Robert W. Woodruff
Library
Boles Collection
special collections
emory university
AN
ESSAY
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
BY
REV. ROBERT FLEMING.
AN INTRODUCTION,
BY
ADIEL SHERWOOD, D. D.
&tjpens,
PUBLISHED FOR THE AUTHOR BY W. C. RICHARDS.
1849.
Entered according to Act of Congress in the year 1848,
. BY ROBERT W. SIMMS,
in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United
States for the District of Georgia.
CHAS. L. WHELER, PRINTER,
So. Lit. Gazette Job Office, Athens.
TO THE READER.
The Baptists believe that the primitive church¬
es embraced only visible saints, and were es¬
sentially voluntary compacts of piety, virtue and
brotherly love. In all ages they have been the
warm advocates for liberty of conscience; and
their views of church organization and gov¬
ernment are purely republican. "Among them
Church Discipline is a very simple affair, follow¬
ing as they do, no synodical or conventional rules.
The plain dictates of the Bible and common
sense are the only standards by which they de¬
sire to regulate their course in life. "* The Bi¬
ble is their only rule of faith and practice. They
believe that Christ's kingdom is not of this world •
hence they have always viewed national church
establishments as obvious innovations, incompat¬
ible with the spiritual purity and beauty of the
Church of Christ. Civil magistrates they allow
to exercise civil jurisdiction; but that wretched
doctrine of the union of Church and State, they
* Benedict.
a 2
iv
TO THE READER.
have ever regarded as a foul corruption incon¬
sistent with the very nature of Christ's king¬
dom on Earth. On their principles, therefore, ci¬
vil persecutions of any kind, are impossible; and
though their own blood has flowed freely, they
have never shed the blood of others.*
The Baptists established, in America, in the
year 1636, a code of laws, "in which" says
Judge Story, "we read for the first time, since
Christianity ascended the throne of the Caesars,
the declaration that 'conscience should be free and
men should not be punished foY worshipping God
in the way they were persuaded He required.' "
From this declaration R. I. has never departed, and
in it she has since been followed by all the United
States. The purely republican principles embra¬
ced and practically exhibited in the government
of the Baptist Churches, are familiar to the peo¬
ple of this great Republic.
Will the reader allow me to introduce to his
notice the following communication made to the
Christian Watchman., several years ago, by the
Rev. Dr. Fishback, of Lexington, Kentucky?
It happily illustrates what has been stated in the
above remarks:
♦ Encyclopaedia of Religious Knowledge.
TO THE HEADER.
V
From the Baptist Guardian, Richmond, Va.
"Mr. Editor,—The following circumstance
which occurred in the State of Virginia, relative
to Mr. Jefferson, was detailed to me b)r Elder An¬
drew Tribble, about six years ago, who since died
when ninety-two or three years old. Andrew
Tribble was the pastor of a small Baptist Church
which held its monthly meetings a short distance
from Mr. Jefferson's house, eight or ten years be¬
fore the American Revolution. Mr. Jefferson at¬
tended the meetings of the Church for several
months in succession, and after one of them, asked
Elder Tribble to go home and dine with him,
with which he complied.
Mr. Tribble asked Mr. Jefferson how he was
pleased with the Church government. Mr. Jeff¬
erson replied that it had struck him with great
force, and had interested him much; that he
considered it the only form of pure democracy
that then existed in the world, and had concluded
that it would be the best plan of government for
the Jbierican Colonies. This was several years
before the Declaration of Independence. To
what extent this practical exhibition of religious
liberty and equality operated on Mr. Jefferson's
mind, in forming his views and principles of re-
vi TO THE READER.
ligious and civil freedom, which were afterwards
so ably exhibited, I will not say."
Reader, the more you become acquainted with
the Baptists, and their doctrines,, the better you
will like them, in all probability. Acquaint
yourself with them, therefore, and be at peace
with them.
The Essay now presented to the public in this
little book was first published, by request, in the
Christian Index, and afterwards in pamphlet-
form j and recently it was re-published in the
Georgia Pulpit. The demand for it has induced
the Editor to secure the copy-right, and to issue
a larger edition of the work in this cheap and
convenient form. The estimation in which it
is held generally, induces the belief that it will
meet with a wide and useful circulation among
those who desire to know the truth on the sub¬
ject of which it treats. The Introduction, by
Dr. Sherwood, will be considered by all who
read it carefully, an able defence of the points
' discussed; and it certainly contributes largely
to the value of the book. It is a blow, straight¬
forward and hard down, upon some of the false
views which are so industriously promulgated
TO THE READER, vii
from the Pulpit and Press respecting John's bap¬
tism.
Friendly Reader, enter upon the perusal of
these pages with a heart earnestly desirous to
know and to do the will of God in reference to
this subject. Carefully compare every position
with the woid of the Lord. Examine every ar¬
gument critically and fairly. Come to your con¬
clusions impartially and honestly. Throw not
this little hook aside hastily- and petulantly.
Have enough of independence of mind to read,
to think, and to act for yourself; and be deter¬
mined in all your christian pilgrimage never to
he led by any other light than that which God's
revelation throws upon your path. See to it,
that your Religion is regulated by the Word of
God, and not by the dogmas of man.
THE EDITOR.
While the whole Pedo-Baptist fraternity
have labored to throw John's baptism into the
dark dispensation, and have written volume af¬
ter volume to prove that his baptism of Christ in
Jordan was not christian baptism, is it not strange
that the Baptists have written so little on the
subject 1 They have in active Jfferation nearly
viii
TO THE READER.
fifty periodical publications in the United States.
They have more than twenty Colleges and The¬
ological Institutes, whose professors are as learn¬
ed and talented as those of any other denomina¬
tion of Christians. The number of Communi¬
cants, according to Benedict's late and valuable
History is nearly a million and a half—and yet
they have written but little about the Baptism of
John, though others have seemed to rally, with
one common consent, to show that his baptism
did not belong to the Christian Dispensation.
INTRODUCTION.
The subject discussed in the following pages
has an important bearing in the gospel economy.
When the question was proposed to the Savior
in the Temple touching his authority to teach,*
he answered by asking another : " The baptism
of John from Heaven, or of men1?" The
priests reflected a moment and perceived that it
would be unsafe to say, " from Heaven." This
would degrade John's commission, and detract
from his dignity, for all esteemed him a Prophet
whose credentials were from on high. They
were afraid of the indignation of the people, and
hence dared not speak disrespectfully of the
Messiah's harbinger;—they compromised the
matter, however, with their pliant consciences,
and said, " We cannot tell." But, prior to this
Jesuitical answer, they had calculated the conse¬
quences, and shaped their response accordingly.
They acted hypocritically, and did not express
* Matthew, eh. 21: r. 23, Sic.
X INTRODUCTION.
the real sentiments of their hearts. To admit it
was from Heaven,—not from Jewish ceremonies
or proselyte washings.—places Pedo-Baptism in
as bad a predicament as were the priests. The
one were afraid to acknowledge the real convic¬
tions of their minds, that is, that John was " a
man sent from God,"—the other, that his baptism
belongs to the Christian Dispensation. Pedo-
Baptists try to conceal the real representations
that the Scriptures make of John's character and
office, lest the people should entertain too high
an opinion of him. It seems so clear that he
practiced immersion, that in order to disparage
this primitive ordinance and weaken the force of
example, it is maintained by them that his dis¬
pensation was legal and not Christian : or, rath¬
er, intermediate, and hence not to be imitated.
John's dispensation could not be Christian, it
is argued, because it was not subsequent to the
Resurrection of Christ 5 " for a testament has no
force until after the death of the testator." This
is true in many cases, but not in the theory pro¬
posed. Christ's commands, issued before his
death, are as binding upon his disciples as those
given after it. This dogma would rank all the
institutions of the Savior, and all the labors of
INTRODUCTION. xi
the Evangelists, prior to the Crucifixion, among
Jewish ceremonies, and as a part of that Dispen¬
sation. The Lord's Supper, on this hypothesis,
would be hut a Hebrew ceremonial, for it was
instituted before the Resurrection.
Centuries gone by, it was common so to in¬
terpret the 19th chapter of Acts as to show that
the persons named therein wfere not re-baptized,
in order to put down the practice of the Ana-
Baptists. For if re-baptism were admitted in
one case, it was feared that the advocates for
adult baptism only, would succeed in their argu¬
ments for immersion sprinkling had been
practiced. But in lat^j.- times, since it has been
ascertained that John's was an intermediate dis¬
pensation, neither Jewish nor Christian, this
paragraph has been adduced to prove the very
opposite! It is now rendered very clear that
John's administrations were in so dark an age
as to furnish no example for enlightened Chris¬
tians ;—persons baptized by him were unfit to
unite with the Church until an authorized ad¬
ministrator had performed his manipulations!
Jn ancient times, John was highly honored,—
buildings and churches were dedicated to his
patronage; but now, since it is manifest, that,
Xii INTRODUCTION.
in proportion as we respect his dispensation and
labors, we disparage and cheapen the theories
and practices of Pedo-baptism, his baptism must
be disposed of in the same way, and his charac¬
ter and office degraded. The Grammars teach
us that the Greek article is used to mark definite-
ness as is the English definite article. Socrates,
the philosopher, with the article ] but without it,
a philosopher. But in the Greek New Testa¬
ment, the article is always used in connexion
with John the Baptist. Yet, modern writers, Mr.
Brown, the author of ^Concordance. Dr. Woods,
of Andover,* and oflffs, denominate him John
Baptist. Dr. George Campbell says: " Baptist
is a title from his office, not a proper name. It
i's, ' therefore, improperly rendered into modern
languages without the article," as the French
translators have done. «
I regard the position taken by Mr. Fleming
as fully proved from the Scriptures, and firmly
established. Neither false interpretations, fan¬
ciful theories, love of logomachy, nor affected
* See American Sunday School Union's Bible Dictionary,
by Archibald Alexander, D. D., Professor of Theology at
Princeton. Were there any Baptists in tho " Committee of
Publication" who approved of that work t There it is writ¬
ten " J olm Baptist." Editor.
INTRODUCTION.
knowledge of philology, of which so many dis¬
putants are so very fond, can shake our confi¬
dence in these fundamental truths. Listen to the
remarks of the learned Dr. Prideaux, as confir¬
mation of the position that John's ministration
belonged to the Gospel dispensation. In ex¬
plaining Daniel's prophecy of the Seven Weeks
and the Three-score and two Weeks, or 483
years from the going forth of the commandment
to restore and build Jerusalem unto Messiah the
Prince, he says : " This brings it down to the
Julian period, 4639, which was the very year in
which the ministry of the Gospel first, began.
This," saith he, " Christ executed at first, and
therein made his appearance as the Messiah by
his forerunner, John the Baptist, for the space of
three years and a half, and by himself the same
length of time : these two put together make up
the last week of the prophecy, which began ex¬
actly at the end of the sixty-two weeks." Dan¬
iel's prophecy concerning the Messiah can be ex¬
plained in no other way than by maintaining
that John's ministry was, as saith the Evangel¬
ist, " the beginning of the Gospel," and part of
the Christian Dispensation.*
*■ See Daniel, ch. ix, and Pridaaui' Connexions,
xiv INTRODUCTION.
Dr. Whitby says : 11 The history of John the
Baptist is styled the beginning of the Gospel, be¬
cause he began his office by preaching repent¬
ance*, as the preparation to receive it, and faith
in the Messiah, as the subject of it."
Mr. Scott, in his Notes on Mark i : 1, says :
"This was, in fact, the beginning of the Gospel,
the introduction of the New Testament Dispen¬
sation."
John began preaching, " Repent ye, for the
kingdom of Heaven [the Gospel dispensation]
is at hand," Mat. 3 : ii.
Christ began his with the same words : " Re¬
pent ye, for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand."
Mat. 4 : xvii. That interpreter or metaphysic¬
ian who can discover a difference between the
instructions of the Harbinger and Messiah, and
so declare they belonged to different dispensa¬
tions, must have a subtlety superior to the Jesu¬
it, Loyola, and an impudence equal to Tetzel
hawking indulgences.
It is freely admitted, that, at first sight, many
persons would suppose the first paragraph in the
nineteenth of Acts recorded the re-baptism of
certain disciples; but the meaning of every wri¬
ter does not lie on the surface. If there were
INTRODUCTION. XV
anything to confirm the supposition in favor of
re-baptism, we might be satisfied with this pri¬
mary view 5 but all the other facts and circum¬
stances recorded, as Mr. F. clearly shows, go to
confirm us in the opinion that the ordinance was
not repeated. Apollos is named in the eighteenth
chapter as "knowing only the baptism of John,"
and if re-baptism were necessary, (and im¬
proper for ordinary disciples to delay it,) it
would seem that an eloquent minister who was
preaching from city to city should not neglect a
positive institution. Yet after they had heard
him'speak, Aqyila and Priscilla instruct him;
but no intimation is given that he should sub¬
mit to baptism—the inference is logical that
John's, which he had received, was quite suffic¬
ient. If re-baptism were proper in any of John's
Disciples, propriety would require,—as Apol¬
los was a minister, named prior to those twelve
persons met by Paul at Ephesus,—that some¬
thing in relation to his submitting to the ordi¬
nance should have been recorded. Why was
knowing only the baptism of John named in con¬
nexion with the eloquent Apollos mentioned, un¬
less to show that in after ages disputes might not
arise as to its validity with that administered by
XVi INTRODUCTION.
the Apostles and Disciples of Jesus 1—to stop
the mouths of such as might attempt to dispar¬
age the character of John and his administra¬
tions %
The reception of the extraordinary influence
of the Holy Spirit was not necessary to salva¬
tion j hence baptism is not necessarily connected
with it or to follow it. In the cases of Saul and
the family of Cornelius, the gift of the Spirit
was conferred prior to baptism ; but the mirac¬
ulous gift, that of speaking with tongues, fol¬
lows the laying on of Paul's hands on the
Twelve Disciples at Ephesus—t-his furnishes no
evidence that they had just been baptized.
According to grammatical construction, the
nearest relative must agree with the anteoadent;
but what is the antecedent of "they" in the 5th
verse, if not "people" in the 4th ? The unau¬
thorized interpolation of " this" in the 5th verse
obscures the historian's meaning. Many sup¬
pose that "thisS1 (which is not in the original,)
refers to Paul's remarks made to the Twelve
Disciples; that is, when they had heard this de¬
claration of Paul, they were re-baptized. But if
the "they" refers to "people" as its antecedent,
and we read the 4th and 5th verses as Paul's re-
INTRODUCTION. xvii
lation of what John did and its effects, leaving
out " this," as it ought to be,* we shall easily
perceive that the true meaning is :—When the
people to whom John preached '■'■heard'1'1 his faith¬
ful declarations, " tJiey were baptized in the name
of the Lord Jesus
It is supposed John could not baptize in the
name of Jesus—his was the baptism of repent¬
ance. But does repentance necessarily exclude
the name of Jesus, in whom John exhorted the
crowds to believe % Every evangelical minister
now requires, as did the Harbinger, evidence of
repentance; for it is a sine qua non connected
with every scriptural administration of the or¬
dinance. " Baptism of repentance" literally can
have no existence. Repentance is sorrow for
sin—an act of the mind, not of the body—con¬
nected with the ordinance, but no part of it.
John's baptism pre-supposed that repentance was
exercised by the candidate, and inseparably con¬
nected with the ordinance—as now with Chris¬
tian baptism. This, no doubt, is the meaning of
the phrase " baptism, of repentance.'''' But wheth¬
er John baptized or not in the name of Jesus, his
authority to administer the ordinance was from
+ See " Georgia Pulpit," Vol. I, page 368.—Ed.
xviii
INTRODUCTION.
on high; and, therefore, to all intents and pur¬
poses, his baptisms were valid, and needed no
repetition. He who questions it, puts himself
at issue with the God of Heaven.
In seeing so many essays and sermons whose
object is to depreciate John's administration, and
cast it into the shade, one is led to inquire—
What has created this anxiety? Why is Pedo-
baptism so much enAged if we class the Har¬
binger of the Savior,—the man sent by God to
prepare the way,—among evangelical ministers 1
The indications that immersion was his uniform
practice, it is true, are very clear and conclusive
—they show that this was the primitive action
in the ordinance; but not more so than under the
administration of the Apostles. In connexion
with his services we have Jordan, a large river
some 150 miles long, in which the Savior and
many penitents were baptized--Enon, where
there was '■'■much water,''' (7rolluvdara.) This
phrase is rendered by some pseudo critics, '■'■ma¬
ny little streams or brooks.'''' See Jeremiah 51 :
xiii and Ezelciel 26 : xix, where the same words
are used, and then say if they mean but " little
rills.'''' We have, also, "went up straightway
out of the water." John refused to baptize the
INTRODUCTION. XiX.
proud Scribes who brought forth no fruits of re¬
pentance,—impenitent men, claiming the ordi¬
nance because of their relation to the father of
Circumcision,*—he baptized no households,!
or infants, J—those only that confessed their
sins.
But we have, in the Acts and Epistles, proof
that rises to demonstration in favor of immersion,
and all the conveniences of that ancient ordi¬
nance—quite as clear as attended John's admin¬
istration. Wefinda "certainwater,"$ orstream,
where the Eunuch was immersed; for on the way
south from Jerusalem we cross the Sorek and
Besor, with their tributaries :—Damascus stands
* Matthew, iii: 7, 8, 9.
t Probably he did—but they were all believers, rejoicing
like those in the jailor's household—or believed " in the Lord"
like Crispus' household—or, addicted to the ministry of the
saints, like the household of Stephanus—or, were brethren ca¬
pable of receiving spiritual comfort, like the household of Ly-
dia.—Acts, xvi: 40.
J Nor did the Apostles baptize infants—nor did Jesus, for he
baptized none.—John, iv: 2. " It is certain Christ did not or¬
dain infant baptism;—we cannot prove that the Apostles or¬
dained infant baptism.''—Neander's Ch. Hist., page 198.
§T<56>p is translated River, sea or pool:—Matthew iii: 16,
where Jordan is called vdaroo : viii: 32, where the sea is re¬
presented by vdaoiv in the plural. Schleusner says it means
" Aqua omnis generis, omne quod est fluidum, flavius, fons—
stagnum mare."—Ed.
XX
INTRODUCTION.
on a branch of the Paphar, andPhilippi near the
Strymonis and a gulf, where Saul, Lydia and the
Jailer could be immersed. Near the position of
"the Seven Churches" addressed by the Apos¬
tle John, we find bays and rivers in abundance.
Ephesus is on the Caystrus and a bay,—Smyrna
is on a bay,—some were on the Hermus and Pac-
totus,—Antioch, on the Orontes,—Caeserea, on
the Mediterranean, where Cornelius was baptiz¬
ed,—Colosse, on the Lycus,—Thessalonica, on a
gulf, and Rome on the Tiber. The traveler can
find water enough for immersion near all the
Churches and places of baptism named in the
Acts and Epistles.
If we should yield to the unjust claims of Pe-
do-baptism, that John had no part or lot in the
Christian Dispensation, the New Testament is
full of testimony that the conveniences for im¬
mersion, wheresoever the ordinance is named,
stand out prominently in the geography of the
countries visited and evangelized by the Apos¬
tles.
" The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ,
the Son of God," was from the preaching of John
the Baptist, [Luke, xvi: 16,] agreeably to the
predictions of Malachi, iii: 1, and Josiah, xl:
INTRODUCTION.
3.*] There is an old Greek adage, "'Apxv w'1-
aa iravToo^ (the beginning is half of the whole.)
promulgated, no doubt, to entourage effort and
stimulate the young to begin something laudable
and praiseworthy. Now, if the evangelical Mark
was inspired to declare that John's preaching,
which continued some three and half years, was
the beginning of the Gospel; the attempt to range
the Harbinger in some other than the Gospel Dis¬
pensation, is equivalent to a denial of a part of
God's Word. This closes these introductory re¬
marks.
* Newcomb's Harmony, by Prof. Stuart: Andover, 1814.
June, 1848.
THE BAPTISM OP JOHN,
PREPARED BY REQUEST, AND READ AT A MINIS¬
TERS' AND DEACONS' MEETING, HELD AT
GREENVILLE, GEORGIA, APRIL, 1843,
BY REV. ROBERT FLEMING.
In compliance with the request made at
your late meeting at Newnan, this Essay on
the three following intimately connected ques¬
tions, is submitted, viz:
1. When did the Jewish Dispensation end,
and the Gospel Dispensation begin ?
2. Was the ordination of the twelve the
same as that of the seventy ? and was it ne¬
cessary to re-ordain either the Twelve or the
Seventy after Christ''s Resurrection in order
to qualify them to administer the ordinances
of the Gospel ?
3. Were the persons who were baptized by
John, and those who were baptized by Jesus'
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
Disciples, jit subjects jor admittance into the
Church, which was organized at Jerusalem
immediately after our Saviour's Ascension,
without re-baptism ?
—The order in wliieh the above questions
stand will constitute our arrangement. In
answer to the first question, we say,— The
Jewish Dispensation ended where the Gospel
Dispensation began. We support this posi¬
tion—
1. From the testimony of John the Bap¬
tist.
*-The following is his language bearing wit¬
ness of Jesus Christ: " John bore witness of
him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom
I spake. He that oometh,after me is pre¬
ferred before me; for he was before me. And
of his fullness have all we received, and grace
for grace. For the law was given by Moses,
but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ."
[John, i: 15-17.] When John saw many
of the Pharisees and Saducees come to his
baptism, he said unto them, " O generation of
vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
25
wrath to come ? Bring forth, therefore, fruits
meet for repentance. And think not to say-
within yourselves, We have Abraham to our
father." Under the Jewish Dispensation,
children having " Abraham, to their father,"
were admitted, by hereditary right, to the
privileges of the Jewish Synagogue. This
John well knew; and, lest the Jews might
form wrong opinions in relation to the Gos¬
pel System, he says to them, " Think not to
say within yourselves, We have Abraham to
our father " How emphatic ! They must
not indulge such a thought in their bosoms.*
* The phrase, "Jewish Church," is objectionable.
We would quote from "Milman's History of Christian¬
ity," a late work, worthy the attention of the Christian
public. He says, in his preface, " The history of the
Jews was the history of a nation; the history of Christi¬
anity is that of a religion.
" The Jews were a civil as well as a religious, the
christians exclusively a religious community."—New
York Edit., page 195. " The admission of members
into the Jewish Synagogue, except in the case of prose¬
lytes of righteousness, was a matter of hereditary right;
circumcision was a domestic, not a publio ceremony.
But baptism, or the initiation into the christian commu-
b
26
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
With such testimony as this before us, the
conclusion is irresistible, that the Jewish Dis¬
pensation was abolished at the Jordan. He
who was sent to prepare "the way of the
Lord" declares that(t every tree which bring-
eth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and
cast into the fire,"—" is hewn down," not
shall be hewn down. John said, " Now also
the axe is laid unto the root of the trees,"—
it is not in the future tense. So we discover
that John required those who came to his
baptism [his disciples] to bear good fruit, and
to bear it now, and not to promise merely
that they would bear it hereafter.* John
nity, was a solemn ceremonial, requiring previous ex¬
amination and probation. The governing power would
possess and exercise the authority to admit into the
community."—p. 198.
" The christians, from the first, were purely a religious
community. This was their primary bond of union;
they had no national law which held them together as a
separate people. Their civil union was a subordinate
effect, arising out of their incorporation as a spiritual
body."—p. 195-6. Just such a spiritual body John would
prepare for Christ.
* Rev. T. A. Morris, bishop of the Methodist Church,
baptism of john. 27
did not receive fruitless trees. Jesus Christ,
the true vine, declares that his father is
the husbandman—" Every branch in me that
beareth not fruit he taketh away." [John,
xv: 2.] Paul required "fruit unto holi¬
ness." James required "fruits of righteous¬
ness." Jude rejected " trees without fruit."
[Jude, 12.] How similar these great teach¬
ers 1 Is repentance a gospel doctrine ? John
came preaching, and saying, " Repent ye;
for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand." Is
holiness of heart and of life a gospel requisi¬
tion ? He preached that men should bring
forth fruit worthy of repentance. Are re¬
pentance toward God and faith in our Lord
Jesus Christ required by the Gospel ? He
uttered, as the " Prophet of the Highest,"
this changeless truth of the unchangeable Je¬
hovah, " He that believeth on the Son hath
says: " Others received from John ' the baptism of repen¬
tance, ' which taught them the necessity of repentance,
and brought them under obligation to repent." See
his sermons, page 241. But the Bishop finds God's word
against his round assertions.—Ed.
28
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
everlasting life; and he tliat believetlv not
the Son shall not see life ; but the wrath of
God abidetli on him." [John, iii: 36.] The
fact is abundantly apparent that John preach¬
ed repentance—the Twelve preached it—the
Seventy preached it—Jesus preached it—
and Peter, immediately after the Ascension,
went on, as before, to preach it. If we shut
repentance out of the Gospel Plan, we shut
the adult sinner not only out of the water,
and out of the Gospel Church, but out of
Heaven itself. Repentance and baptism are
joined together, not only by John and Christ
and Peter, but by all the true ministers of
the Gospel. See this union throughout all
the Acts of the Apostles, and in all their
Epistles, when the subject is mentioned. But
2. From the testimony of Mark we support
our position.
Mark not only takes the position that the
Gospel Dispensation began with John, but
he refers us to the fulfillment of the prophe¬
cy in support of it. The ten first verses of
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
29
the first chapter of his Gospel are direct proof
of the correctness of the sentiment Ave main¬
tain : " The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus
Christ, the Son of God, as it is written in the
prophets, Behold I send my Messenger be¬
fore thy face, which shall prepare the way
before thee. The voice of one crying in the
wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord,
make his paths straight. John did baptize
in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of
repentance for the remission of sins. And
John was clothed," &c. [Mark, i: 1-10.]
3. From the testimony of the Jews we main¬
tain our position.
When the Jews sent Priests and Levites
from Jerusalem to enquire who John was, he
told them he was not the Christ. "Andthey
asked him, What then? Art thou Elias?
And he saith, I am not. Art thou that Pro¬
phet? And he answered, No." And they
asked him, and said unto him, "Why bap-
tizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor
Elias, neither that Prophet ? " [John, i: 19-
25.] From this enquiry, made by the Priests
30
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
and Levites in behalf of the Jews who sent
them, it is evident that they viewed baptism
as an innovation upon the customs of their
law; and believed if John was not the Mes¬
siah, nor Elias, he was not authorized to
make such changes in the religious rites of
the nation. It is also evident that they ex¬
pected this ordinance would be administered
by some person of very great note; either by
some great Prophet, as Elias, for whom they
looked before the coming of the Messiah, or
by the Messiah himself; and not by a common
teacher, or any ordinary person. It is ob¬
vious that this rite, as performed by John,
had not been practiced before among the
Jews; for if it had, they would not have been
so much troubled about it as they were ; nor
would they have troubled themselves to send
a special delegation of Priests and Levites
from Jerusalem to " Bethabara beyond Jor¬
dan," to enquire of John who he was, and
by what authority he was engaged in this
new way. It is clear from this enquiry that
John was not engaged in any of the " divers
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
31
washings, common among the Jews." " Then
there arose a question between some of John's
Disciples and the Jews about purifying."
[John, iii: 25.] Why all this, if John was
merely preaching up old Jewish customs ?
4. That the Gospel Dispensation began
with John, is proven by the testimony of Jesus
Christ.
In the eleventh chapter of the Gospel by
Matthew, we have the direct declarations of
our Lord, in reference to the closing scene of
the Jewish economy and the opening of the
Gospel Dispensation. John was in prison
when Christ gave his testimony on this point.
" From the days of John the Baptist until
now, the kingdom of heaven suffereth vio¬
lence, and the violent take it by force. For
all the Prophets and the law prophesied un¬
til John. And if ye will receive it this is
Elias which was for to come. He that hath
ears to hear, let him hear." This test is full
and clear in its import. " From the days of
John the Baptist until now that is, from the
commencement of John's ministry until the
32 baptism: of johx.
time that Jesus uttered this expression, " the
Kingdom of Heaven suffereth violence. By
the " Kingdom of Ileaven " is to be under¬
stood the " Gospel Dispensation" its doctrines
and ordinances, in contradistinction to the Jew¬
ish Dispensation, " For all the Prophets and
the laio prophesied until John" In the ninth
chapter of Mark, Jesus says, "Elias is in¬
deed come, and they have done unto him
whatsoever they listed." So we discover the
Kingdom of Ileaven suffered violence. The
Gospel has ever had its opposers. John was
now in confinement. Herod had laid violent
hands on him. The Son of God knew that
this was a time of trial to the friends of the
Gospel, while to its enemies it was an hour
of unholy triumph. The people of God suf¬
fer violence. John told the soldiers to " do
violence to no man." The Scribes and Phar¬
isees opposed the Gospel with such violence,
that Christ pronounced a woe against them.
"Ye shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against
men ; for ye neither go in yourselves, neither
suffer ye them that are entering to go in."
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
33
" Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, liow
can ye escape the damnation of hell." [Mat¬
thew, xxiii.] But further : the Kingdom of
Heaven suffereth violence, "for John came
neither eating nor drinking, and they say he
hath a devil." Such was their violent oppo¬
sition to John. " The son of man came eat¬
ing and drinking, and they say, behold a man
gluttonous, an^a wine-bibber, a friend of pub¬
licans and sinners,"—so violent against the
Savior. " But wisdom is justified of her
children." They justify John and Jesus.
John, the friend of the bridegroom, rejoiced
greatly because of the bridegroom's voice.
[John, iii: 2 9-3 O.J Again, Jesus says of John,
" Verily I say unto you, that the publicans
and the harlots go into the Kingdom of God
before you. For John came unto you in the
way of righteousness, and ye believed Iiim
not; but the publicans and harlots believed
him; and ye, when ye had seen it, repented
not afterward, that ye might believe him.
[Matthew, xxi: 32 to la.-t verse.] When the
chief Priests and Pharisees had heard his par-
34
baptism of john.
ables they sought to lay violent hands on
Jesus. [Matthew, xxxii: 45-46.] The op¬
position of the Jews, (both towards John and
Jesus in their public ministry,) was violence
done to the Kingdom of Heavenits doc¬
trines and its ordinances. They opposed the
Gospel with rage and not with reason ; with
settled animosity and not with solid argument.
They endeavored, in their v^Jence, to crush
its doctrines and its friends. When Jesus
would reason with them, they would ridicule;
and when he was in the temple teaching, the
" elders of the people" came and demanded of
him his authority for doing these things.
How soon he silences their opposition, by
asking them " one thing"—" The baptism
of John, whence was it; from Heaven or of
men?" [Matthew, xxi.] They saw the
point, and felt the power of this question.
" lie will say unto us, Why did ye not, then,
believe him ?" Again, Jesus Christ, the head
of the Church, asserts, that " The Law and
the Prophets were until John;—since that
time the Ivingdom of God is preached, and
baptism of john.
35
every man presseth into it." [Luke, xvi: 16.]
This expression refers us back from the time
Jesus uttered it to the time when John began
to preach—" since that time the Kingdom of
God is preached."*
Again; in Mark, i: 14, "Now after that
John was put in prison, Jesus came into Gal¬
ilee, preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom of
God, and saying, " The time is fulfilled, and
the Kingdom of God is at hand; repent ye,
and believe the Gospel." But if the gospel
was not preached then, how could the people
believe it ?
5. The testimony of Peter, and of one hun¬
dred and twenty at Jerusalem, in conference,
supports our position.
This testimony was given soon after the as¬
cension of our Lord, in the first conference
which was held by the Disciples at Jerusa¬
lem to transact Church business. It is found
in the first chapter of the Acts of the Apos-
* Jesus Christ says, "John was a burning and a
shining light."—[John, v: 35.] Why put him in the
dark Dispensation 1
36 BAPTISM OF JOHN.
ties. Jesus had just told his Disciples that
tliey should bear witness unto him, " unto the
uttermost parts of the earth." [V. 8.] We
should be careful to receive their testimony
in all things. "And in those days Peter
stood up in the midst of the Disciples, and
said, (the number of the names together were
about one hundred and twenty,) Men and
brethren, this Scripture must needs have been
fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth
of David spake before concerning Judas," &c.
" Wherefore of these men which companied
with us, all the time that the Lord Jesus went
in and out among us, beginning from the bap¬
tism of John, unto the same day that He was
taken up from us, must one be ordained to be
a witness with us of his Resurrection." [See
Acts, i: 15-25.] Nothing can be plainer than
this. When the one hundred and twenty
heard Peter's move in this conference, they
agreed to it, and they chose Matthias, and he
was numbered with the eleven Apostles. He
was chosen out of, and from those who had
companied with the Apostles, all the time the
baptism of john. 37
Lord went out and in among them, begin¬
ning- from the baptism of John, unto the
same day that he was taken, up from them.
Peter's move was very definite. Indeed, it is
impossible that any one who is not deficient
in understanding, could have any difficulty in
perceiving its import. Here we have " one
hundred and twenty " gospel witnesses, testi¬
fying to the correctness of the doctrine for
which we contend. But we have
6. The testimony of Paul in support of our
position.
Paul, in his travels, came to Ephesus and
found certain Disciples, and enquired of them
if they had received the Holy Ghost since
they believed. They told him they had not
so much as heard whether there be any Holy
Ghost. He then asked them concerning
their baptism—" Unto what, then were ye bap¬
tized V " They said, Unto John's baptism."
"When Paul heard this, he immediately re¬
plied in strong terms of commendation of
John's baptism: "John verily baptized with
3
38 BAPTISM OF JOHN.
the baptism of repentance, saying unto the peo¬
ple, that they should believe on him which
should come after him, that is, on Jesus Christ.
When they heard this, they were baptized in
the name of the Lord Jesus." Luke says—
" When Paul had laid his hands upon them,
the Holy Ghost came on them; and they
snake with tongues and prophesied." [Acts,
xix.] Luke gives us another instance in
which the Holy Ghost was given by the lay¬
ing on of the hands, on persons who had on¬
ly been baptized in the name of the Lord
Jesus, at Samaria. [See Acts, viii: 16-17.]
In this last instance, those upon whom hands
were laid by Peter and John had been bap¬
tized by Philip after the Ascension. In the
instance recorded in the nineteenth chapter
of Acts, those upon whom Paul laid hands
had been baptized under John's administra¬
tion before it. Here we have the miraculous
gifts, of the Holy Ghost bestowed upon those
who had been baptized before the Ascension,
and also upon those who had been baptized"
BAPTISM OF JOHN. 39
afterwards. The Holy Ghost put no differ¬
ence between them. Shall we put any ?
Surely not. "For by one Spirit are wc all
baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or
Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and
have all been made to drink into one Spirit."
[1st Corinthians, xii : 13-14.]
7. As John and Christ never officiated in
the priestly office, we conclude that their min¬
istry belonged to the Gospel Dispensation. ■
It is true that John was the son of Zacha-
rias, a priest of the course of Abia, and his
mother, Elizabeth, was of the daughters of
Aaron. The angel declared that he should
be great in the sight of the Lord, and should
drink neither wine nor strong drink,* and
that he should turn many of the children of
Israel to the Lord their God, and "the diso¬
bedient to the wisdom of the just." [Luke,
i: 15-17.] This looks very much like the
* From this, it is clear that Zacharias had a very ex¬
alted opinion of his son, John, as a teacher of the way
\ of salvation. Some modern teachers think he was
hardly a converted man.
40 BAPTISM OF JOHN.
work of a Gospel Minister. On the day
when he was circumcised, his father was
filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied,
" Thou, child, shalt be called the Prophet of
the Highest, for thou shalt go before the
face of the Lord to prepare his ways,—to
give knowledge* of salvation to his people
by the remission of their sins, through the
tender mercy of our God." [Luke, i: 76-
77.] So, instead of being called a Priest,
he was called " The Prophet of the Highest."
He never ministered in the priestly office,
but was in the wilderness or desert " till the
day of his shewing unto Israel." [Yerse
80.] In Luke, iii: 2, we are informed that
" the word of the Lord came unto John, the
son of Zachariah, in the wilderness. And
he came into all the country about Jordan,
preaching the baptism of repentance for the
remission of sins." Thus his " shewing un¬
to Israel" was not in the temple, in the char-
* Would that all, who bear the name of Baptist,
would imitate John the Baptist in this.
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
41
acter of a Priest, but in " the country about
Jordan," in the office of a Prophet and a
baptizer. Nor was John keeping up any
former Jewish ceremony by his baptism.
Purifying was not directed to be performed
in the wilderness of Judea, or in Jordan,
or in Enon. There arose a dispute between
some of John's Disciples and the Jews about
purifying. They evidently viewed John as
an innovator upon their customs. We are
obliged, therefore, to view John's dispensa¬
tion as the introduction of the Gospel, and
no part of the Jewish economy. He never
administered in any office in the Jew's reli¬
gion. [John, v: 35.]
Secondly, John did not baptize Jesus to in¬
duct him into the-priestly office.*
* Rev. Richard Watson, an approved Methodist Com¬
mentator on Matthew, 3: 15, says: "The notion that
Christ was baptized with reference to the entrance of
the Levitical Priests into their office, by anointing and
baptism, does not .seem to be well founded, since their
baptism was a mere oblation, which was continually re¬
peated during their ministry."
Dr. James Macknight, a distinguished Presbyterian
42 BAPTISM OF JOHN.
Jesus Christ never went into the temple
with the blood of a goat or of an heifer.
Paul informs us that " He, of which these
things are' spoken, pertaineth to another
tribe, of which no man gave attendance at
the altar," as priest. [Heb., vii: 12-18.]
" For it is evident," says Paul, " that our
Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe
Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood."
Moses sprinkled with blood the tabernacle
Minist er of Scotland, whose Translation and Exposition
of the Epistles should be in every Christian Minister's
Library, says, in a note on Colossians, ii: 12, "Buried
with him in baptism." Christ began his Ministry with
receiving baptism from John, to show, in an emblemati¬
cal manner, that he was to die and to rise again from
the dead. And, after his resurrection, ho commanded
his Disciples to initiate mankind into his religion by
baptizing them, as he himself had been baptized, to
show that, although they shall die, like him, through
the malignity of sin, yet, as certainly as he rose from
the dead, believers shall be raised at the last day, with
bodies fashioned like to his glorious body. Wherefore,
his Disciples having been baptized as he was, and for
the very same purpose, they are fitly said to be " buried
with Christ in baptism." He remarks, on Romans, 6 :
4,—" Christ submitted to be baptized, that is, to be
BAPTISM OF JOHN. 43
and all the vessels of the ministry; " and al¬
most all things are by the law purged with
blood, and without shedding of blood is no
remission of sins. It was, therefore, neces¬
sary that the patterns of things in the hea¬
vens should be purified with these; but the
heavenly things themselves with better sac¬
rifices than these. For Christ is not entered
into the holy places made with hands, which
are the figures of the true, but into Heaven
itself." " He appeared to put away sin by
the sacrifice of himself." [Heb., ix: 21-27.]
' He was made an High Priest, " not after the
buried under the water by John, and to be raised out of
it again, as an emblem of his future death, and resur¬
rection. In like manner, the baptism of believers is
emblematical of their own death, burial and resurrec¬
tion."
Rev. F. G. Ilibbard, of the Methodist Church, has
written a book on baptism, in which he differs from the
above learned divines. He says: " That our Saviour's
baptism was a priestly consecration, is corroborated by
all the accompanying circumstances." [Page41.] This
notion is now nearly abandoned by all the most learned
divines, for the best of reasons. Jesus never officiated in
the temple as a Jewish Priest.—Ed.
44
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
law of a carnal commandment, but after the
' power of an endless life." [Hebrews, vii.]
Now, if Jesus was baptized by John to put
him into the priestly office, (after the law of
a carnal commandment, as is sometimes
strangely asserted,) why is it that he never
officiated in that office " after the law of a
carnal commandment ?" To put one into an
office who is never to officiate in it, is, to our
mind, a work of supererogation. Nor did
John baptize Jesus in reference to the fulfil¬
ment of any of the ceremonial laws of the
Jews; for baptism, (as we have shewn in the
3d argument,) was first practiced by John,
and was, by the Jews, viewed as an innova¬
tion upon their customs. Where the idea
that John immersed Christ to induct him
into the Priest's office, or to fulfil the requi¬
sitions of the Jewish ceremonial laws, sprang
up, we know not, nor need we care to know,
as it is not in the Sacred Scriptures.
In the 8th chapter of Leviticus, from the
1st to the 13th verse, we learn'the " ceremo-
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
45
nial laid" in reference to the work of priest-
making. " And the Lord spake unto Moses,
saying, Take Aaron and his sons, &c., and
gather thou all the congregation unto the
door of the tabernacle, &c. And Moses
brought Aaron and his sons, and washed
them with water." Thus the ceremonial law
of the Jews required the priest to be washed
at the door of the tabernacle, and not in the
wilderness of Judea, in the Jordan. If John
and Jesus were members of the Jewish
Church, and engaged in the performance of
Jewish rites and ceremonies, why did the
Jews say of John, " He hath a devil ?" Why
did they look upon him as one in league with
Satan ? Why did they raise a dispute with
John's Disciples about purifying ? Why did
they send to John to inquire whom he was,
and by what authority he was baptizing the
people, if he was neither Elias nor the Mes¬
siah ? Why did the Jews revile the young
man whose eyes Christ had opened, by tell¬
ing him, " Thou art Christ's Disciple, but we
46 baptism of john.
— S
are Moses' Disciples ?" Why all this, if Je¬
sus Christ was doing nothing more than fol¬
lowing the customs of Moses ? The truth
we conceive, in reference to this matter, is
this: Jesus had conformed to the requisitions
of the Jewish law of circumcision. He had
fulfilled that act of righteousness under that
dispensation. Now he would comply with
the requisitions of the new dispensation, by
submitting to John's baptism, and thus give
proof to the world, that the baptism of John
was from Heaven and not of men—that it
was a righteous thing—that the administrator
was "a man sent from God"—that John
came " in the way of righteousness." [Matt,
xxi: 32.] And, as the highest proof of
this, he was baptized. Thus are silenced
forever the unrighteous objections brought
against John's administration. " Thus it be-
cometh us to fulfill all righteousness."
Though John never officiated in the Priest's
office, he clearly understood the design of
the offerings made among the Jews for sin :
BAPTISM OF JOHN. 47
hence, lie calls to liis Disciples, " Behold the
Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of
the world." He calls Christ " the Lamb of
God," in view of the offering he was to
make of himself, not only for the sin of the
Jewish nation, but for " the sin of the world."
To put away sin " by the sacrifice of him¬
self" as Paul says in Heb. ix.
"We proceed to consider the second ques¬
tion with its subdivisions:
2. Was the ordination of the twelve the
same as that of the seventy ? and was it
necessary to re-ordain either the twelve or the
seventy, after Christs resurrection, in order
to qualify them to administer the ordinances
of the Gospel ?
1. "Was the ordination of the twelve the
same.as that of the seventy? We answer,
it was. But Luke is the only Evangelist
who mentions the appointment of the seven¬
ty. In the 6th chapter, he records the ap¬
pointment of the twelve in the following
words: " And it came to pass, in those days,
48
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
that he (Jesus) went out into a'mountain to
pray, and continued all night -in prayer to
God. And when it was day, he called unto
him his Disciples, and of them he chose
twelve, whom he named Apostles." [Ver¬
ses 12 and 18.] Though these twelve were
chosen at this time, they were not commis¬
sioned until afterwards, as we discover in the
9th chapter. It would seem that he required
them to remain with him awhile, to witness
his miracles, receive his instructions, and
profit by his example, before they should be
sent out to the work of the Ministry. " Then
he called his twelve disciples together, (those
whom he had chosen, as stated in chapter
vi,) and gave them power and authority over
all devils, and to cure diseases* 'and he sent
them to preach the kingdom of God and to
heal the sick." This statement by Luke
agrees with that by Matthew. They were
to go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel,
and to preach, saying, "The Kingdom of
Heaven is at hand." The work to be per-
BAPTISM OF JOHN. 49
formed and the field of their labors were
pointed out in their commission.
In Luke the 10th we are told, " After
these things the Lord appointed seventy oth¬
ers," and sent them forth with power to heal
the sick and to cast out devils. They were
charged to say unto the inhabitants of the
cities into which they went, " The Kingdom
of God is come nigh unto you." The work
of the twelve and of the seventy appears to
have been the same. The .twelve were sent
out to heal the sick, to cast out devils, and
to preach the gospel; so were the seventy.
The field of their labors was the same—the
Jewish nation.
The Disciples of Jesus were baptizing at
the same time that .John was. [See John,
iii: 22-23, and iv: 2.] Whether the twelve
or the seventy baptized more Disciples than
John did, we are not told; but, as their com¬
missions were alike, it is presumable that
both the Twelve and the Seventy were enga¬
ged in the work. That John or Jesus' Dis-
50 BAPTISM OF JOHN.
ciples used any form of words in the admin¬
istration of the ordinance, does not appear;
nor was baptism into the name of the Fath¬
er, Son and Spirit, necessary, until it was
made so by the further instructions of • our
Lord himself. This formula he added at
his ascension. It was this command that
regulated all future baptisms. Immersion
was baptism after Christ's ascension, as well
as in the days of John and Christ's Disci¬
ples. The testimony of the truly learned, L
among Pedobaptists as well as Baptists, is to
this point.* Baptism underwent no change
when Christ, at His ascension, extended the
* Seo the following testimony of Pedobaptist divines:
Tertullian, who lived within a century after the Apos¬
tle John, mentions expressly the people, (quas Joannes
in Jordane tinxit,) "whom John dipped in Jordan."—
Stennctfs Answer to Russen, p. 144.
Mr. Doddridge: " Buried with him in baptism." It
seems the part of candor to confess that here is allusion
to the manner of baptizing by immersion.—Fam. Ex¬
positor.
Mr. Whitfield, of unequalled fame in modern days,
says: " It is certain that, in the words of bur text,
(Rom., vi: 3-4,) there is an allusion to the manner of
baptism of john. 51
commission of the twelve from the Jewish
nation to "all the world." They were
still to baptize, that is, to immerse; but,
henceforth, they were to baptize in the name
of the sacred Trinity, and to baptize believ¬
ing Gentiles as well as believing Jews. This
■baptizing by immersion, which is what our own Church
allows," &c.—Eighteen Sermons, p. 297.
Mr. J. Wesley, no less distinguished than Whitfield,
says: "Buried with him by baptism." Alluding to the
ancient manner of baptizing by immersion.—Note on
Rom., 6:4.
Liglitfoot and A. Clarke: "That the baptism of John
was by plunging the body, seems to appear from those
things which are related of him ; namely, that he bapti¬
zed in Jordan, and that he baptized in Enon, because
there was much water there," &c.—In Clarke's Com¬
mentary at the end, of Mark.
Dr. J. Macknight, probably a more learned divine
than any of the above distinguished names, says, on
Rom., 6: 4, " Christ submitted to be baptized, that is,
to be buried under the water by John, and to be raised
out of it again as an emblem of his future death and
resurrection."—See, also, Prof. Stuart on Baptism,
p. 365-6.
Dr. Chalmers, but recently dead, one of the most dis¬
tinguished Presbyterian Ministers Scotland has ever
produced, says, (in his commentary on Romans, the 6th
52 BAPTISM OF JOHN.
law was not ex post facto in its operations.
It was not to nullify all baptisms previously
performed by his Disciples and by John,
but to regulate all future baptisms, among
chapter,) on the phrase, "buried with him by bap¬
tism," that "The original meaning of the word 'bap¬
tism' is immersion; and, though we regard it as a point
of indifference, whether the ordinance so named be per¬
formed in this way, or by sprinkling, yet we doubt not
that the prevalent style of the administration, in the
Apostles' days, was by an actual submerging of the
whole body under water."—See Chalm jrs' Lectures on
Rom., 6. 1
It would be folly to call in question the talents of the
above men: their writings are found in every land of
Christendom. But we make one more quotation:
Mosheim: "The saerament of baptism was adminis¬
tered in this (the second) century, without the public
assemblies, in places appointed and prepared for that
purpose, and was performed by immersion of the whole
body in the baptismal font. Those adult persons that
desired to be baptized, (among the collegiants,) received
the sacrament of baptism according to the ancient and
primitive mann%r of celebrating that institution—ever
by immersion." [Eccles. Hist., cent, ii, part ii, chap,
iv, sec. viii. Also, cent, xvii, sec. ii, part ii, ch. vii,
sec. i.]
All history on the subject establishes the view given
by the above able scholars and divines.—Ed.
BAPTISM OF JOHN. 53
all nations to the end of the world. The
same kind of subject baptized in John's day,
that is, a penitent believer, was ■ to be admit¬
ted to the ordinance after the above form of
words was annexed to the commission. Not
• an instance of infant baptism is recorded in
John's day, nor is one mentioned in the Acts of
the Apostles !* Throughout the New Testa¬
ment, faith, repentance and baptism, are con-
* Mr. Burkitt, a Pedabaptist, in Ms commentary on
the New Testament, Matt. 19: 13-15, says: " John's
baptism was the baptism of repentance, of which infants
were incapable.",
Mr. Thomas Scott, a Presbyterian commentator,
well known among us, says: "It does not appear that
any but adults were baptized by John." [Matt., 3:
5-6.] Mr. Scott again says: "The baptism of Jesus
was doubtless of adults alone." [Com., John, 3: 22-24.]
Mr. James Saurin, a celebrated French divine, Says :
" In the Primitive Church, instruction preceded baptism
agreeable to the order of Jesus Christ,—"Go teach all
nations, baptizing them," &c.—Bap. Manual, p. 25.
Dr. Neander, the latest and most distinguished church
historian, says: "It is certain Christ did not ordain in¬
fant baptism; we cannot prove that the Apostles or¬
dained infant baptism."—Ch. Hist., rp. 198.
Dr. Stuart, Professor of Theology at Andover, says :
54
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
nected together, by John, by Christ, and by
his Apostles, when they speak of the sub¬
ject.
2. Was it necessary to re-ordain either the
twelve, or the seventy, after Christ's re¬
surrection, in order to qualify them to admin¬
ister the ordinances of the Gospel ?
We answer, it was not, else it would have
been done, and the. sacred writers would
have informed us of it. The charge which
Christ gave to the twelve, at his ascension,
was not a re-ordination, but an extension of
their bounds in preaching the Gospel, as we
have shewn. They had been ordained, pre-
" Commands, or plain and certain examples in the New
Testament, relative to it, I do not find; nor, with my
view of it, do I need them."—Stuart on Bap., p. 354.
Dr. Woods, also of Andover Theological Seminary,
Says: "We have no express precept or example for in¬
fant baptism in all our holy writings. The proof must
be made out in some other way,"
From the above quotations, it is clear that the bap¬
tism of John and that of the Apostles Was the same; and
that neither John the Baptist nor the Apostles baptized
infants—our opposers, themselves, being the judges.—
Ed.
BAPTISM OF JOHN. 55
viously, to preach the Kingdom of God; so
had the seventy. John was a man " sent
from God" to preach the Gospel, and, con¬
sequently, to administer baptism. The twelve
and the seventy were men sent by Christ to
preach and to administer the ordinances. It
was not necessary to set them apart again
to do what they had already been ordained
to do, and had been doing.
The procedure of the " one hundred and
twenty," on the day of Pentecost, when one
was to be chosen to fill the place of Judas,
(as recorded in Acts, i: 21 to 26,) shews
that the Apostles did not re-ordain Matthias.
He was numbered with the eleven Apostles.
No hands were laid on Matthias ; but when
the seven deacons (less important officers in
the Church,) were appointed, as stated in
Acts, vi: 5-6, they were " set before the
Apostles, and, when they had prayed, they
laid their hands on them." Here we have
an ordination, the first which took place in
the Church after Christ's ascension. When
56
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
the Church sets apart Ministers or Deacons,
she may, and should ordain them by imposi¬
tion of hands. But John was set apart by
God himself, and the twelve and seventy had
been set apart by Christ—higher power than
man could exercise. For the Church to
have ke-ordained them after His ascension
to glory, would have been offering insult to
the authority of Heaven. Why any one,
who reads the Gospel attentively, should
have supposed it necessary to re-ordain either
the twelve or the seventy, in order to qualify
them to administer the ordinances of the
Gospel after Christ's ascension, is, to our
mind, strange. Indeed, if a re-ordination
had been made by the Church, it would have
proven to us, at once, that John's dispensa¬
tion was not the Gospel dispensation, and
that Christ's baptism was not the Christian
or Gospel baptism, and that neither John,
Christ, the twelve, nor the seventy, preached
the Gospel before Christ's ascension—all of
which, as we have shewn, is at variance with
BAPTISM OF JOHN. 57
the plain statements of the New Testament.
But we will now consider our third ques¬
tion :
3. Were the persons baptized by John, and
those baptized by Jesus' Disciples before the
resurrection and ascension, jit subjects for
admittance into the Church, which was or¬
ganized at Jerusalem after our Saviour's as¬
cension, without being re-baptized?
"We answer, they were fit subjects. If
not, in what sense could it be said John pre¬
pared the way of the Lord ? But we sup¬
port this position by various arguments,
clearly deduced from the Scriptures. ' #
1. They were so recognized by the Apos¬
tles.
This position is supported from the fact
that Matthias was not only not re-ordained,
but he was not re-baptized, when he was
numbered with the eleven. See the history
of this transaction in the first Church Con¬
ference at Jerusalem, held within less than
ten days after Christ ascended up into Hea-
58
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
veil. It is recorded in the first chapter of
the Acts, at the 21st and 22nd verses. The
Apostles were all there, and they all recog¬
nized John's baptism as Christian baptism.
Peter was very precise, as well as concise,
in his move. Here it is: "Wherefore of
these men which have companied with us all
the time that the Lord Jesus went in and
out among us, beginning from the baptism of
John, unto that same day that he was taken
up from us, must one be ordained to be a
witness with us of his resurrection ?"
The conference consisted of one hundred
and |p$§nty Disciples, and the choice was to
be made out of such of them as had compa¬
nied with the Saviour and the eleven "all
the time" that the Lord Jesus went in and
out among them, " beginning from, the bap¬
tism of John, unto that same day that he was
talcen up from them." Can any thing be
clearer than this ? No individual could fill
the place of Judas, but one chosen as above.
Instead of rejecting John's dispensation, they
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
59
would have nothing to do with one to fill the
place of him who betrayed their Lord, unless
he could be found within the limits of the
above move. Let no christian man, then,
say he will have " nothing to do" with John's
administration. John prepared " the way of
the Lord," and these Disciples followed it.
The above reasoning is clear and scriptural;
he that runs may read.
2. We have no instance in the New Testa¬
ment of the re-baptism of any of John's or
Christs Disciples.
If those baptized by John and by CImst's
Disciples, before the ascension of our Lord,
had not been proper subjects for admission
into the Church organized at Jerusalem af¬
ter the ascension, they would have been re-
baptized, and the Scriptures would have in¬
formed us of it. Those baptized at Jerusa¬
lem on the day of Pentecost, had not been
previously baptized by John or by Christ's
Disciples; for they admitted none to baptism
but penitents. But Peter commanded them
CO BAPTISM OF JOHN.
to repent and be baptized, " every one'''' of
them. Therefore, they had not been pre¬
viously penitent; nor had they been pre¬
viously baptized. So none of them had been
previously John's or Christ's Disciples. It
is by no means certain that three thousand
were baptized on the • day of Pentecost,
though it is certain that three thousand were
on that day added unto them; that is, to the
" one hundred and twenty" mentioned in the
15tli verse of the first chapter. The New
Testament knows nothing of adding individu¬
als to the Church, without their having been
previously baptized. Now, some of the three
thousand added to the Church might have
been of those who had been previously bap¬
tized by John's and Christ's Disciples, and
some (probably the greater portion,) were
such as had that day repented and been bap¬
tized by the Apostles. But, be all this as it
may—the argument is the same; none of
John's Disciples were re-baptized. We do
not introduce the above reasoning for the
BAPTISM OF JOHN. 61
purpose of avoiding the supposed difficulty
of immersing so many in one day, because it
is well known that a person can be baptized
in about the same time that he can be sprin¬
kled. If, from the one hundred and twenty,
we take the eleven and the seventy, who had
companied with the Lord Jesus all the time
he went in and out, there will be left thiriy-
nine, who had not been with them all the
time. They were, however, added to the
eleven and the seventy, Avithout regard to
the time of their baptism; whether, before
the ascension, like that of the seventy, or, af¬
ter it, like that of those baptized on uay
of Pentecost by the Apostles. So all these
baptisms were recognized by the Apostles as
the Christian baptism, without a murmur.
There is no crookedness in this.* John pre¬
pared the way of the Lord, and made His
paths straight, and His Disciples went
straight into the Church without re-baptism,
when it was organized at Jerusalem.
* 1 Cor., xii: 13-14.
62
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
3. Ap olios, who " knew only the baptism
of John, was not re-baptized at Ephesus, nor
was he re-ordained.
Luke, in the eighteenth of the Acts of the
Apostles, gives us the following account of
this very distinguished Minister:—" This
man was instructed in the way of the Lord;
and, being fervent in the Spirit, he spake and
taught diligently the things of the Lord,
knowing only the baptism of John. And he
began to speak boldly in the synagogue;
whom, when Aquila and Priscilla had heard,
they took him unto them, and expounded
unt him the way of God more perfectly.
And when he was disposed to pass into
Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the
Disciples to receive him; who, when he was
come, helped them much which had believed
through grace."
Apollos was not re-baptized, though Aqui¬
la and Priscilla took him unto them, and ex¬
pounded unto him the way of God more
perfectly. " This man was instructed in the
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
63
way of the Lord," and "taught diligently
the things of the Lord," yet there were
things in which Aquila could further instruct
him. The question is— What were those
things ? We cannot positively tell. We
can tell what they positively were not. He
was not re-baptized ; for he knew the baptism
of John. He was not re-ordained; for he
was acknowledged as a Minister of Christ,
and " the brethren wrote, exhorting the Dis¬
ciples to receive him" as such. He was
" an eloquent man, and mighty in the Scrip¬
tures and it could not have been in these
things he was taught by them more jr -ifect-
ty-
But there was certainly something in his
preaching, (notwithstanding his profound
knowledge of the Jewish Scriptures,) which
was imperfect—something, in his notions of
tilings, which required that he should have
a private lecture ; such a one as a good old
Disciple and his wife could give at their own
house. Apollos knew only the baptism of
64 baptism of john.
John. Now, the baptism of John and that of
Christ's Disciples wera alike, and were lim¬
ited to the Jewish nation, until Christ, at his
ascension, enlarged or extended the field of
labor to all the world. Apo'llos might
not have heard of the extension of the com¬
mission, and, consequently, he preached the
baptism of John—that is, limiting his work
to the Jews, mightily convincing them that
Jesus was the Christ. It might have been
in this particular that he' was taught more
perfectly. Before Christ enlarged the sphere
of the Disciples' commission to all the world,
and before the command to baptize hence¬
forth in the name of the Father, Son and
Spirit, all the baptisms of John and Christ's
Disciples were valid. But now that the
field of labor is enlarged, and a formula of
baptism given, it would be improper to bap¬
tize, as they had done prior to this extension
of the commission, without the formula.
As this was after the enlargement of the
commission, and also after the form of words
BAPTISM OF JOHN. G5
was given, and as Epliesus was in Asia Mi¬
nor, and the residence of Apollos was in Al¬
exandria in Africa, it is presumable that
Apollos had not heard of the extension of
the field of labor, nor of the annexation of
the future baptismal formula. "We hear
nothing of his having had any interview with
the Apostles previously, and, consequently,
he knew only the state of things in John's
day—that is, only John's baptism in its re¬
stricted application to the Jews. To have
confined his ministry to the Jews, or to have
baptized, not using the name of the Father,
Son and Holy Ghost, (now that the commis¬
sion is to go into all the world and preach
the gospel to every creature, and to baptize
in the name of the sacred three,) would have
been improper. When Christ gave the com¬
mand to go into all the world and preach,
and baptize believers in the name of the tri¬
une God, the baptisms previously performed
by the Disciples were not nullified by it.
Baptism, after this command, unless perform-
66 baptism of john.
eel "in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost" would be null
and void. It is by the existence of law that
an act is authorized, or required.
But the inquirer may ask— Tfho baptized
Apollos ? Did John, or one of the twelve, or
of the seventy ? We do not know. But
baptism by either, of them is regarded, (as
we have shewn,) as Christian baptism by the
one hundred and twenty at Jerusalem in
conference assembled, the Apostles all being
present.
4. John's Disciples at Ephesus were not
re-baptized.*
The first verse informs us they were Dis¬
ciples—the second that they were believers—
the third that they were baptized unto John's
baptism. When Paul heard this, he was
satisfied, and commended John's baptism with
a verily—he tells how John preached, and
how the people were baptized. Then said
* Sec "Georgia Pulpit," vol. 1, pages 866-7, "where
this subject is fully discussed.—Ed.
BAPTISM OF JOHX. G7
Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism
of repentance, saying unto the people that
they should believe on him which should
come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
When they heard this, they were baptized
in the name of the Lord Jesus." [Acts, xix:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5.]
After so strongly vindicating John's bap¬
tism, and shewing that John required the
people to believe on Jesus, and to be bapti¬
zed in His name, he proceeds to lay his
hands on them, and the Holy Ghost came
on them; and " they spake with tongues and
prophesied."—See parallel case, Acts, viii:
15, 16, 17.
Thus, in a plain and scriptural way, we
have endeavored to discharge the duty as¬
signed us. "We have relied more on a just
application of the word of God in support of
our views, than upon any thing else. Hence
we have quoted largely from the New Tes¬
tament, desiring that God's Book should
speak, and praying, " He that hath ears
to hear, let him hear."
68
BAPTISM OF JOHN.
With an earnest desire that the truth may
triumph over error, and that all God's people
may " stand fast in one spirit, with one mind,
striving together for the faith of the Gospel,"
we cheerfully submit this essay to the pray¬
erful consideration of the reader.
THE FAITH OP THE GOSPEL.
69
THE
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL:
AN
ESSAY.
BY REV. ROBERT FLEMING.
ATHENS, GA.:
PUBLISHED FOR THE AUTHOR BY W. C. RICHARDS.
1849.
THE FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
" —Striving together for the Faith of the Gos¬
pel."—Phil., i: 27.
" Beloved, -when I gave all diligence to write un¬
to you of the common salvation, it was needful for
me to write unto you, and exhort you, that ye
should earnestly contend for the Faith which was
once delivered unto the saints."—Jude, 3.
The Lord is our creed-maker. We have
no standard of faith, but the Bible. We
acknowledge no other—we need no other.
It is our Book of Doctrine and Discipline,
and every lecture and every sermon we de¬
liver should be nothing more or less than a
faithful exposition of its doctrines. We
should strive together " for the faith of the
Gospel,"—" the faith which was once deliv¬
ered unto the saints,"—because it is a system
,of religious worship of God's ordaining, made
4
74 FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
ready to our hands, and complete in all its
parts. We sliould reject all those dreamy
systems of religion framed by synods, coun¬
cils, or conferences of men. The Church of
Jesus Christ is not a law-making, but an ex¬
ecutive power. Christ is ■' the head of the
body—the Church." [Col.,i: 17.] Here-
quires His Ministers to teach for doctrines?—
not the " commandments of men," but all
things which He has commanded. [Matt.,
xxviii: 20.] " Jude, the servant of Jesus
Christ," declares it was needful for him to
write unto, and to exhort " them that are
sanctified by God the Father," that they
should earnestly " contend for the faith which
was once delivered unto the saints." By a
figure of speech called metonymy, the word
faith, in the above verses, is put for the ob:
jects of faith—namely, the doctrines and
precepts of the Gospel, which are the objects
of men's faith. This faith was delivered to
the saints once for all, and is never to be
changed: nothing is to be added to it, and
faith op the gospel. 75
nothing is to be taken from it. It is as good
as it can be ; it is as perfect as God himself
could make it. "The law of the Lord
is perfect."
It is a notorious fact that, among Baptists,
neither Associations nor Conventions ever
pretend to make rules for the regulation of
the faith and practice of the Churches : they
do not claim the power to pass any resolu¬
tions, or enact any laws to govern them, or
in any way to exercise authority over them.
It is also a notorious fact, that, among Bap¬
tists, each Church is an independent body,
purely republican in all the features of its.
organization and government. All the rules
by which they are governed, in their inter¬
course with each other, are made to hand in
the Bible,—" the faith which was once deliv¬
ered to the saints,"—and not from a Book of
Discipline made by themselves or by others.
They have never " created" any rules for¬
bidding them to commune at the Lord's ta¬
ble with other Christians. They find, in the
76 FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
Scriptures, rules to which they contend all
Christians should conform in their faith and
customs. They contend earnestly for these
rules, and insist that a faithful compliance
with them would bring all God's people to¬
gether at the Lord's table. It is " non-con¬
formity" to these rules that divides them.
" There is one body and one sjnrit, even as
ye are called in one hope of your calling;
one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God
and Father of all, who is above all, -and
through all, and in you all." [Eph., iv: 4,
5, 6.]
By some, the Baptists have been charged
with making a Saviour of baptism. They,
however, feel confident this charge lies with
no weight against them, as they require all
who would be baptized, first to become be¬
lievers. "If thou believe,st with all thy
heart, thou mayest" be baptized. [Acts,
viii: 37.] Baptism is "not the putting
away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer
of a good conscience." 1 Pet., iii: 21.
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL. 77
As Baptists, we are charged with illiber¬
ally, selfishness, ignorance and bigotry, for
not inviting others to commune with us at
the Lord's table. We hold, however, as the
rules of our Church were not made by us,
that we are not at liberty to-alter them; for,
as has been said, we are not a law-making
nor law-repealing body. As we did not ap¬
point the Lord's Supper, nor the rules for its
celebration, so we cannot make any altera¬
tion in them. " Ye are my friends, if te
do whatsoever I command you." [John,
15: 14.] The evidence of our friendship
towards God is exhibited in doing what
HE has commanded. None can come into
Church-fellowship, according to " the faith of
the Gospel,"—' the faith which was once de¬
livered to the saints,"—without first believing
and being baptized; and, consequently, none
can come to the table of the Lord who have
not been baptized. All intelligent evangeli¬
cal Christians are agreed in this. They,
however, disagree in their answer to the
78 FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
question—What is Gospel baptism ? We
hold that nothing is scriptural baptism, but
the immersion of a believer, on a profession
of his faith, by a properly authorized admin¬
istrator. But what do our Pedo-baptist breth¬
ren teach on this subject? We can proba¬
bly ascertain their views by a careful and
impartial examination of their " Confessions
of Faith," and the writings of their accredit¬
ed authors.
" Pedo-baptists of all classes regard bap¬
tism as the instrumentality of entering into
the covenant of salvation, and, therefore, as
at least synonymous with regeneration ; and
the Lord's Supper they look upon as a
u certain means and seal of graceNow,
we Baptists find no such sentiment in "the
faith of the Gospel,"—the faith which was
once delivered unto the saints." We cannot,
therefore, receive the Sacraments when ad¬
ministered for such purposes. Therefore
* Dr. Howell, of Nashville, from whose book on Com¬
munion I have quoted largely.
faith of the gospel.
79
We cannot commune with Pedo-bap-
tists, because they administer baptism
and the Lord's Supper for purposes
such as God has not authorized, and
attach to them an unscriptural and
unreasonable degree of efficacy and
importance.
The Baptists are the only people who do
not unduly exalt the Sacraments. They re¬
gard baptism as" nothing more or less than a
solemn and practical profession of faith in
Christ, by a believer in him, in the manner
appointed by the King of Zion. A very su¬
perficial knowledge of ecclesiastical history
is sufficient to convince any one that but a
few centuries transpired after the Apostles,
before a melancholy change was effected in
the opinions of the Christian world with re¬
gard to the design and efficacy of the Sacra¬
ments of the Gospel. Yery soon a lamentable
departure from the faith which was once de¬
livered to the saints was effected, and the
Sacraments were believed to be so intimate-
80 faith of the gospel.
ly connected with the vitality of religion, that
tliey could not in any case be omitted without
preventing the salvation of the soul. In the
third century the Christian fathers believed
and taught that sins were only forgiven in
baptism—that ififants,by this ordinance, were
purged from original pollution, and, that all
persons dying without it, were lost.* This
assertion may startle the plain, unsophistica¬
ted Christian reader. Let us see the testimo¬
ny of Cyprian, Ambrose and Crysostom. I
Cyprian, the Bishop of Carthage, wrote
A. D. 250. On this subject he remarks as
follows: '-As'far as lies in us, no soul, if pos¬
sible, is to be lost. It is not for us to hinder
any person from baptism and the grace of
God; which rule, as it holds to all, so we think
it more especially to be observed in reference
to infants, to whom our help and the divine
mercy are rather to be granted; because by
their weeding and wailing, at their first en¬
trance into the world, they do intimate noth¬
ing so much as that they implore compas-
* Howell.
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL. 81
sion." * Speaking of the reception of bap¬
tism, he says : " Thence begins the origin of
all faith, the saving entrance to a hope of eter¬
nal life, and a divine grant to purify and
quicken the servants of God." f Soon after
he also attributes the remission of sin and
sanctification to baptism, and applies it to
John, iii: 5. J- We ask,the candid reader if
the above sentiments are in accordance with
"the Faith of the Gospel"—"the faith once
delivered to the saints .?" If they are not, we
may be excused for not contending earnestly
for them, and for not communing with those
who hold such sentiments. We cannot con¬
sent that baptism is a saving ordinance—we
cannot unduly exalt it.
Ambrose, the Bishop of Milan, flourished
about A. D. 390. He says : " No person
comes to the Kingdom of Heaven but by the
sacrament of baptism. Infants that are bap¬
tized are reformed back again from wicked-
* Howell.— fHe is the first patron of infant sprinkling*
and of holy water.—$ Baptist Library, vol. I, p. 480.
: __
82 faith of the gospel.
ness to the primitive state of their nature." *
Reader, can a Baptist, or any one else, who
would earnestly contend for the faith " once
delivered to the saints " countenance such er¬
roneous and unscriptural views of baptism,
by comnluning with those who hold them ?
Surely you would not be so unkind as to re¬
quire it of us.
Crysostom, the Patriarch of Constanti¬
nople, wrote A. D. 390. He remarks on this
subject: " The grace of baptism gives us cure
without pain, and fills us with the grace of
the spirit. Some think that the heavenly
grace consists only in the forgiveness of sins,
but I have reckoned up ten advantages of it.
If sudden death seize us before we are bap¬
tized, though we have a thousand good qual¬
ities, there is nothing to be expected but
hell." t Candid reader, you will weigh these
historical facts in the scale of impartial jus¬
tice, and then admit that, as Baptists, we have
. reason—good reason—to withhold our invi-
* See Dr. HoWell on Communion, f Ibid.
faith of the gospel. 83
tation to the table of the Lord from all those
who thus attach unscriptural importance to
the Sacraments. "Wall's " History of Infant
Baptism" is full of such testimony.
Dr. Wall says: " If we except Tertullian,
Vincentius [A. D. 419] is the first man upon
record that ever said that children might be
saved without baptism," &c. [See Bap. Bib.
vol. I, p. 480.] We have said that Baptists
are the only people who do not unduly exalt
the Sacraments. Let us examine the views
held by the
ROMAN CATHOLIC CHUBCH.
This is the oldest of the Pedo-baptist de¬
nominations. "What do they hold and teach ?
Hear them speak through their Council of
Trent: " If any one shall say that baptism is
not necessary to salvation, let him be accursed
. . . Sin, whether contracted by birth, or com¬
mitted by ourselves, by the admirable virtue
of this Sacrament, is remitted or pardoned.
. . . By baptism we are joined and knit to
Christ, as members to the head. By baptism
84 FAITH OF THE GOSPEL,
we axe signed with a character which can
never be blotted out of our soul-. . . Besides
other things which we obtain by baptism, it
opens to every one of us the gate of Heaven,
which before, through sin, was shut." [Bap.
Library, vol. i., p. 482.]
After reading the above, will our Pedo-
baptist brethren think us illiberal, selfish and
ignorant for not uniting with such at the
Lord's table ? But what does the twin sister
of the Roman Catholic Church teach ?—we
mean the
GREEK CHUKCH.
Cyril, the Patriarch of Constantinople, gives
us his views, and consequently the views of
his Church, respecting baptism, in the follow¬
ing manner: "We believe that baptism is a
Sacrament appointed by the Lord, which, ex¬
cept a person receive, he has no communion
with Christ; from whose death, burial and
resurrection, proceed all the virtue and effica¬
cy of baptism. "We are certain, therefore,
that both original and actual sins are forgiv-
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL. 85
en to those who are baptized in the manner
which our Lord requires in the Gospel; and
that whoever is washed ' in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost' is regenerated, cleansed and sanctified.
Is the above " the faith which was once deliv¬
ered to the saints ?" We cannot, will not, con¬
tend for it, nor anything like it. Shall we now
examine the creeds made by other men—by
Protestants ? Reader, be not startled at the
assertion. All Pedobaptist Protestants have
carried with them into their confessions of
faith, to a large degree, these unscriptural
f
views of baptism. In our country it would
be unnecessary to show the errors in the views
set forth on this subject in the Confession of
Helvetia—Confession of Bohemia -— Confes¬
sion of Augsburg—Confession of Saxony —
and Confession of Wittemlurg. Let us ex¬
amine briefly the younger though repudiated
sister of the Church of Rome—the
- CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
What does this strong arm, upon which the
86 FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
perpetuity of the British crown is hung, ex¬
hibit in relation to the importance of baptism.
The child, in the Catechism, is taught to say
that there are two Sacraments " as generally
necessary to salvation—that is to say, baptism
and the supper of the Lord" "When the child
is asked who gave him his name, he is taught
to answer, "My sponsers in baptism, wherein
I was made a member of Christ, the Child
of God, and an inheritor of the Kingdom of
Heaven."
Now, if this is the " Faith of the Gospel,"
we, as Baptists, have not so learned it. And
if it is not the " faith of the Episcopalians
why do they so publish it in their books ? We
pass on to see what was argued upon, in ref¬
erence to baptismal efficacy and importance,
by the
WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY.
" Before baptism the minister is to use some
words of instruction, showing that it is insti¬
tuted by our Lord Jesus Christ; that it is a
seal of the covenant of grace, of our ingraft-
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL. 87
ing into Christ, and of our union with him, of
remission of sins, regeneration, adoption and
life eternal." Such is the language of mod¬
ern Pedo-baptists in their public formulas.
Sere is baptismal regeneration. How can
we, with "the faith of the Gospel"—with the
" faith which was once delivered to the saints"
lying before us, contend for such a creed as
the above ? The remission of sins secured
and sealed to us through baptism ! Reader,
it is the blood of Christ which cleanseth us
from all sin. Yes, verily,
" There is a fountain filled with blood.
Drawn from Immanuel's veins ;
And sinners plunged beneath that flood
Loose all their guilty stains."
It is from this glorious fountain that Baptists
hope for " remission of sins, regeneration,
adoption, and life eternal."
"We will now examine the baptismal doc¬
trines set forth in the confession of faith and
adopted by the General Assembly of the
88 FAITH OF THE .GOSPEL.
PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH—IN THE U. S.
In our examination of the faith which has
been delivered to the saints in the Presbyte¬
rian Church, by her General Assembly, the
remarks of the Rev. Dr. Howell, as publish¬
ed in his able work on Sacramental Commu¬
nion, will be strictly inserted. They are can¬
did, clear and just. They show that our
Presbyterian brethren are not behind other
Pedo-baptist denominations in their views
respecting the efficacy of baptism—respect¬
ing its saving power.
" In the Confession of Faith," says Dr. H.,
" we shall find a declaration in these words:
' IV. Not only those who do actually profess
faith in, and obedience to Christ, but also the in¬
fants of one or both believing parents are to be
baptized.'
' V. Although it be a great sin to contemn or
neglect this ordinance, yet grace and salvation
are not so inseparably annexed unto it, that no
person can be regenerated or saved without it, or
that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regen¬
erated.' *
" Much guarded caution characterizes the
* Phila. Ed., 1828—pp. 121,122,123.
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL. 89
language of this passage—indeed, it appears
to be almost a jumble—but the doctrine of
baptismal regeneration is nevertheless fully
embodied and maintained. Our brethren
profess to believe that grace and salvation are
not so inseparably annexed to baptism, as
that they are conferred by that ordinance in
every case in which it is administered, or to
make it in every case absolutely essential to
regeneration and salvation. What, then, are
its position and influence ? That, I suppose,
maintained in the Book of Common Prayer,
that it is "generally necessary to salvation"
and, in most cases, those who receive the rite
are by it regenerated. When the Confession
says it is not positively certain that all who
are baptized are by this ordinance undoubt¬
edly regenerated, the idea is unquestionably
implied that some who are baptized are un¬
doubtedly regenerated, as, when I assert that
all who were at the battle of New-Orleans
were not soldiers, I mean to maintain that
some were soldiers and others were eitizens.
90
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
My reader may possibly be curious to inquire,
if any infants are regenerated by baptism,
why it should be doubted whether all who re¬
ceive are not equally benefitted. Our breth¬
ren who subscribe to the Confession of Faith
in question explain themselves. It is known
they are Calvinists. They believe in etern¬
al, personal and unconditional election and
predestination. Hear their,confession upon
this point:
' By the decree of God, for the manifestation of
His 'glory, some men and angels are predestined
unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to
everlasting death. These angels and men thus
predestined and foreordained, are particularly and
unchangeably desigped; and their number so cer¬
tain and definite, that it cannot be either increas¬
ed or diminished.'
" This being the case, they doubt whether
all the infants they baptize are of the elect.
But the Confession is still more in point :
' VI. The efficacy of baptism is not tied to that
moment of time wherein it is administered; yet,
notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordi-
FAITH OF THE GOSFEL.
91
nance, the grace promised, is not only offered, but
really exhibited and conferred by the Holy Ghost,
to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace
belongeth unto, according to the counsel of God's
own will in the appointed time.''—p. 125.
" Here we have the necessary explanation.
The efficacy of baptism is such that grace,—
either at the time of administration or after¬
wards,—is really offered, exhibited and con¬
ferred., in this ordinance, by the Holy Ghost;
provided, always, the child so baptized is em¬
braced in the counsels of God's mercy, is one
of the definite elect unto life—and, therefore,
one of those " that grace belongeth unto" If
he is one of the eternally chosen, the grace
that is only exhibited and offered to others, is
upon him actually conferred, and he is un¬
doubtedly regenerated in baptism.
"In the 'Directory for the Worship of
God,' of this Church article—' Of the admin¬
istration of baptism,' the minister reads to his
people the reason why an infant is to be bap¬
tized, The form prescribed requires him to
92
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
use this language: ' This infant is to be bap¬
tized not only because some children are fed¬
erally holy, but also because we are [all] by
nature sinful, guilty and polluted, and have
need of cleansing by the blood of Christ, and
by the sanctifying influences of the spirit of
God."—:p. 431. By federal holiness of chil¬
dren, they mean, I presume, only that their
parents are religious. My design, however,
is to call attention specially to the fact that
this Directory teaches us that the object se¬
cured by baptism is thereby to obtain an ap¬
plication of the blood of Christ and the sanc¬
tifying influences of the spirit of God, to
cleanse the recipients from pollution. I ask
whether the baptism of a child has this effect-?
If so,—and they profess to believe it has,—
truly it is a capital article in religion, and
essential both to regeneration'and salvation."
The Cumberland branch of the Presbyterian
Church has adopted substantially the same
Confession of Faith, Catechism and Directo¬
ry as their mother Church, repudiating only
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL. 93
the doctrine of election and predestination,
and some things in relation to the Ministry.
On baptism they teach precisely the same
doctrines, and in the same words with their
progenitor, as any one may see who will be
at the trouble of comparing their standards.
The same remarks are true of the Hopkin-
sians—the Old School, the New School, and
all the other sects of Presbyterians.
In the articles now examined, we have
again exhibited before us the doctrines of the
(Roman Catholic) Counsel of Trent—which
doctrines are, indeed, still more fully, and
with less disguise, taught by the wisest and
most eminent divines of their faith, to two of
whom, as a specimen of all the others, I shall
briefly refer. The first is the late learned
President of Yale College, Dr. Timothy
Dwight, whose system of Theology, in many
respects so excellent, is adopted as a standard
work by the several branches of the Church,
of which he was a distinguished member;
the other is the eminent Commentator, Mat¬
thew Henry.
94 FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
Dr. Dwight remarks: " When children
die in infancy, and are (have been) scriptu-
rally dedicated* to God in baptism, there is
much and very consoling reason furnished to
believe that they are accepted beyond the
grave."f
This is a very pretty and, apparently, (?)
very pious passage; but it is expressed with
the cautiousness of a man, who is conscious
he is on dangerous ground. It is the state¬
ment of a positive, and we only are con¬
cerned to know what the negative is which it
contains. When Dr. Dwight singles out the
baptized children who die in infancy, and
tells us " there is much and very consoling
reason furnished to believe that they are ac¬
cepted beyond the grave," are we not to un¬
derstand him as maintaining negatively of
unbaptized children, who die in infancy,
that there is little reason furnished, and none
* Dwight's Theology—Sermon, on Baptism.
t Dedicated!—baptising children they call dedicating
them to God! !
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL. 95
that is consoling, to believe that they are ac¬
cepted beyond the grave ?
Mr. Henry, in his " Treatise on Baptism,"
uses the following language:—" The Gospel
contains not only a doctrine, but a covenant;
and by baptism we are brought into that .coy-
enant. Baptism wrests the keys of the heart
out of the hand of the strong man armed, that
the possession may be surrendered to him
whose right it is. The water of baptism is
designed for our cleansing from the spots, and
defilements of the flesh. In baptism our names
are engraved upon the breast-plate of the
High Priest. This, then, is the efficacy of
baptism,—it is putting the child's name into
the Gospel grant. We are baptized into
Christ's, death—that is, God doth, in the ord¬
inance, seal, confirm and make over to us all
the benefit of the death of Christ."
. If, as Mr. Henry maintains, we are brought
by baptism into the covenant of grace, cleans¬
ed from the spots and defilements of the flesh,
have our names put into the Gospel grant,
96
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
and secured to us all the benefits of the death
of Christ, which in that ordinance are sealed,
confirmed and made over to us, it must be re¬
generation, sanctification, salvation,—indeed,
nearly the -whole sum and essence of the re¬
ligion of Christ."
We are now prepared to decide what the
standard and accredited writers of the Pres¬
byterian Church teach in relation to the ef¬
ficacy of baptism. They hold that, provided
the child is one of the elects grace and salva¬
tion are annexed to baptism, and that in this
ordinance, whether the recipient is adult or
infant, such grace and salvation are absolute¬
ly .offered, exhibited and conferred by the
Holy Ghost; that in it are applied to cleans¬
ing from sin the blood of Christ, and the sanc¬
tifying influences of the spirit of God; that
it brings the child into covenant with God,
and seals,* confirms and makes over to it, all
* Pedo-baptists talk much about the "sealing ordi¬
nances," by which they mean the Sacraments. The
Catholics boast of having the keys and seals, of th»
church.
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
97
the benefits of the death of Christ; and that
it prepares it for acceptance with God beyond
the grave!! These indisputed and indispu¬
table facts show that the Presbyterian comes
behind no other church in the tenacity with
which she upholds and supports the doctrine
of baptismal regeneration and salvation.
From what we have now brought before
the reader it is obvious that the Roman Cath¬
olic Church—the Greek Church—the Epis¬
copalian or Church of England—and all the
branches of the Presbyterian Church—hold
and teach the doctrine of baptismal regener¬
ation. The only remaining Pedo-baptist de¬
nomination of any importance among us is the
METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH.
Let us examine the Book of Discipline,
and some of the standard works approved and
published by the Book Concern. In the Dis¬
cipline, in the "order entitled " The Ministra¬
tion of Baptism to Infants," the minister is
required to commence the service by read¬
ing to his people an address, copied almost
98 FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
verbatim from the Book of Common Prayer'
as follows
" Dearly beloved ! forasmuch as all men are con
ceived and born in sin, and that our Savior, Christ,
saith none can enter into the Kingdom of God "ex¬
cept he be regenerated and born anew, of water
and of tbe Holy Ghost;—I,beseech you to call up¬
on God the Father, through the Lord Jesus Christ,
that of His bounteous mercy he would grant unto
this child that thing which by nature he cannot
have; that he may be baptized with water and
with the Holy Ghost, and be received into Christ's
holy Church, and be made a heavenly member of
the same." *
No one can be at a loss to know what is
meant in the above passage by the words—
" that thing which by nature he cannot have "
It is to be regenerated and born anew of wa¬
ter and of the Holy Ghost. But when is it
that all this is to be accomplished ? Now—
in his baptism ! It is in this short quotation
twice repeated,—" by baptism born anew of
water and of the Holy Ghostand is added,
" our Savior, Christ, saith, without this none
* New-York edition, 1829, p. 100. See, also, Discip.
of M. E. Church, South, p. 107: Charleston ed., 1846.
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL. 99
can enter into the Kingdom of God." With¬
out what ? Without being regenerated and
born anew of water and of the Holy Ghost!
"We have here embodied," says Dr. How¬
ell, "the doctrine of this Church regarding
the advantages and efficacy of baptism. All
its members solemnly profess to believe and
to take for their guide a book which teaches
that in their baptism infants are regenerated
and born anew of water and of the Holy
Ghost, and that without this none can be
saved! It is in perfect coincidence with this
sentiment that the Discipline dictates to the
minister a prayer for the child, in which .he
is directed to beseech Almighty God that in
his baptism he would " wash him and sancti¬
fy him with the Holy Ghost.'' And what is
it to be washed and sanctified with the Ho¬
ly Ghost but to be regenerated, which the
Discipline teaches is done in baptism, and
that " without which none can be saved!"
. " Let no one imagine," continues Dr. H.,
" that I have either mistaken or misrepresen-
100
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
ted the doctrine of the Discipline upon this
subject. Mr. Wesley wrote or copied from
the Book of Common Prayer this Discipline
—certainly this part of it. Whoever else
might be mistaken, lie himself knew what he
intended to teach in, the premises. His opin¬
ions in other works in which he has discussed
the same subject, will illustrate and define his
meaning in the book before us. In his
" Treatise on Baptism," Mr. Wesley says—
" By baptism, we who are by nature the chil¬
dren of wrath, are made the children of God.
And that regeneration which our Church in
so many places ascribes' to baptism,, is more
than barely being admitted into the Church,
though commonly connected therewith. Be¬
ing grafted into the body of Christ's Church,
we are made the children of God by adoption
and grace. [John, iii: 5.] By water, then,
as a means,—the water of baptism,,—we are
regenerated and born again, whence it is call¬
ed by the Apostle, " the washing of regener¬
ation." In all ages the outward baptism is a
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL. 101
means of the inward. Herein we receive a
title to, and an earnest of, a kingdom which
cannot be moved. In the ordinary way,
there is no other way of entering into the
Church or into Heaven. If infants are guil¬
ty of original sin, then they are proper sub¬
jects of baptism, seeing, in the ordinary way,
they cannot be saved unless this is washed
away in baptism."*
Who that reads the above passage can
doubt that the Discipline designs to teach
" baptismal regeneration and salvation" in
the broad sense of Austen, Jerome and oth¬
ers of the Fathers who figured so largely in
the Pelagian Controversy of the fourth cen¬
tury. I am not unapprized of the objection
that Mr. Wesley wrote the book I have quo¬
ted while yet an Episcopalian, and before he
escaped from the mists of that age. I reply
it was long after he had organized his socie-
* See his works, vol. vi., pp. 15, 16—Book Concern
print. Also, Sermons, vol. i., Sermon 45, p. 405—Book
Concern print.
102 FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
ty, and had written his Discipline. I will not
inquire whether he ever left the Episcopal
Church, but will simply remark that among
the last, if not the very last, book he ever
wrote was his "Notes on the New Testa¬
ment." In relation to the baptism of Paul,
on these words, " Arise and be baptized and
wash away thy sins, calling on the name of
the Lord," he observes—"Baptism is both
the means and the seal of pardon, and God
did not, ordinarily, in the Primitive Church,
bfestow his grace upon any save through this
means."
Such are the doctrines of the Discipline,
and of its great author. They are too une¬
quivocal to admit of any misrepresentation.
We are baptized, says the Discipline, because
we are conceived and born in sin, and our
Savior, Christ, saith, none can enter into the
Kingdom of God, except he be regenerated
and born anew of water and of the Holy
Ghost; and we are baptized, says Mr. Wes¬
ley, because by it we are made children of
FAITH OP THE GOSPEL.
103
God, are connected with the Church, are re¬
generated and born again,.receive a title to
and an earnest of Heaven, and because, with¬
out it, infants, if they are partakers of origi¬
nal sin, cannot be saved!
Reader, we willclose with a recapitulation
of what we have said in the preceding pages
respecting the doctrines of baptism held and
maintained by the different denominations
whose Confessions of Faith and accredited
authors we have candidly and fairly examin¬
ed. Whatever errors Baptists hold, they
cannot be charged with making a Savior of
baptism. They are willing to admit that there
is as much soul-saving virtue in a drop of
water as there is ha an ocean ; for neither the
ocean or the drop of water can cleane us from
pollution. But a believer can be baptized in
an ocean of water, but he cannot be baptized
—buried with Christ in baptism—in a drop
of water; but let us recapitulate.
By baptism,—says the Roman Catholic,—
" our sins are remitted and pardoned, and we
104
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
are joined and knit to Ohrist, as members to
the head."
By baptism,^—says the Greek Church,—
" we are certain that both original and actual
sins are forgiven."
By baptism,—says the Episcopalian and
Church of England,—"/ was made a member
of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of
the Kingdom of Heaven."
By baptism,—says the Presbyterian,—
" we are brought into covenant with God—
cleansed from the defilements of the flesh, and
God doth seal, confirm and make over to us
all the benefits of the death of Ohrist."
By baptism,—says the Methodist,—"we
who are by nature the children of wrath, are
made the children of God—are regenerated
and born again."
By baptism,—says Peter,—" the like fig¬
ure whereunto our baptism doth now save us,
(not the putting away of the filth of the flesh,
but the ansioer of a good conscience,) by the
resurrection of Jjesus Christ." I. Peter, iii: 21.
FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
105
What a pity the Roman Catholics did not
follow Peter in his views of baptism I What
a pity too that the before-mentioned denomi-
' nations of Christians departed from Peter
and followed the Roman Catholics in"their
views in relation to the efficacy and import¬
ance of baptism!
Many of the truly pious among them, no
doubt, will earnestly protest that whatever
their books of faith and their great writers
may teach, they do not believe that baptism
lias any saving or regenerating or saving in¬
fluence whatever; that spirituality, and not
the mere administration of an ordinance, is
the sum of religion. Very well. But is it
not passing strange that while they thus pro¬
test against the errors of their creed and
creed-makers, they still solemnly subscribe
and publicly profess their belief that these
very Confessions of Faith contain the true
exposition of the Word of God? Why do
they teach them to the rising generation, and
publish them to the world as their articles of
i_
106 FAITH OF THE GOSPEL.
faith? As they claim the right to make a
Confession of Faith, surely it is within their
province to mend it. As- for ourselves, we
hope ever to strive together for the Faith of
the Gospel—to contend earnestly for " the
faith which was once delivered to the saints."