cur offences, and was raised for our justification.' 1 Cor. xv. 17 : * And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain ; and ye are yet in your sins.' They professed also, (2 Cor. v. 14) *l!0 live unto him which died for them, and rose again.' Rom. xiv. 8, 9 : * For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live, therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.' 'For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.' The Jew, and in many cases the Gentile, who became a follower of Christ, was considered and treated by his friends as dead; and looked upon as one who had died an accursed death. This profession was made in Baptism ; and it drew upon the person making it all the odium of the death of their Saviour. To the world they were crucified, and the world was crucified to them. Hence the Saviour calls the hatred and persecution of his followers by the world a Baptism. Luke xii. 60 : * But I have a Baptism to be baptized with ; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished !' He confirms this by his remarks to the two sons of Zebedee. Mark X. 38, 39 : * Can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? And tney say unto him, We can. And Jesus said unto them. Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the Baptism that I am baptized withal shall je be baptized.' The sons of Zebedee were baptized with his Baptism according to his prophecy : James A Led wkh ice to » restigate buried;' ified' by tb in bis d to bis ' If wfe rem tbe ind was And if B are yet . 14) *tO 3 again/ unto the e Lord: Lord's.' revived, id of tbe itile, who Ld treated one who ivas made Ling it all the world 1 to them, jcution of e xii. 50 : and how confirms e. Mark k of? and zed with? said unto drink of; thai shall baptized t^ James 87 wa« beheaded iby Herod; and John .was imck peDH^ euted ; and all who live godly shall suffer perseiouition. Tbe odium of his death, the Cross, is upon them all. The Apostle says, Gal. vi. 14 : * God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.' ICor. XV. 31: *I die daily.' 2 Cor. iv. XO: ■ Always bearing about in the body the dying of th^ Lord Jesus.' Rom. vi. 3. 6 : * Know ye not, that as many of us as were baptized unto Jesus Christ were baptized into his death ? Crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed.' Gal. ii. 20 : * I am crucified with Christ.' This language is true of every one that professes Christ ; and thus it is that they are baptized mto the likeness of his death. They voluntarily take upon themselves all the sorrows, trials, persecutions, and afflictions, as well as ail the hopes and glories of the death of Christ. How forcibly is this set forth in the figure of our being baptized into the likeness of bis death ! Bearing the cross — wearing the crown. Hence I do not believe that there is reference to a particular mode of burial in the text under consideration. For the Bible is intended to be understood alike by all nations. Ail do not bury alike. Some bum; some embalm; some inter; some deposit in vaults; some bang up the body until the flesh decays. But not one buries by forcing the body through the element ; not one resembles the mode, the way of immersion, not one the death of Christ. It was a death lifted up, on a mount, on a cross. And our Baptism is unto the like- ness of his death. A death for and unto sin. Thus have I given you my reasons why I think the Apostle had no reference to immersion, as a mode of Baptism, in the passages we have been considering. -- Our Baptist brethren think, that the Phiiippian Jailor and his family were baptized by immersion. I have a tract now before me, called the * Enquirer's Guide,' written by the Rev. William Storrs, in which the writer attempts to prove immersion from Actg xvL 30. . . He I '. i! 38 akysi * thpy went out b^owBaptisih.' Thiii appeare td b6 stich a gross violation of the text, that we shall o6n'- sidfeif it ia few moments. The Scripture reads as f^l^ lows : * And brought them out and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said. Believe on the Lord JefsuS' Christ; and thou shaltbe saved, and thy houseJ Aiki they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to air that were in his house. And he took them the samd hour of the night, and washed their stripes ; and wad baptized, he and all his, straightway. And when he had brought them into his house,' &c. Here observe Paul and Silas had been taken, scourged, and put into the inner prison. At midnight there was an earthquake ; the Jailor was frightened ; he collected his family ; Paul instructed them ; the Jailor was convinced of the truth of the Messiahship of Jesus, and of the Christian reli- gion; he washed the Apostle's stripes ; and was baptized, h6 and all his. Now, the collection of the Jailor's femily ; Paul's instruction of them; the Jailor's washing their stripes ; and the Baptism of himself and his family — appear aU to have transpired in the space of one hour, in the outer prison. He brought them out from where they were, which was the inner prison. After this was accom- plished, he took them into his house, that is, into his own apartment. The whole appears to have been under one roof -'-' • ■ ',•• '.''•■ ■■ >u; J Is there any thing in this accotmt that looks as if they went away to a river or pond for immersion.'^ Certainly not Every circumstance forbids such an idea. Had it been necessary to go abroad for Baptism, it would probably, even under common circumstances, have been delayed until morning. And this case waF attended with special reaso'is for delay, if it were necessary to go abroad. Paul and Silas were prisoners ; and, had the Jailor gone out with them, it would have subjected him to a severe penalty. His orders were very strict ; and how mucii he feared the punishment, if the least blame fell on him, we are informed, verse 27 ; * And the kedpei^ oi the prison awaking out of his sleep, and / )pecii«td hall 0611^ as fbl^ hat must theLowi y- house: d, and to the same and wad when he observe put into thquake; ly ; Paul the truth tian reli- baptized, > Jailor*8 washing family — ; hour, in here they is accom- J his own mder one IS if they 2)ertainly »a. Had it would ave been attended 3ssary to and, had !ubje6ted 7 strict; the least 7; 'And 3ep, and ,4 99 iseing the prison doors open, he drew out his swq3;<^^ and would have killed himself, supposing that the prisoners had been fled.' Neither would the Apostlea ' encourage him to get into this difficulty. The Apostles, too, were put into prison contrary to law, and we;^e[ determined to have recompense. When the magistrates discovered their error, they sent the sergeants to tell them they might go. All they wanted now was to get them once over the threshold of the prison doors. Paul knew too much for this, and would not stir one step out of prison until he had received a recompense. It is then evident, that the whole family was baptized suddenly in the dead of the night and in the outer prison. After having examined the preceding subjects, of so much importance to our differing brethren, without find- ing immersion connected with tnem, we proceed to look for some other mode of Baptism beside immersion. ,«^{ As God has appointed Baptism to be a standing ordinance in the church, it is reasonable to believe that, he has clearly enough pointed out that mode which is most acceptable to him. Hence we proceed to show that effusion, by either pouring or sprinkling, is the mode of Baptism which is Scriptural. I shall first search the Scriptures to ascertain God's, meaning of the word baptize, and the mode practised by Him. In Acts i. 5 : * Jesus said, John truly baptized with water ; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost, not many days hence.' John had before said (Matt. iii. 1 1), that Jesus should baptize with the Holy Ghost. What language does prophecy use in relation to the Baptism of the Holy Ghost ? Does it ever speak of dipping, plunging, immersing, in the Holy Spirit? It speaks plainly, and never intimates any thing of the kind. Lotus hear Isaiah (xliv. 3), ' I will pour out my Spirit upon thy seed ;' Joel (ii. 28), * I will pour my Spirit upon all flesh;' Isaiah (xxxii. 15), 'IJntil the Spirit be poured upon us from on high ;' Ezekiel (xxxix. iJ9), * For I have poured out my Spirit.* Does the New ?|lestament say that any were even dipped, plunged) oc immersed, in the Holy Spirit? Not the jsligHtest hint is given that this was ever done. Matt. iii. 16 : * John saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon Jesus/ John xx. 22 : * Jesus breathed upon them, and said. Receive ye the Holy Ghost.' From these prophecies and their fulfilment we would not expect a case of immersion in this promised Baptism of the Holy Spirit. This Baptism was performed by the Father. He was to send the Spirit. John xiv. 16, 17 : * And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; even the Spirit of truth.' This Baptism was performed on the day of Pentecost. Acts ii. 3 : ' And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.' Again, Acts xi. 16 : * Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.' There is no immersion here ; for Peter says in the fifteenth verse — 'And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as in us at the beginning.* We are endeavouring to ascertain the meaning of the word — baptize. Our Baptist friends say there is but one meaning — ^total immersion; and therefore, there could be but one mode. This I shall disprove ; and show, from the Bible, that it means tc pouTy to sprinkle, descend upon, as seen above. Here then is a mode, and a meaning, that is not immersion. They must there- fore give up their one mode and meaning, or contend that there are two Baptisms — the one of water, and the other of the Spirit. But this will not alter the case. For, even if there were two Baptisms, we cannot avoid the conclusion that the word does not mean — total immersion, as explained by Jehovah. I have proved clearly, that it means to pour out, as used by the great Author of the Bible. John truly baptized. So did God. John baptized with water John i. 31. Therefore came I baptizing with water. God baptized with the Holy Ghost. We have no reason to suppose they did' it differently. But if they did, there are two modes and mean! given us to (John lincrea 'Cease( hadb( in the John( water used ( ?|^ given ^ Baptii exii. 12 )on "v 'yath( is bu liifer< Fatht imme food's not n of Bj Pe me, t lin th fwate' 'mean in th the i it me ; a pei lau 1 what with r itestbint 'John ove, and breathed t: From ould not eiptism of by the 16, 17 : u another er ; even rmed on appeared sat upon lembered n indeed with the for Peter to speak, ginning.* ig of the re is but re, there 5ve; and sprinkle, lode, and st there* contend , and the the case, not avoid m — total B proved the great did God. ►re came he Holy y did' it )de8 and 41 hneBJiingsix) baptize ; the one that John gives — ^the odier given by God. God's is pouring. Which is safest for us to take.'^ There is but one Baptism. John said |(John iii. 30), ' I must decrease, but he (Jesus) must [increase.' John's Baptism has not only decreased, but ceased long ago. Acts xix. 5. Certain disciples, who l^liad been baptized unto John's Baptism, were re-baptized ^in the name of Jesus. Again, I repeat it, that while ^John did baptize, it is invariably said, * He baptized «;i/^ ^water.' And it is unaccountable that no other term is fused concerning his mode if he immersed. But his has Igiven place to Christian Baptism. This then is one fBaptism; and includes that of the Holy Spirit. 1 Cor. fxii. 13 : * For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body.' It is in the name of the three, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. It embraces the mode of the three; for they 'agree in one.' The Spirit's mode is )ouring out. The Father's mode is the same. The |Son was to baptize * with fire.' As the mode of the iFather and Spirit is clear, and our friends say that there is but one mode to one Baptism, there cannot be a different mode required by the Son from that of the Father and the Spirit. We see that this mode is not jlnmersion but by pouring out. I have proved that j^od's meaning of the words baptize and Baptism do not mean immersion ; and that, if there be but one mode of Baptism, it is not by immersion, but by effusion. Perhaps I shall be reminded by those who differ from ,me, that the Baptism to which reference has been made iin the foregoing remarks, is spiritual Baptism, and not l^ater Baptism. I answer, I am willing to seai^h for the ^meaning of the word baptize, as used by the Holy Ghost in the Bible, in reference to water Baptism. We give the Baptist definition of the word baptize. They say it means to dip, to plunge — ^total immersion ; as whe'i a person holding a weight which is too heavy, lets it iifcll into the water, and it sinks entirely under. This is what Cox and Carson say it means. But they have ivith much truth said, 'mere speculation here is of no 48 Talne ; theories and conjectures with respect to a subject that concerns the faith and the obedience of God's people is of no authority.' We must have a plain proof, that thm saith and thus doeth the Lord, before we can admit that it is God's word. Where, then, is the thus saith and thus doeth the Lord, for immersion only ? I cannot find it in the Bible. < f j i o u w n i » k> fi»;.'i u \ \ r) i r ■ j "^m m tn But to return : we shall find a case of water Baptism, 1 Cor. X. 1, 2 : * Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.' I know our Baptist brethren say it fairly proves immersion. The sea was on either hand; the cloud was before, over, and behind them ; so that they were completely surrounded by water. I answer, they did not fall into it like a heavy weight. However, the account given in Exodus, 14th chapter, is somewhat different from yours. * And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground.^ * But the children of Israel walked upon dry land in the midst of the sea.' There were upwards of 620,000 Israelites in this company. How did they get under the water ? — • the thing was impossible. Exodus xiv. 21 : * And the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided.' Heb. xi. 29: *By faith they passed through the Red Sea as by dry land.'' Dry land was under them, before them, and behind them; and, if water was on each side of them, it was at so great a distance that those only who were on the outside of the host could see it. Then in this Baptism there was no immersion. How are our brethren to get out of this difficulty ? It is none with us ; for we can baptize upon dry ground, as God did the Israelites. The Psalmist bits put this subject beyond the reach of useless contro- versy ; for in Jf salm Ixxvii. 17, while speaking of this very event, he says, 'The clouds poured out vater.' The only kind of rain that does not wet the ground is a stiljeot of God's lin proof, we can the thus only? I Baptism, not that ers were sea, and id in the y proves he cloud hey were they did ever, the omewhat rael went ' But the 3 midst of raelites In water ? — • 'And the east wind iie waters y passed land was ,* and, if great a ide of the e was no ut of this tize upon Psalmist IS contro- ls of this It v»ater.* s^round is 48 [what we call a sprinkling. H«re then God's mode of (baptizing with water is by sprinkling. Our brethren J say there is but one mode. It realty seems so; for whether God baptizes with the Spirit or with water, he pours out or sprinkles, and does not immerse. St. Paul was directed to call it Baptism (for the express purpose of showing that the Sacraments of the Jews were types of ours) by the same Spirit that directed Moses and . David to record the events. Again, I say we are seek- ing for the Bible meaning of the word baptize. And we see inspired Moses and David, Peter and Paul, and the prophets, explaining it as a pouring, a sprinkling, and not immersing. Thus I have been to the New Testa- ment as well as the Old. From both I have proved, that the word means to pour out, to sprinkle. *A11 m Scripture is given by inspiration ; and is profitable for P doctrine and instruction.' And as it has decided that the word does mean to pour, to sprinkle, wie ought to bow in reverence to its decision. I am persuaded, that, -^he more we search the Scriptures, the stronger will be the proof, that the word baptize and the mode of •Baptism, as used in the sacred writings, have reference to the applying of the element to the body by pouring Jdr sprinkling, and hot the applying of the body to the llfelement by plunging or immersing. Do you know of liny prophecy which says, that immersion under water Hhould exist, or be practised in the Chiirch of Christ? J know of none. But there certainly are prophecies concerning the use of water in the Redeemer's kingdom. But there are none in reference to immersion. Indeed t neither the word, nor any thing like it, ever occurs as ^connected with the ordinance of the Gospel. But the %^ord sprinkle is frequently used in types referring to the dispensation of grace; and direct prophecies are made of the use of water, and how the water was to be applied : viz., by pouring on or sprinkling. Isaiah xliv. '^ : ' I will pour water on him that is thirsty, and floods pon the dry ground ; I will pour my Spirit on thy seed, nd my blessing on thine offspring.' Here is mention n h U made cf pouring water and of pouring the Spirit. TMs is the modet and the ofispring are the subjects. Again, lii. 15 : ' So shall he sprinkle many nations/ This is a prophecy of what should come. Because, though there were many sprinkUngs under the former dispen- sation, there was but one nation sprinkled. This sprink- ling of *many nations,' was to take place under the Again, Ezekiel xxxvi. 25 : ' Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean.' This also was a prophecy of what should come, and could not have its completion under the former dispensation, and of course must take place and have its accomplishment under the Gospel ; for, though there were many sprink- lings, there was no sprinkling of * clean water.' Water mixed with * blood,' 'scarlet wool,' *the ashes of an heifer,' and with some other things, was sprinkled ; but no * clean,' unmixed, or pure water. God says, * I will (in the future time) sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean.' AH of these passages refer to the blessings of the Gospel. That there should be some allusions to so important an ordinance as that of Bap- tism, was to be expected. The only way in which water Is used in the Christian ordinances is in Baptism. The prophecy of its use is pouring and sprinkling, not immer- sion. 'They lead us to expect that the mode and mean- ing which, as I have proved, God affixes to Baptism, would be continued in the Gospel dispensation. It is pouring, sprinkling — ^not plunging, sinking, dipping. Perhaps an opponent may say, these prophecies are to be taken figuratively, not literally. I ask for proof Does the Bible say so .'* If the prophecy had said, *Then will I immerse you in clean water,' instead of sprinkle you, would you have allowed me to say it must he taken figuratively ? But suppose they were to be taken figuratively, it puts immersion still further out of the question, t'igurative language is used, because it is stronger than the literal. Now^ immersion is a stronger term than pouring out, or i^rinkling^ and requir ^hus, ^alway If, tne ;|''rule o I both t the pc clear : shall This i unsays ] w and A pla ^sical ( ^' the ai Irit. ThoM Again, This is though }r dispen^ is sprink- ander the kle clean also was not have n, and of plishment ly sprink- .' Water les of an kled; but rs, ' I will you, and 3fer to the I be some it of Bap- lich water sm. The lotimmer- ind mean- Baptism, ion. It is dipping, ies are to for proof, had said, nstead of ay it must ere to be irther out i, because 'sion is a ling, and ■^fi^- 4i equires more water. Why was not this term used<^ ^hus, if we go to facts, to prove Baptism, they will ways bring us to pour, or sprinkle — never immersion^ f, tnen, we attend to the prophecies, which were the ule of Paul's preaching, the matter is clear respecting both the subjects and mode of Baptism, even beyond the possibility of a doubt. The prophecies I say are |clear : * I will sprinkle clean water upon you and y« liihall be clean ;' ' So shall he sprinkle many nations.' I This is * what the Prophets did say should come.' Paul ' says he * taught none other things than the Prophets and Moses did say should come.' Acts xxvi. 22. Here is plain truth, Scripture evidence, unaided by metaphy- sical distinctions and logical deductions ; and it is beyond the art of sophistry to deny it. How shall we form im argument to disprove this; or how shall we get rid of ^Ithe force of it ? Can we deny that the Prophets said •tsprinkling of clean water should come ? No ; this we vcannot deny. Can we deny that the Apostles did teach and practise what the Prophets did say should come? ^his, again, we cannot deny. Can we undertake to say, -ihat any other sprinkling of clean water is instituted in llhe church except in Baptism 1 Certainly not. Sprink- ling, then, is the mode of Baptism ; and this argument lin favour of sprinkling can never be set aside. It is so lain, that with the greatest ease it may be understood, e may run that readeth. So all the instances wherein aptism is recorded in the New Testament comport with the idea of sprinkling ; because they were evidently performed with ease and facility. Indeed there is not an instance where a single circumstance is related which is necessarily connected with immersion, nor from whence it can be inferred ; and, in a iiumber of instances, he circumstances plainly forbid even the possibility of immersion. Perhaps I shall be told that Baptism is a washing of the body. Acts xxii. 16 : * Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins.' Hebrews x, 22 : * Having our bodies washed with pure water.' Now, if we look into the Bible we shall see that sprinkling the -,ftTA...;h-..ifi,v'-"'.is 1lt f 1 Imi body was washinff it Our Baptist brethren admit that Baptism and washing are the same thing. This they are obliged to acknowledge, because the translators of the Bible have in so many instances translated the word baptize into the word wash. But did the translators of the Bible mean to have us understand that washing means plunging, and only plunging, as our friends define Baptism? Or did the translators of the Bible mean to have us understand that religious washing is parallel with sprinkling ? They tell us that Christ's feet were washed with the tears of one woman; but do they mean to have us understand they were plunged? Certainly not. Again, Aaron was consecrated to the priest's office by washing. Exodus xxix. 4 : ' And Aaron and his sons thou shalt bring unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and thou shalt wash them with water.' This washing is found to be sprinkling. Numb. viii. 6, 7 : * Take the Levites from among the children of Israel, and cleanse them. And thus shalt thou do unto them to cleanse them, sprinkle water of purifying upon them.' '■■A3i - llH^ ■■;■ ivi:'iH io ■■-1-i '.Mirri/rffF'"' ¥i^f' ' ;**> n^ Thus we see, that sprinkling the body was washing Ife i Now, the Apostle himself has pointed out the way in which the body is purified. Heb. ix. 13, 14 : ' For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh ; how much more shall the blood of Christ purge your conscience from dead works,' &c. Heb. x. 22: * Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil con- science, and our bodies washed with pure water.' Now, here, sprinkling purifies the flesh and the conscience, and is the washing required. * For Baptism does not save us by the putting away of the filth of the flesh, tat the answer of a good (a sprinkled) conscience towards Grod.' Sprinkling we see does purify the flesh. And we are saved *' by the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed upon us abundantly,' Titus iii. 6. Indeed it is in vain to )arch dUin^ Fnder formec he de ^is cc and al by spi typeo |Df the saiali lory 11 vei veni )e n( pnn the t dmit that Phis they slators of the word slators of washing ids define ble mean s parallel feet were do they plunged ? 3 office by his sons (le of the th water.' umb. viii. tiildren of u do unto fing upon ■'V washing t the way L: 'For if les of an purifying of Christ Heb. X. evil con- sr.' Now, mscience, does not the fleshy Dnscience the flesh, meration, ihedupon 1 vain to earch the Scriptures about Baptism, unlesi we are illing to see the word sprinkle in connexion with it nder the former dispensation purifications were per- l^rmed by sprinkUng. The door-posts, in Egypt, wiien |)the destroying angel passed over, were sprinkled; and ^'^ this consecrated the family. The altar, the tabernacle, i and all the vessels of the sanctuary were consecrated ' ))y sprinkling. That sanctuary, with its vessels, was a lype of the Gospel Church. So the Prophet, speaking |of the coming of Christ, and the Gospel day, declares, iJisaiah xxii. 24: * Aiid they shall hang upon him all the glory of his father^s house, the offspring and the issue, all vessels of small quantity, from the vessels of cups, even to the vessels of fiaggons.' As the vessels of the sanctuary were consecrated by sprinkling, so the Pro- phet says, that little children, * the offspring and the issue,' even the smallest vessels, shall be hung upon Christ, consecrated to God in the same manner, that is h" sprinkling. So also the lepers, the unclean, and all ^tiie people, were consecrated to God, not by dipping, ibut by sprinkling. Those sprinklings were emblems of %he blood of Christ. The Apostle saith, Heb. ix. 19 : *|For when Moses had spoken every precept according ^o the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with ater, and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both Jihe book and all the people ; saying. This is the blood f the Testament, which God hath enjoined unto you. oreover he sprinkled, likewise with blood, both the [tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry.' Indeed Imost all things under the law were purged with blood; [that is, with the sprinkling of blood mixed with water, e. Blood and water were mixed, to signify both the nward and the outward cleansing. Water could purify xternally ; but blood alone could purify and cleanse he heart. ' Without the shedding of blood there could e no remission.' This mixture of blood and water the Apostle tells us was to be applied by sprinkhng. * He sprinkled the book and all the people.' * He sprinkled the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry.' He MM 48 9mdy ' This is the blood of the Testament.' The law which the Apostle refers to is recorded, Numb. xix. 9, 10-19. Hence we learn, that we must be cleansed, both internally and externally, by sprinkling ; and as the blood of Christ is shed for the cleansing of the heart, water only is now used as an outward expression of inward cleansing by the blood of Christ. How then could God give us a stronger evidence, that sprinkling is sufficient for the outward and inward cleansing of the sinner, than he has done by those plain and positive institutions ? Hence the Apostle argues, not from sprink- ling to plunging, but from sprinkling to sprinkling. He says : * Our hearts are sprinkled.' * We are come to the blood of sprinkling.' The dispensation is changed ; but it is a dispensation of sprinkling still, not of mixed, but of clean water. This is a better sacrifice than mixed water, as it gives a more clear and distinct idea of the nature of divine purity and sanctification. i^ The external visible seal of God's covenant, the ordin- ance that admits into the visible church, is expressive of what is done to the heart. Circumcision, the former seal, was appointed to show that, in regeneration, thp heart is circumcised to the Lord — cut off from sm. Hence we read so often of * the circumcision of the heart ;' that * the heart must be circumcised to the Lord ;' that * circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter;' that the outward circumcision is a sign of the circumcision of the heart, and a seal of the right- eousness of faith ; because the Holy Spirit doth mortify, subdue, and cut off from sin, take away wicked and carnal desires, and implant those that are pure and holy. So Baptism, the latter seal of the same covenant, is appointed to show, that in regeneration the heart is baptized to the Lord ; that is, cleansed from spiritual pollution, which is sin. Hence we read so ohen of being * baptized by the Holy Ghost,' of * the Baptism of tiio opint, auu Oi ' tuc spriniviing of the ueart ; because the influences of the Spirit come down as the rain, fall as the dew, or as water poured and sprinkled, and do Tlie law lb. xix. 9, cleansed, f ; and as ig of the xpression How then sprinkling ansing of d positive >m sprink- ling. He me to the iged; but [lixed, but an mixed ea of the the ordin- jxpressive he former ation, thf' from sia. on of the ;he liord ;' spirit, and n is a sign the right- h. mortify, eked and and holy, srenant, is ) heart is [ spiritual » often of baptism of , ucuauoc ain, fall as 1, and do 49 cleanse the heart from spiritual pollution, which is sin. Heart pircumcision, and heart baptism, are undeniably the ^ame thing. Consequently, external circumcisiom and external baptism are the same thing likewise. An ordinance is designed to express what is done to th» " heart. Therefore baptism is a token of the same cove-, nant as circumcision, and equally a seal of the riehte« ousness of the same faith. This idea of the analogy between the outward and inward baptism is further ex- pressed by the following Scriptures, which speak of jluiese baptisms under different names, but parallel to ^ each other. John iii. 6: 'Except a man be bom of "\yater, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the o kingdom of God.' One is the outward, and the other * the inward baptism. 2 Cor. i. 22 : ' Who hath sealed us, and given us the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.* 0utward baptism is here the seal, and the earnest of the Spirit in the heart is regeneration. Titus iii. 5 : ' He saved us by the washing of regeneration and the renew* |. jng of the Holy Ghost Here, again, is the outward. 9^jid the inward Baptism. Water Baptisipiis called the washing of regeneration, which is the sign oftheregen* ipr^tion of the heart, as circumcision is said to be the siga of the circumcision of the heart. But the renewing of iJie Holy Ghost is regeneration itself. Heb. x. 22: I Having pur hearts sprinkled firom an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.' The sprinkling 0^ the heart is heart Baptism; and the washing of the bodv the outward Baptism, which expresses what is done, to the heart. It is clearly seen, from these Scriptures, find from what has been said before, that the outward nd the inward Baptisms are analagous. The outward designed to express the inward. We have before shown, that washing and sprinkling is the same thing ; and when a part of the body is washed, it is said to be * clean every whit.' This washing of the body, which expresses what is done to the heart, is the fulfilling the irophecy, *I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye hall be clean.' As the heart is baptized, or washed bj 5# AT. fnniLungf, so fii^'Biyy imwt bier !ttpiize, Rom: xv. 1(5: ^Beih^sanctifitedbf tJie H6iy Gho$t:' J €6r; vi.ll : *Btitye are washrf, but ye are sanctified by the Spirit of our God.' ^ 'f- 'W. By the i^nter, Eph. v. 26: * That he mighf iiaiie- l!fy and cifeanse it (the church) with the washing is^83so is by sprinkling. : We are washed wi^ thJlB d by sprinkling. Heb* xii. 84; *Y« ai,e comertp e blood of sprinkUng.' X Peter j. 2 : !Unio «prinkj«« the blood of Jesus Christ/ The Spirit thenis appjli^i y sprinkling; the Upod is appJi^d by ^pprinkiii^g ; ai^ these two die heart is'-^'SprinkJed.ftopEa a^ eyil ofB^ nee,' that is, regenerated. Xt is then certaii^, jthat^h^ ,, a^r mnst be applied by sprinkling; jlt han ^m\S ^^dn ^i-iir vi>« ow itfvO 53 CONCLUSION. In reviewing what has heen said, we see this express iclaration of God by the Prophet, that the time should >me when he would sprinkle clean water upon his )ople; the express declaration of the Apostle, that he lught none other things than what the Prophets did ly should come ; the universal practice of purification \y sprinkling under the former dispensation ; and the general concurrent testimony of Scripture, that the external must correspond with and express that which internal, that the water must agree in one with the Ipirit and the blood. These considerations afford the lost clear, decided, and unequivocal evidence that )rinkling of clean water is the only Scriptural mode ^f Baptism, and was the invariable practice of the \postles. To esteem sprinkling insufficient when God pays it is sufficient, to say the least, argues a great listrust in God and want of faith in Jesus Christ ; and, rhat is more, a great degree of self-righteousness. But luman nature is prone to err, and go to excess; and \ough our brethren excommunicate us, we must not [communicate them ; because, doubtless, many of lem are sincere. When Jesus poured water into a basin and washed disciples' feet, and told them without such washing ley had no interest in Him, Peter saith, * Not my feet mly, but my hands and my head.' Peter would have ten plunged in a minute had it been convenient, and [had not Jesus restrained him : and no v^onder if many ^not so good as Peter should go astray. I beueve human nature has devised this mode of [Baptism, and many years' practice has made it the beaten path of some ; but from the beginning it was not sa