! 
 
 GIFTS OF THE 
 
 THE 
 
 X p.m p H 
 
 N0T WAXER 
 
 BAPTISM OF CHRIST. 
 
 
 / BY 
 
 R. GOYETT, JUN., 
 
 MINISTER OF THE GOSPEL. 
 
 NORWICH : 
 
 JOSIAH FLETCHER, UPPER HAYMARKET 
 
 LONDON : HAMILTON, ADAMS, & CO. 
 
 1844. 
 
NOT WATER BAPTISM, 
 
 
 RUT THE 
 
 GIFTS OF THE' 
 
 THE 
 
 BAPTISM OF CHRIST. 
 
 y 
 
 BY 
 
 • R. GOYETT, JUN., 
 
 MINISTER OF THE GOSPEL. 
 
 NORWICH: 
 
 JOSIAH FLETCHER, UPPER HAYMARKET; 
 
 LONDON : HAMILTON, ADAMS, & CO. 
 
THE 
 
 BAPTISMS OF JOHN 
 
 After the lapse of nearly four hundred years, during 
 which prophecy had ceased in the Jewish Church, and 
 all things had gone on according to the ordinary laws 
 of the world, came John, the son of Zacharias, preach¬ 
 ing in the wilderness. He was commissioned for this 
 purpose from God. “ There was a man sent from 
 God, whose name was John:” John ‘i, 6. “ He sent 
 me to baptize with waterver. 33. 
 
 His preaching was of one constant tenor: and is 
 generally described in one word—repentance. Now 
 this was evidently the beginning of a new order of 
 things. It was virtually a setting aside of the law, as 
 the hope of salvation to the Jew. For the law could 
 not justify any one that needed repentance. To 
 repentance belongs confession of sin. But confession 
 of sin draws down the law’s curse. “ Cursed is he that 
 continueth not in all things that are written in the book 
 of the law to do them:” Gal. iii, 10. The law can 
 crown perfect righteousness only; but repentance is 
 the acknowledgment of wrarighteousness. 
 
 Now this proclamation of repentance was sent to 
 “ all the people of IsraelActs xiii, 24. Whence it 
 followed clearly, that God regarded all the people of 
 Israel as unrighteous, and needing repentance. It was 
 therefore God’s proclamation, that the law, and its 
 hope of being justified by works, were about to be 
 done away : that, having tried Israel two thousand 
 
 B 
 
2 
 
 years, he had found none justified by it. He was now, 
 therefore, about to give birth to a new scheme of 
 salvation; 
 
 In answer to this appeal from God, multitudes 
 flocked to John from all parts of the land of Judaea, 
 and from Jerusalem : Matt, iii, 5. They were expect¬ 
 ing Messiah’s speedy approach, and this seemed like 
 the first news of it. Therefore, in obedience to God’s 
 design, they confessed their sins. And as the token 
 and sign of their need of repentance, the baptism of 
 water was ordained of God, to be administered by his 
 servant John. He then that received John’s preaching, 
 and saw the necessity of repentance, received also 
 John’s baptism, as the proof of repentance. Those 
 who came to John, therefore, were “ baptized by him in 
 Jordan, confessing their sins Matt, iii, 6. But one 
 class of the people of Israel was quite unprepared for 
 John’s message and baptism of repentance. These 
 were the Pharisees. They “justified themselves before 
 men;” Luke xvi, 15. They accounted themselves 
 righteous : and therefore refused to confess sin, which 
 would have been the overthrow of righteousness. 
 
 “ They were Moses ’ disciples.” But God made no 
 exception on their behalf; but beheld them as even more 
 sinful than the people generally. And therefore, when 
 some of them came to John, he declares them unright- 
 ous and transgressors, in the strongest tone and terms 
 of severity. “ O generation of vipers, who hath warned 
 you to flee from the wrath to come?” Matt, iii, 7. 
 This stern reproof embraced the Sadduces also. Hence 
 a corresponding difference was seen in the succeeding 
 history of both these classes. As the great body of 
 the people had received John, so the great body of the 
 nation received Jesus, as a prophet; and were “very 
 attentive to hear him Luke xix, 48. 
 
 But the Pharisees from the first drew up in array 
 against the Messiah, as they had already rejected the 
 forerunner. This is noticed as the fitting result: Luke 
 vii, 29, 30: “ All the people that heard him, and the . 
 
3 
 
 publicans, justified God, being baptized with the bap¬ 
 tism of John. But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected 
 the counsel of God against themselves, being not 
 baptized of him.” 
 
 The baptism and preaching of John created a great 
 stir and inquiry throughout the nation of Israel. And 
 at length an opinion began to be entertained, that he 
 was the long expected Messiah. “ The people were in 
 expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, 
 whether he were the Messiah or not:” Luke iii, 15. 
 It became him, therefore, to undeceive them, and then 
 a new feature of his preaching rises to view. He was 
 to direct their thoughts to faith in the Messiah shortly 
 to appear. “ John answered, saying unto them all, I 
 indeed baptize you with water, but one mightier than 
 I cometh, the latchet (thong) of whose shoes I am not 
 worthy to unloose ; he shall baptize you with the Holy 
 Ghost and with fire: ” Luke iii, 16. 
 
 After this general baptism of the people, Jesus came 
 from Nazareth to be baptized by John. And the spirit 
 of prophecy seems at the approach of Jesus to have 
 declared to John, that he was the Messiah, whom 
 before he had announced. He was ignorant of the 
 person of Jesus; for he had been living in the deserts 
 till the day of his showing to Israel: John i, 33 ; Luke 
 i, 80. He perceived at once that Jesus had no need of 
 the baptism of repentance , because he had no sins 
 requiring to be repented of. Therefore, “ John forbad 
 him : ” Matt, iii, 14. But in this case there was another 
 end in view, which John did not see. “ A fulfilling of 
 all righteousness” was required. He was about to 
 enter on his priestly office; and in order to this it was 
 necessary, that he, like the priests under the law, 
 should submit to a washing, as a part of his consecra¬ 
 tion. “ Aaron and his sons thou shalt bring to the 
 door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and shalt 
 wash them with water:” Exod. xxix, 4. Thus that 
 part which Moses performed for Aaron, John, as the 
 greatest born of women, performed for Jesus. The 
 
4 
 
 garments of splendor and beauty required by the law, 
 ver. 5, 6, were not required at this consecration; for 
 Jesus had the robe of perfect righteousness, the thing 
 signified by these outward emblems : Psalm cxxxii, 9 ; 
 Isaiah xi, 5 ; lxi, 10. No blood of bullock or of rams 
 wais required, as under the law, ver. 10—28, for he 
 who was thus consecrated had no sin. These things 
 were to make Aaron holy. Christ was so already. 
 Nor was the anointing oil poured on his head : because 
 the thing signified, the anointing of the Holy Spirit, 
 was then visibly poured out: Matt, iii, 16 ; Acts x, 38. 
 And immediately after, Jesus is impelled by the Spirit 
 into the wilderness, there to be tempted and to be 
 victorious. 
 
 At this time the people sent a solemn deputation, 
 to inquire of John who he was. The first question 
 asked is—Was he the Messiah? No. Was he Elijah, 
 who was to be sent, (according to the prophet Malachi,) 
 before the coming of **the great and terrible day of the 
 Lord? No. Was he the prophet promised by Moses, 
 like himself, to whom the people were to hearken ? No. 
 Who was he then ? The forerunner of Messiah spoken 
 of by Isaiah. 
 
 The reas'on, as it appears to me, why John was sup¬ 
 posed to be Messiah, may be found in a passage of the 
 same prophet: 
 
 “ Fear not, ‘O Jacob, my servant; 
 
 And thou, Jesurun, whom I have chosen. 
 
 For I will pour water upon him that is 
 
 THIRSTY, 
 
 And floods upon the dry ground : 
 
 I will pour my spirit upon thy seed, 
 
 And my blessing upon thine offspring 
 
 Isaiah xliv, 2, 3. 
 
 John’s baptism so much resembled this, that, un¬ 
 derstanding the chapter in which it occurred as 
 spoken of Messiah, they naturally conceived John to 
 be the Christ foretold, and the baptism of water to be 
 
5 
 
 the baptism mentioned by the prophet; while their 
 nation might be described as thirsting for Messiah’s 
 appearance. 
 
 We find therefore, that the Priests and Levites sent 
 to inquire of John, were stumbled at finding him 
 baptizing, while he confessed himself to be neither the 
 Messiah, nor the prophet foretold by Moses, nor yet 
 Elijah. “ Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not 
 the Messiah, nor Elias, neither the prophet? ” John i, 25. 
 The answer he gives is, that his baptism was merely a 
 preparatory one; that, as he was but Messiah’s fore¬ 
 runner, so was his baptism as inferior to Messiah’s, as 
 his dignity was to the dignity of Messiah. So great 
 was his successor’s majesty that the most menial office 
 he could perform to him was too great and high an 
 honor. “ I baptize you with water , but there standeth 
 one among you whom ye know not; He it is, who 
 coming after me, is preferred before me, whose shoe’s 
 latchet (thong) I am not worthy to unloose John i, 
 26, 27. “ He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost 
 
 and with fire Luke iii, 16. 
 
 The drift of John’s reply then may be easily seen, if 
 taken in connection with the above passage of Isaiah. 
 As if he said, ‘ Do not imagine that my baptism of 
 water is the baptism foretold by the prophet as one 
 day to be administered by Messiah; mine is only a 
 baptism “ with water unto repentance,” the baptism 
 foretold by the prophet is the “ outpouring of his Spirit ” 
 upon the true seed of Abraham—even those who are 
 justified by faith ; and this is the real blessing promised 
 to that great patriarch Gal. iii, 14. 
 
 The inferiority of the baptism of John, therefore, is 
 by him considered to reside in the earthliness of the 
 element—as water: the superiority of the baptism of 
 Messiah in the heavenly nature of the baptism—that 
 of the Holy Ghost. 
 
 This baptism John considered as peculiar to Messiah, 
 because of his peculiar dignity, and one great design of 
 his baptism was to point out this wonderful personage. 
 
 b 2 
 
6 
 
 “ That he might be made manifest unto Israel, therefore 
 am I come baptizing with water:” John i, 31. And 
 the sign by which he was to recognize the baptizer with 
 the Holy Ghost, was bestowed immediately after our 
 blessed Lord had received the baptism of water. “ He 
 that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto 
 me, upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending 
 and remaining upon him, the same is he which bap- 
 tizeth with the Holy Ghost: ” John i, 33. 
 
 John supposes also that the baptism of Messiah, or 
 the baptism of the Holy Ghost, was intended for all for 
 whom his own baptism of water was designed. For 
 after he has addressed the multitudes as already baptized 
 with water, he tells them that they were to look upon 
 themselves as yet needing and yet to receive the baptism 
 of the Holy Ghost at the hands of his successor, the 
 Christ. “I indeed have baptized you with water: 
 but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost 
 Mark i, 8. 
 
 Now John’s baptism supposed repentance and confes¬ 
 sion of sins in those who came to it. It supposed also 
 faith in the Messiah as soon about to appear , to whom 
 their eyes were to be directed onwards. Therefore the 
 baptism of the Spirit is not regeneration. For all who 
 are possessed of faith and have felt true repentance 
 are already regenerate. John’s baptism was unto the 
 remission of sins : Mark i, 4. But sins cannot be re¬ 
 mitted except to the believing and regenerate. Whence 
 I conclude, that the baptism promised by John was not 
 regeneration, since those who received it aright (and to 
 such only could he be supposed to address himself) 
 were already regenerate. And the result showed this. 
 The day ’of Pentecost, with its “ tongues as of fire ,” 
 and its speaking with other languages, manifested what 
 was meant by the baptism with the “ Holy Ghost and 
 with fire.” 
 
 When the Lord Jesus was baptized of John, the two 
 baptisms met and were united. The Savior having just 
 come up out of Jordan, and experienced the baptism of 
 
7 
 
 water, received also the baptism of the Holy Ghost. 
 And after this he, who before had lived a simple life, 
 undistinguished from other men, working at his father’s 
 trade of a carpenter, (Mark vi, 3,) now in the wilderness 
 is addressed by Satan as possessed of miraculous power, 
 as able to turn stones into loaves, and is tempted to do 
 it in order to manifest himself as the Son of God. 
 And soon after, our Lord, who before had wrought no 
 miracles, begins to signalize himself by those he wrought 
 at Jerusalem and in Galilee. 
 
 Let us now consider the hints and notices given by 
 our Lord himself concerning this his own peculiar bap¬ 
 tism. The first of these is found in our Lord’s conver¬ 
 sation with Nicodemus. This ruler of the Jews was 
 informed by our Savior that in order to become a 
 subject of the expected glorious kingdom of Messiah, 
 natural birth alone was not enough. “ Except a man 
 be begotten from above, (ysvvri&f} avuQzv,) he cannot see 
 the kingdom of God:” John, iii, 3. A subject of the 
 kingdoms of Greece or Rome he might be by natural 
 birth; but a partaker of the glory to be revealed when 
 Messiah’s kingdom came, he could not be. 
 
 Nicodemus could not comprehend this, and was 
 stumbled at the strength of the expression, taking it 
 literally. Our Lord repeats again his former declaration, 
 with a significant addition : “ Except a man be begotten 
 of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the 
 kingdom of God John iii, 5. 
 
 The addition was intended, probably, to allude to 
 the baptism of John, and its requirements of repentance 
 and faith. He that had repentance and faith and thus 
 had received forgiveness of sins, was a fit subject for 
 the glory to be revealed; but none else. And the 
 baptism of water betokened the first operation of the 
 Spirit of God. The baptism of water, as it was the 
 washing away of the filth of the flesh, aptly shadowed 
 forth the forgiveness of sins. The Lord then went on 
 to observe, that this operation of the Spirit was, like 
 the wind, invisible—to be discovered only by its effects; 
 
8 
 
 and that it was as seemingly capricious as the changes 
 of the wind. 
 
 But for even this simple announcement Nicodemus 
 was unprepared. He probably believed with most of 
 his nation, that in order to enjoy the promised happiness 
 of Messiah’s reign, nothing more was requisite than to 
 be a child of Abraham by natural generation. He did 
 not perceive, therefore, the necessity of being a child of 
 Abraham by faith. Nor did he know that faith takes 
 its rise from heavenly regeneration. But since the 
 lesson might have been learned both from the law and 
 from the prophets, who speak of the circumcision of 
 the heart, as well as of the flesh, the Lord Jesus 
 reproves him for ignorance in attempting to teach Israel, 
 while he was himself unacquainted with the first prin¬ 
 ciples of the Scripture. 
 
 But since the meaning of John’s baptism was hidden 
 from this leader and doctor of Israel, how could it 
 be expected that the doctrine of the baptism of the 
 Holy Ghost would be received by him ? How could he, 
 who could not comprehend even the necessary doctrine 
 of the change of heart, betokened by the baptism of 
 water, understand the glorious privilege intended for 
 the sons of God, that they should be baptized with fire 
 and gifted with supernatural powers of the Holy Ghost ? 
 The doctrine of Moses found no echo within; how 
 should the deeper lessons of Messiah ? This is, I 
 believe, the meaning of our Lord’s words of disappoint¬ 
 ment and almost of sorrow, that follow on his reproof 
 of Nicodemus. “ If I have told you earthly things 
 and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of 
 heavenly things?” John iii, 12. For John seems to 
 describe his baptism as earthly, where he is comparing 
 himself with Jesus—“ He that cometh from above is 
 above all; he that is of the earth is earthly and speaketh 
 of the earth; he that cometh from heaven is above 
 all:” John iii, 31. And it was true that the element 
 of his baptism was earthly. It was a baptism with 
 water f which is within the reach and at the command 
 
9 
 
 of the sons of men. But the element of Messiah’s 
 baptism was fire , and that a fire not earthly, (the 
 tongues were not common fire, but “ tongues like as of 
 fire,”) but from heaven : and herein lay the superiority 
 of Messiah’s baptism — its element and sign were 
 heavenly, and much more the thing signified ; it was “ the 
 Holy Ghost sent down from heaven 1 Peter i, 12. 
 
 But that the baptism of the Spirit was the 
 heavenly thing intended by our Lord, we may see from 
 the additional reasons following. 1st. It was a foretaste 
 of Christ’s “ heavenly kingdom 2 Tim. iv, 18. Hence 
 the gifts thereby bestowed are called “ powers of the 
 age to come:” (aiuvog) Heb. vi, 5. By means of the 
 same Spirit and his miraculous powers, Christ’s kingdom 
 of glory will be finally established. 2nd. This baptism 
 is likewise so called, because the giver is heavenly— 
 our “heavenly Father:” Matt, xviii, 35. 3rd. As 
 belonging to the gospel dispensation, which is opposed 
 to the carnal or earthly things: Heb. vii, 16; viii, 5. 
 4th. As a mark of God’s calling, which is heavenly: 
 Heb. iii, 1. 5th. As powers belonging to the heavenly 
 or resurrection state : 1 Cor. xv, 48, 49 ; 2 Cor. v, 1. 
 
 The next occasion on which our Lord was led to 
 speak of it, was in his conversation with the woman of 
 Samaria. He had seated himself, fatigued and thirsty, 
 beside Jacob’s well, and asked of the Samaritan woman 
 water to drink. Her refusal leads our Lord to speak 
 of spiritual things. He had indeed asked of her to 
 benefit him by a draught of earthly water, but he had 
 power to benefit her, had she only known and asked, 
 by the gift of heavenly water. And this gift would be 
 satisfying and abiding ; not like her gift, a momentary 
 thing, requiring to be repeated often; but a constant 
 possession. “If thou knewest the gift of God, and 
 who it is that saith to thee, ‘ Give me to drink,’ thou 
 wouldst have asked of him, and he would have given 
 thee living water.” “ Whosoever drinketh of this water 
 shall thirst again, but whosoever drinketh of the water 
 that I shall give him, shall never thirst, but the water 
 
10 
 
 that I shall give him shall be in him a fountain ('Ttrfyr\) 
 of water , springing; up unto everlasting life John iv, 
 10, 14. Here Christ is the giver, not the gift. The gift 
 is the Spirit. “ He gave gifts unto men Eph. iv, 8. 
 
 •But these words receive much light from the next 
 occasion, on which our Lord spoke more fully and 
 plainly than he had done before. On the last day of 
 the feast, water was fetched in great pomp from the 
 well of Siloam, and brought with the sound of music to 
 the temple, where it was poured, mixed with wine, on 
 the sacrifice. From this ceremony our Lord took 
 occasion to address his disciples, promising to them the 
 gift of the Holy Ghost. “ In the last day, that great 
 day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any 
 man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that 
 believeth on me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his 
 belly shall flow rivers of living water. Now this spake 
 he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him were 
 about to (sf^zWov) receive; for the Holy Ghost was not 
 yet given, because that Jesus was not yet glorified 
 John vii, 37—39. 
 
 In the former passage our Lord had represented the 
 Holy Ghost, which he was able to bestow, as a fountain 
 of living water. Here the same gifts of the Spirit are 
 described as rivers of living water flowing forth from 
 the possessor. And such, indeed, were the gifts of the 
 Holy Ghost. They were not only to him that had 
 them as an ever-springing well of living water; but 
 they were rivers of forth-flowing water. They were 
 given to aid others also , that the brethren around 
 might be edified and comforted by their flow, as the 
 stream of perennial waters diffuses life and vegetation, 
 and quenches the thirst of the parched traveller. How 
 refreshing to the believer the possession of the gift of 
 healing; — the joy he was permitted to diffuse by 
 speaking words of power over the sick brother or 
 sister, and beholding them rise up, not only with pain 
 departed, but languor gone! How refreshing to the 
 husband to behold the wife restored, to the father to 
 
11 
 
 see his child recovered to health ! Truly the gifts were 
 as constant waters watering a thirsty land. 
 
 And in this place the ground of receiving them is 
 stated. “They that believe on him” were to receive 
 them. They that came to him were to drink. Thus 
 the words of our Lord to the Samaritan woman are 
 connected with his present intimation. At another 
 time, the Lord Jesus, on being appealed to by his 
 disciples, to teach them how to pray, inspirited them 
 to ask by comparing the kindness and bounty of God 
 with the willingness of parents to bestow good gifts on 
 their children. “If ye then, being evil, know how to 
 give good gifts to your children, how much more shall 
 your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit* to them 
 that ask him?” Luke xi, 13. 
 
 Again, the Redeemer, in his last discourse on the 
 eve of the betrayal, promised the same miraculous 
 baptism to his disciples which he himself had expe¬ 
 rienced. “ Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that 
 believeth on me , the works that I do shall he do also ; 
 and greater works than these shall he do; because I 
 go unto my Father: John xiv, 12. The reason as¬ 
 signed why the disciple should do even greater works 
 than Christ, was, because he was going to the Father. 
 And the necessity of his departure he explains. It 
 was in order to “ pray the Father, that he might give 
 
 them another Comforter.the Spirit of truth: ” 
 
 John xiv, 16. “It is expedient for you that I go 
 away, for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come 
 unto you ; but if I depart , I will send him unto you :” 
 John xvi, 7. 
 
 After the resurrection, the promise was repeated in 
 another form, not to “ the eleven” alone, but to those 
 
 * TIvzv/xu aytov , Not “the Holy Spirit,” but a “holy spiritual 
 gift.” The article is not used. So several of the ancients under- 
 stood it. And some MSS. read ayuQov mro/xu ; and the Scholia 
 in three MSS. have %apv tfvw/xaTixyiv while the Ethiopic has 
 —“A good gift of the Holy Spirit.” So 1 Cor. xiv, 12, 32. (Greek.) 
 
 / 
 
12 
 
 disciples “that were with them:” Luke xxiv, 33. 
 “ Behold, I send the promise of the Father upon you ; 
 but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem until ye be endued 
 (clothed— svdv&Yiak) with power from on high : Luke 
 xxiv, 49. 
 
 Lastly, before the ascension he commanded the dis¬ 
 ciples to “ wait for the promise of the Father, which, 
 saith he, ye have heard from me. For John truly 
 (indeed) baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized 
 with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.” “Ye 
 shall receive power , after that the Holy Ghost is come 
 upon you:” Acts i, 4, 5, 8. And the words of his 
 parting 1 commission recognize the union of the two 
 baptisms, that of water, and that of the Holy Ghost. 
 “ Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to 
 every creature. He that believeth and is baptized [with 
 water] shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall 
 be damned. And these signs shall follow them that 
 believe ; [the baptism of the Holy Spirit;] In my name 
 they shall cast out devils; they shall speak with new 
 tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they 
 drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they 
 shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover:” 
 Mark xvi. 15—18. 
 
 These promises at length received their fulfilment at 
 Pentecost. With the sound of a mighty rushing wind 
 the Holy Spirit descended and filled the hundred and 
 twenty disciples, while tongues as of fire, distributed to 
 each of them, abode on their heads, and they began to 
 speak in other languages. This then was manifestly the 
 baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost. And so Peter 
 expounds it: Jesus, “ being by the right hand of God 
 exalted, and having received from the Father the pro¬ 
 mise of the Holy Ghost, hath poured out (s§s%ss) this 
 which ye now see and hear”—“ see,” in the tongues of 
 fire—“ hear,” in the tongues spoken : Acts ii, 33. The 
 baptism of the Holy Spirit is afterwards explained to be 
 “ the gift of the Holy Ghost:” ver. 39. And this the 
 apostle affirms to be intended for the Jews and their chil- 
 
13 
 
 dren and for all believers among the Gentiles. “ Then 
 Peter said unto them, (the inquirers after salvation,) 
 Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name 
 of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall 
 receive the gift of the Holy Ghost; for the promise (of 
 the Holy Ghost, ver. 33) is unto you and to your 
 children and unto all that are afar off , even as many 
 as the Lord our God shall call:” ver. 38, 39. That 
 by those who “are afar off” are meant the Gentiles, 
 see Eph. ii, 13, 17; Isaiah viii, 8, 9; Jer. viii, 19, 
 xxxi, 10; Ezek. xxiii, 40; Zech. x, 9. 
 
 We cannot doubt then that they did receive the 
 promise, for three thousand were baptized; and in the 
 fourth chapter we are told that “all were filled with 
 the Holy Ghost:” Acts iv, 31. And in the sixth 
 chapter, when additipnal deacons were to be chosen, 
 they are desired to look out men “ full of the Holy 
 Ghost and wisdom ver. 3, while Stephen and Philip, 
 the only two of whom any thing is specially said, 
 wrought many and great miracles : Acts vi, 8 ; viii, 6. 
 
 The history of Philip introduces us to a new feature 
 in the case. That evangelist preaches Christ to the 
 Samaritans, and in spite of the sorceries of Simon, the 
 magician, and their prejudices in favor of him, they 
 “ believed Philip, preaching the things concerning the 
 kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, and 
 were baptized , both men and women:” viii, 12. The 
 news arriving at Jerusalem, such of the apostles as were 
 there sent down Peter and John, “ who when they were 
 come down, prayed for them that they might receive 
 the Holy Ghost. (For as yet he was fallen upon none 
 of them, only they were baptized in the name of the 
 Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their hands on them, 
 and they received the Holy Ghost:” ver. 15—17. 
 
 We have afterwards the narrative, in the tenth 
 chapter, of the impartation of the miraculous gifts of the 
 Holy Spirit to the Gentiles : and in the nineteenth to 
 some of the disciples of John. 
 
 From the course of the history then, and various 
 
 c 
 
14 
 
 texts scattered up and down, I am led to the following 
 conclusions regarding the baptisms of Jesus and that 
 of John. 
 
 First, that no baptism with water can be the baptism 
 of the Messiah. In this point John places the in¬ 
 feriority of his baptism : that it was with the earthly 
 element of water. The superiority of Messiah’s he 
 places in this : that it would be with the Holy Ghost; 
 while its attendant sign would be fire—a heavenly 
 element, not destructive, but giving glory and power 
 to those on whom it rested. 
 
 The baptism with water, then, under the Christian 
 dispensation, is not Christian baptism : if by that be 
 meant the baptism of Christ. It is only an expansion 
 of the baptism of John, and was adopted by the 
 Redeemer (not instituted) at his ascension. It had 
 been divinely appointed to the Jews through the 
 ministry of John. The Savior himself had sanctioned 
 the use of it by his disciples as the first act of his 
 ministry. And this exclusive reference of the baptism 
 of water to the Jew w T as necessary at first, because the 
 kingdom of God was then ready to appear in its glory, 
 had Israel but believed. To them alone, therefore, the 
 invited guests of former ages, was the baptism of re¬ 
 pentance sent, as we learn from the parable of the 
 marriage supper: Matt, xxii, 3, 4. The servants are 
 sent at first only to them “ that were bidden .” 
 
 And the baptism was the baptism of repentance, 
 because it was intended of God to be a confession on 
 the part of the Jew, that he gave up the hope of right¬ 
 eousness by the law. It was absolutely necessary in 
 order to the baptism of the Holy Ghost, and the 
 coming of the kingdom of God, as the apostle shows in 
 the third chapter of the Epistle to the Galatians. There 
 he observes, that the law brought only a curse , and 
 therefore the blessing promised to Abraham could not 
 be given to those that were under the law, for they were 
 cursed by it. John’s baptism of repentance was also 
 the baptism of faith in the Messiah just about to 
 
I 
 
 15 
 
 appear. And faith is the means with which the 
 miraculous gifts of the Spirit are connected, as the 
 chapter above cited shows : ver. 2, 5. The present 
 view also accounts for the fact, that neither to Jews nor 
 to Samaritans was the baptism of the Holy Ghost 
 granted before the baptism of water. Else it might 
 and would have been said, that they were justified by 
 the works of the law, and thus the very foundation of 
 the gospel would have been uptorn. Merit would have 
 been introduced, and the blessing of Abraham regarded 
 as purchased, and no longer a gift. But the baptism 
 of repentance was with the confession of sin, and thus 
 the full and entire renouncing of merit. Therefore the 
 acquisition of these divine powers was evidently as a gift 
 to the unworthy, bestowed in memory of the promise 
 to faithful Abraham. It was the gift by grace, to the 
 justified by faith. So also had the Holy Ghost fallen 
 upon the Samaritans before their baptism, it might 
 have been thought and said, that the merit of their 
 circumcision caused the descent of the Holy Ghost. 
 At any rate the advocates for circumcision would have 
 had some shadow of ground for affirming the necessity 
 of circumcision. 
 
 But in the case of the Gentiles receiving the baptism 
 of the Holy Spirit no such danger could arise. They 
 were regarded by the Jew as unclean, and the moment 
 they believed they could see that as idolaters they must 
 be hateful in the sight of a pure God. They could not 
 therefore have the smallest pretension to merit. The 
 bestowal of the Holy Ghost therefore on them was 
 immediately on their believing, and before the baptism 
 of repentance and of water. This proved circumcision 
 unnecessary to acceptance with God. The holy anoint¬ 
 ing oil had not been poured on them if they had been 
 unclean. Therefore Peter relies on this proof when he 
 would convince those bigoted in favor of the law of 
 Moses. And thus by both these acts the Holy Ghost 
 overthrew the Jews’ vain imagination, and exhibited 
 the gospel as fully come. On the one hand he makes 
 
16 
 
 the baptism of repentance and faith necessary to the 
 Jew, ere he can receive his holy gifts; *thus dashing to 
 the ground the Jewish hope of justification by the law. 
 And on the other hand, by his communication of the 
 gifts to the Gentile uncircumcised, he put aside the 
 doctrine of the Gentile’s uncleanness, and of the neces¬ 
 sity of circumcision to justification. But in opposition 
 to the Quaker doctrine of the needlessness of the bap¬ 
 tism of water, we find that the Gentiles of Cornelius’ 
 assembly were “ commanded to be baptized in the name 
 of the Lord Acts x, 48. 
 
 We may trace then, the adoption of the rite of water 
 baptism in the Christian dispensation thus. At first, 
 while the mission of God and his message were only to 
 the Jews, both John and the Lord Jesus baptized Jews 
 only, as the fitting preparation for the coming kingdom 
 of God, and for the gifts of the Holy Ghost which were 
 given to signalize it. But when the Jews reject the 
 invitation to the supper, the disciples are sent to the 
 Gentiles with the same message that had been sent to 
 the Jew. Then, as the baptism of water had been 
 before confined to the Jews, so now, as the preaching 
 was expanded, the baptism of water takes as wide a 
 range. Jesus bids the disciples, “ go and make 
 disciples of all nations, baptizing them.” For the end 
 and intention of the baptism of water was nearly the 
 same to the Gentile as to the Jew. Repentance was 
 as necessary to the one as to the other, and faith in 
 the Messiah was as requisite. x4nd these were the 
 two requirements of John’s baptism. The nature, 
 therefore, of the baptism with water undergoes no 
 change, in its passing from the hands of John, to the 
 disciples of Jesus after his resurrection. But now it is 
 added, that they were to be baptized in “the name of 
 the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” 
 This would be easily agreed to by the Jew, to whom 
 these views of the Godhead were comparatively familiar, 
 through the medium of the prophets and the law. 
 By the Gentile, on turning from his false gods, this 
 
faith was especially needed. And that the baptism of 
 water was (after the gospel had commenced) the baptism 
 of repentance and faith, we see from the words of Peter 
 —“ Repent and be baptized every one of you in the 
 name of Jesus Christ unto (s/s) the remission of sins 
 Acts ii, 38. Repentance is here as expressly required as 
 by John; and faith—in that it was to be administered 
 in the name of Jesus, as the Messiah expected by their 
 fathers. 
 
 The baptism with water is however regarded as only 
 the preparatory step to the baptism with the Holy 
 Ghost, both by John the Baptist and Peter. “ I 
 indeed have baptized you with water; but he shall 
 baptize you with the Holy Ghost:” Mark i, 8. As 
 though he would say, ‘ Do not rest in this baptism of 
 water: mine is only the means to the heavenly baptism 
 of Messiah.’ So does St. Peter state the matter when 
 that baptism was now fully come. “ Be baptized 
 every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the 
 remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the 
 Holy Ghost:” Acts ii, 38. Where he represents the 
 baptism with water as only the means to the further 
 attainment of the gift of the Holy Ghost. The same 
 is also apparent from the case of the Samaritans. 
 They were baptized w 7 ith water upon believing in the 
 name of the Lord Jesus: Acts viii, 12, 16. But the 
 apostles did not think this baptism enough, and the 
 writer marks by his mode of expression the disappoint¬ 
 ment of their expectations on finding that the baptism 
 of the Spirit was not given. Peter and John “ prayed 
 for them that they might receive the Holy Ghost. 
 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them : only 
 they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus:”) 
 Acts viii, 14, 16. In other words, the believers in 
 Christ were disappointed that the gifts of the Holy 
 Ghost did not follow on the baptism of water. Philip 
 had used the means, but the end or thing signified did 
 not result. No gifts were bestowed : the baptism of 
 the Spirit had not fallen on them. “ Only they were 
 
 c 2 
 
18 
 
 baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus!” What 
 more did they want?—we are ready to say in the 
 present time. They had believed and been baptized. 
 What was required beyond that? The evangelist does 
 not think that sufficient. Though it was baptism with 
 water, (as now,) in the name of the Lord Jesus, he speaks 
 of it with comparative slight. They had only water 
 baptism, not the baptism of the Holy Ghost; John’s 
 baptism, not that of Messiah. Nor is it the evangelist 
 only who expresses his dissatisfaction. The inspired 
 apostles send down two of their number to speed, by 
 prayer, the lingering blessing attached to faith in 
 Christ. They also, therefore, account the baptism of 
 water incomplete, so long as it was not followed by the 
 baptism and gifts of the Holy Ghost. But we, the 
 uninspired, are content with the baptism of water. 
 We rest in the preparatory baptism, and think not of 
 that to which it was but the means : as the Jews rested 
 in the circumcision of the flesh and regarded not that 
 of the ear and heart. Can we be right? 
 
 The baptism of water is not the baptism of Jesus. 
 Of this we are reminded, not only by John’s forcible 
 distinction and opposition : but also by the fact noticed 
 by St. John, that “ Jesus himself baptized not , but his 
 disciples John iv, 2. This is mentioned, lest any 
 should think the baptism of water is Christian baptism, 
 or the baptism of Christ. His baptism is the bestowal 
 of the Holy Ghost. Hence it could not be given till 
 he had ascended on high and received the promise of 
 the Father for men, as it is written—“ When he 
 ascended up on high he led captivity captive, and gave 
 gifts unto men:” Eph. iv, 8 ; Psalm Ixviii, 18. 
 
 And again, Psalm xxiv, 3 — 5: “ Who shall ascend 
 unto the hill of the Lord ? or who shall stand in his 
 holy place? He that hath clean hands and a pure 
 
 heart.. He shall receive the blessing from the 
 
 Lord.” 
 
 His baptism is with the Holy Spirit. Over the 
 Spirit of God no created being can have power. 
 
19 
 
 Hence water is the element of the disciples’ baptism, 
 because being earthly, it is under their control. But 
 the Spirit must come from Christ. With the baptism 
 of water there are many baptizers ; with the baptism of 
 the Spirit there is but one. “ The same is he that 
 baptizeth with the Holy Ghost:” John i, 33. Hence 
 Jesus speaking of it, says, “ The comforter .... whom 
 I will send unto you from the Father:” John xv, 
 26. And again, “Behold I send the promise of my 
 Father upon youLuke xxiv, 49. And again, 
 
 “Jesus.hath poured out this which ye see 
 
 and hear Acts ii, 32, 33. 
 
 Although, therefore, the Holy Ghost was communi¬ 
 cated by the disciples with laying on of hands, yet two 
 points are to be noted with regard to it. First, that the 
 laying on of hands seems almost peculiar to apostles. 
 One instance only of deviation is recorded : Acts ix, 17. 
 And secondly, this laying on of hands is never called 
 by the apostles their baptizing with the Holy Ghost, 
 though the baptism of water is stated as the act of the 
 person performing it. “ John truly baptized with 
 water:” Acts i, 5. “They went both down into the 
 water both Philip and the Eunuch ; and he baptized 
 him:” Acts viii, 38. “I thank God that I baptized 
 none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; lest any should 
 say that I baptized in mine own name. And I bap¬ 
 tized also the household of Stephanas; 1 know not 
 whether I baptized any other besides:” 1 Cor. i, 
 14—16. 
 
 But the communication of the gifts of the Holy 
 Ghost is always spoken of in a different manner. The 
 apostles therein are represented only as the channels of 
 conveyance, not as the agents. “ They laid their 
 hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost:” 
 Acts viii, 17. “ Through laying on of the apostles’ 
 * hands the Holy Ghost was given ver. 18. “When 
 Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Ghost came 
 on them Acts xix, 6. 
 
 And thirdly, though the laying on of hands commu- 
 
20 
 
 nicated the Holy Ghost, yet the gift was the gift not 
 of the apostle, but of Christ and the Holy Ghost: 
 Eph. iv, 7. And the apostles had no power to give 
 any special gift, or to keep back any. The Holy 
 Ghost was the distributor. ‘‘Thou thoughtest that 
 the gift of God might be purchased with money.” 
 
 “ God bearing them witness.with diyers miracles, 
 
 and distributions (^sg/tf/xo/s) of the Holy Ghost accord¬ 
 ing to his own will:” Heb. ii, 4. “ To one is given 
 
 by the Spirit , the word of wisdom 1 Cor. xii, 8. 
 
 Is then Christian baptism intended to be lasting? 
 All uphold this, against the Quakers; and so long as it 
 is supposed to be the baptism with water. But 
 Christian baptism is distinguished from John’s, and is 
 not the baptism with water, as has been shown. No 
 baptism with water can be. Apostles were dissatisfied 
 with it alone, Peter and the rest in the case of the 
 Samaritans; Paul in the case of the twelve disciples at 
 Ephesus: Acts xix, 1—6. Christ’s baptism, strictly 
 taken, must be that only where he is the baptizer, and 
 where that which is communicated is his. Therefore, 
 I conclude, that the miraculous baptism of the Holy 
 Ghost was intended for all ages of the Christian 
 Church. So long as Christ has the power to pour 
 forth the Holy Spirit, so long we are right in looking to 
 him for it as the promise of the gospel; so long are we 
 wrong in looking on the baptism of water as the 
 consummation. 
 
 It has been shown above, that the baptism with 
 water is only set forth as the means to the baptism of 
 the Holy Spirit: the one being only the preparation 
 for the other. If so, either the miraculous baptism of 
 the Holy Ghost ought to remain, and we ought to 
 possess it still, or else the baptism with water should, 
 as the Quakers say, be done away. For, if you 
 affirm, that the baptism of the Holy Spirit was not 
 intended to last, then much less should the baptism 
 with water, which was only designed and made binding 
 as a means to it. The end ceasing, what need of the 
 
21 
 
 means? Or if you affirm that it ought to be retained, 
 then do you in that decision assert virtually, that the 
 baptism of the Spirit, which is the great end of water 
 baptism, should be equally lasting. The keys of a city 
 are given to the governor of it, as the token and means 
 of his entering it; but if the city is destroyed, or never 
 more to be inhabited, of what good are the keys ? unless 
 to testify against the governor, that it was once inhabited 
 and ought to be so again. Who would think that it 
 was enough for the governor to rest in the possession of 
 the keys ? The application to the baptism with water 
 is evident. 
 
 But we may also take the affirmative side, and say, 
 the baptism with water ought to be retained, for it 
 exhibits a doctrine of universal necessity, viz., repentance 
 unto the forgiveness of sins. And so long as man 
 shall need forgiveness, and be capable of repentance, so 
 long the sign of this doctrine (which is the foundation 
 of the gospel) is to be retained. But if so, much more 
 ought that to remain, to which the baptism with water 
 was intended to lead on. For the meaning of that 
 is no less universal, no less required for every age. 
 The baptism of the Spirit was intended to remedy in a 
 measure the weakness of the flesh, and this is univer¬ 
 sal, and continues the same from age to age. Man is 
 blind with regard to the future ; he “ knoweth not what 
 a day may bring forth.” The baptism of the Holy 
 Spirit was intended to remedy this, and to gift the 
 believer, and the church to which he belonged, with the 
 knowledge of the future events which most concerned 
 it, and 10 direct it in its choice, of alternatives and of 
 officers. Thus, the saints at Jerusalem, warned by 
 prophecy, of the destruction coming on Jerusalem, fled 
 by divine direction to Pella. The flesh is weak in 
 discovering the thoughts of man’s heart, and much 
 more in discerning between the spirits of evil, and the 
 Spirit of God. The baptism of the Spirit was intended 
 to bestow this great and divine gift of discernment, as 
 we see in the case of Ananias and Sapphira. How t 
 
22 
 
 useful this gift, nay, one might add, how necessary , the 
 experience of all churches and ministers may proclaim. 
 And so with the other gifts. They are all founded on 
 the infirmities and ignorance of the flesh, which they 
 icere sent to remedy, and as the nature of man 
 remains ever the same, so these gifts can never be 
 superseded . The attempt to do without them only 
 manifests their deep necessity, by the infirmities which 
 every system of church government and worship mani¬ 
 fests most conspicuously. 
 
 Again, if the baptism of Jesus be the baptism of 
 water, wherein is its great superiority to that of John? 
 John’s baptism manifested, as truly as that of Jesus, a 
 death unto sin, and a rising again unto a new life. 
 John’s baptism supposed faith in Messiah to come, that 
 of Jesus in Messiah come. Let it be granted, that 
 those baptized by John, were to be baptized again in 
 the name of the Lord Jesus. One can see the reason 
 of this; for faith in a Messiah to come is not equiva¬ 
 lent (as we see by the case of the present Jews) with 
 faith in Jesus of Nazareth, as the true Messiah. But 
 what advantage did the twelve at Ephesus obtain from 
 their being baptized ? They were not made believers 
 thereby; for they were “ disciples” already. Yet John 
 supposed, that the baptism of Jesus should be glorious 
 and advantageous, even to those that had already 
 received his. If indeed baptism with water in the name 
 of Jesus regenerated and imparted the new nature of 
 grace, it would in truth be superior to John’s baptism. 
 But no evangelical Christian with whom I am now 
 arguing will maintain this, and conspicuous facts destroy 
 abundantly any such vain imagination ; while it has 
 been shown that no baptism of water can be that of 
 Christ. Christ’s baptism has not only another efficacy, 
 but another element; his is a baptism of fire—of 
 heavenlv fire. 
 
 Moreover, if it be asserted that the baptism of water 
 was to last, while that of fire was not to endure 
 beyond the first age or ages, then is the baptism of 
 
23 
 
 John superior to that of Christ. Yet his forerunner 
 asserted, “He must increase, but 1 must decrease:’’ 
 John iii, 30. Now that any institution should pass 
 away is its disgrace ; that any should remain is its glory; 
 2 Cor. iii, 7, 8—11. Heb. viii, 13. To affirm then 
 that the baptism of water, begun by John, was intended 
 to last, but the baptism of the Spirit, the especial glory 
 of Jesus, was not to last, is to set the glory of the 
 inferior above that of the superior. “ Much more that 
 which remaineth is glorious 2 Cor. iii, 11. 
 
 Let us now then compare the two baptisms of Jesus 
 and of John together ; or, if any prefer so to call them, 
 let us note the differences between the baptism of water, 
 and that of the Spirit. 
 
 Now first, the baptism of the Spirit is not regenera¬ 
 tion, but supposes it. So we have seen that repentance 
 and faith were required by Peter before any were to 
 receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. And this was 
 betokened and represented by the baptism of water. 
 The plunging beneath the water answered to the death 
 unto sin; the rising again, to the new life of holiness. 
 Now, where repentance and faith are, there are conver¬ 
 sion and forgiveness of sins—or in other words the man 
 is regenerate : Acts iii, 19 ; xi, 18 ; 1 John v, 1. But 
 for a disciple of Jesus, conversion is not enough. That 
 might be, nay, must be, even under the law, if any one 
 were to be saved. It was also taught by the law. 
 Moses demanded conversion as the circumcision of the 
 heart: Deut. x, 16. The prophet required it. “ Make 
 you a new heart, and a new spirit:’’ Ezek. xviii, 31. 
 Moreover baptism with water was no new thing. 
 Moses and all his people were baptized with water in 
 the Red Sea: 1 Cor. x, 1, 2. But the baptism of 
 Messiah was to add to the believer a witness of sonship. 
 The law looked on its followers as slaves. Messiah 
 redeemed them and gave them authority to become 
 sons of God by faith : John i, 12. Was there to be no 
 difference then between the slave and the son ? No 
 manifested difference ? Yes, as the God of grace is 
 
24 
 
 also the God of nature, so, in token of their becoming 
 his sons, he would give them a certain degree of power 
 and authority in his empire of nature. He would 
 entrust them with a small degree of that divine power 
 which made and sustains the world. He bestowed the 
 gift of healing—he gave them power to check the fatal 
 laws of disease, and to restore vigor to the frame. He 
 put into their hands a power that could dry up a tree 
 or remove a mountain, if for his glory : Matt, xxi, 21. 
 He gave them dominion over the spirits of evil, which 
 the Gentiles worshipped, and over serpents and scor¬ 
 pions, and the power of the enemy : Mark xvi, 15—20. 
 Thus they acted like children to whom some little con¬ 
 trol and power in the father’s house is bestowed, in 
 token of yet greater privileges to be exercised when 
 their full manhood and the time appointed by the 
 father is come. 
 
 Both of these are operations, but different opera¬ 
 tions, of the same Spirit. Faith is imparted in both— 
 but a different kind of faith. The first operation is that 
 of regeneration whereby the dead soul is made alive. 
 This is irregular, invisible, only to be known by its effects. 
 “The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the 
 sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and 
 whither it goeth, so is every one that is begotten by the 
 Spirit:” (ysyivvYiftevog s% rov nvzvpMrog :) John iii, 8. 
 The second was bestowed regularly, according to 
 Christ’s promise, on them that believed, and the promise 
 yet remains. This was visible and audible, as at Pen¬ 
 tecost ; and appealed even to the senses of unbelievers : 
 Acts ii, 3, 4, 33 ; v, 32 ; x, 45, 46. And as the first 
 was the regeneration of the Holy Ghost, so was the 
 second the baptism of the Holy Ghost. Now the 
 baptism of the Spirit presupposes the regeneration of 
 the Spirit. He who is to be baptized is of course 
 supposed to be first born. Regeneration of the Spirit 
 imparts life , but the baptism of the Spirit imparts 
 power. How great the difference between the force of 
 body and of mind in the infant and the adult! Now 
 
25 
 
 the gifts of the Holy Ghost were directed to these 
 very two points, they were an addition either of intelli¬ 
 gence or of power—the two points which distinguish 
 the infant from the man. What a difference between 
 the feeble idle jerkings of a babe’s fingers and their 
 aimless play, and the intelligent motion of the musician’s 
 hand, and the strong grasp of the warrior ! It is even 
 so now. We have life , but power we have not. We 
 are left to the flesh ; or, at the utmost, the Spirit moves 
 upon and makes use of the powers of the flesh. But 
 the Spirit’s baptism, the manifest power of God, we 
 have not. Purity of doctrine, we may have through 
 study of the letter of Holy Scripture, but demonstra¬ 
 tion of the Spirit and of power, is not to be found 
 among us now. The church of the apostle’s day was 
 the church of manhood’s intelligence and energy; ours 
 is the feebleness and dimness of infancy, in thought 
 and action. 
 
 Again, there is a manifest distinction to be observed 
 between the persons imparting the one, and the pther. 
 
 The first was delivered as a command to the disciples. 
 “ Go teach all nations, baptizing them Matt, xxviii, 
 19. In this they were active. The element of water 
 was always within their reach, and obedience to the 
 command could always be shown. 
 
 “ He 
 
 that believeth and is baptized shall be saved Mark 
 xvi, 16. But in the second the apostles were passive; 
 receivers, not imparters. “ Ye shall be baptized with 
 the Holy Ghost:’ 7 Acts i, 5. “Ye shall receive 
 power:” Acts i, 8. “Tarry at Jerusalem until ye be 
 clothed with power from on high:” Luke xxiv, 49. 
 They who had baptized others with water, must be 
 baptized with the Holy Ghost. 
 
 There is a like distinction in the subjects of the two 
 baptisms. In coming to the baptism of water the man 
 was active. He was complying with a command. In 
 regard to the baptism of the Holy Ghost he was 
 looking for a promise. In the one he was fulfilling a 
 
 D 
 
26 
 
 duty. In the second he was waiting for the bestowal 
 of a privilege , consequent on the fulfilment of the 
 duty. In the first he testified obedience. In the 
 second he received a gift. The first baptism exhibited 
 to him his union with Christ in his death and resurrec¬ 
 tion. The second communicated to him of the power 
 of God. 
 
 The baptism with water supposed the disciple to 
 have come for instruction to the ministers of Christ’s 
 gospel—“Go teach all nations, baptizing them:” 
 Matt, xxviii, 19. And of him who drew nigh for 
 this purpose, certain requirements were made, as con¬ 
 ditions of his receiving the ordinance. He must have 
 repentance and faith, in order to receive it rightly. He 
 came therefore to the baptism of water testifying his 
 unworthiness and self-condemnation; and virtually, if 
 not by word of mouth, confessing sin. At this point 
 the minister met him, accepted in Christ’s name his 
 repentance and submission, and gave him a right to the 
 standing of a disciple and the name of a Christian, by 
 administering the ordinance. But the bestowal of the 
 Holy Ghost, either by direct descent in fire, or by the 
 laying on of apostle’s hands, was a much higher attes¬ 
 tation. The disciple came self-condemned to the water, 
 but Vesting' by faith on the righteousness of the Messiah, 
 he looked ftfFTh'S' promise of the Spirit. The baptism 
 of the Holy Ghost, on the other hand, was God’s 
 acceptance of the believer. It was his seal, manifesting 
 to the gifted person, and to all others, that he was 
 righteous—justified by faith. Hence, Peter, beholding 
 the Holy Spirit bestowed on the Gentiles, asks, “ Can 
 any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, 
 who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?” 
 Acts x, 47. This was in effect to say, ‘The Master 
 has accepted, can the disciple refuse? The king has 
 set his seal on the writing, can the secretary refuse his 
 signature?’ The Head of the church that reads the 
 heart, had attested the reality of their faith; could the 
 minister hesitate as to its genuineness ? God had borne 
 
27 
 
 witness that the Gentiles were his; could man reject 
 those whom God had received ? The reverse might 
 not always hold. After the disciple’s baptism the 
 Master might withhold his. He might see some flaw 
 in the writing, and refuse his seal. Thus the baptism 
 of the Holy Ghost carried along with it, by force of 
 authority, the baptism of water. But not necessarily 
 does the baptism of water carry with it that of the 
 Holy Ghost; as we see in the case of the Samaritans, 
 and above all in the baptism of the present day. 
 
 The signs and elements of the two baptisms were 
 also quite distinct. The emblem and element of the 
 disciple’s baptism was water: of the Master’s—fire. 
 The mode of administering the one was by the dipping 
 or immersing in water. That of the other was by the 
 descent of fire from heaven, or by laying on of the 
 apostles’ hands. And the respective elements were 
 emblems of the different significations of the two bap¬ 
 tisms. That of water is a representation of weakness 
 even unto death and burial: Rom. vi, 3, 4, 5; Col. 
 ii, 12. And thus water is described in Holy Scripture 
 as the element of weakness—“All knees shall be weak 
 as water: 1 ’ Ezek. vii, 17; xxi, 7. “The hearts of 
 the people melted, and became as water: ” Josh, vii, 5. 
 The baptism of the Holy Spirit is the communication of 
 power. Hence its sign and.emblem is fire, to which is 
 ascribed power. “ Quenched the violence (power, hvm[j.i\i) 
 offire:” Heb. xi, 34. Water is the fitting element to 
 represent the feebleness of the flesh. “ Unstable as 
 water , thou shalt not excel:” Gen. xlix, 4. Fire on 
 the other hand is the emblem of the heavenly power 
 of angels. “Who maketh his angels spirits; and his 
 ministers a fiame of fire:” Heb. i, 7. 
 
 Thus in the first baptism the cleansing efficacy of the 
 Holy Ghost was set forth, water being the element 
 for “putting away the filth of the flesh :” 1 Peter iii, 
 18, In the second his holy power of gift was commu¬ 
 nicated to the believer. In the first, evil was exhibited 
 as taken away; in the second, power for good was 
 
28 
 
 actually bestowed.* Hence the baptism of the Holy 
 Ghost is also called the gift of the Holy Ghost. As 
 the first baptism exhibited the disciple as one with 
 Jesus who “ was crucified through weakness,” so the 
 second made him partaker of the life which Jesus 
 “ liveth by the power of God 2 Cor. xiii, 4. And 
 this contrast between the still remaining weakness of 
 the flesh and the imparted power of the Spirit, is 
 probably intended in the following passage. “Always 
 bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, 
 that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in 
 our body:” 2 Cor. iv, 10. The one is an exhibited 
 conformity with the Messiah in his death and burial for 
 our sakes. The other is a manifested partaking with 
 him of his “ power of an endless life.” The one exhibits 
 us as one with Messiah the Son of Man in his humilia¬ 
 tion ; the other manifests us one with him as the risen, 
 ascended, exalted, glorified Son of Man, reigning over 
 all things, all authority and power committed to his 
 hands, and a measure of it bestowed by way of token 
 and foretaste on his true followers. 
 
 The one exhibited the putting off of the old man— 
 the body of the sins of the flesh, and the putting on of 
 the righteousness of the new man—the second Adam: 
 Eph. iv, 22—24; Col. iii, 9, 10. But the flesh is not 
 only impure , but it is also weak: Rev. iii, 18; Rom. 
 vi, 19. The removal, therefore, of impurity and naked¬ 
 ness is the object of the first baptism; the communi¬ 
 cation of power, that of the second. Cleansing, is indeed 
 enough for salvation. But God may, if he will, bestow 
 something further; a glorious privilege, remedying the 
 weakness of the flesh by a portion of his power. Hence 
 
 * Whence the rendering of the word ftct'jrrifyj by the word 
 ‘purify,’ or one of like import, is not admissible. The baptism of 
 the Holy Ghost is not purification : it is the communication of super¬ 
 natural power. Hence while the term purification may suit the 
 baptism of water accidentally, because it is intended to represent it 
 —yet it will not suit the same term as applied to the baptism of the 
 Holy Ghost. 
 
29 
 
 Holy writ speaks to us of a twofold clothing —that 
 of righteousness, (Gal. iii, 27,) and that of power. 
 “ Tarry at Jerusalem till ye be clothed (zvbvarjffk) with 
 power from on high:” Luke xxiv, 49. Both come 
 through faith. The first comes through justifying and 
 sanctifying faith: JRom. v , 1; Acts xxvi, 18. The 
 second is through miraculous faith : Matt, xvii, 20; 
 xxi, 21 ; 1 Cor. xiii, 2. These two kinds of faith may 
 be separated. We see this by the examples of the 
 present day. Thousands are justified and sanctified, 
 who would tremble, or perhaps scoff, at the thought of a 
 miracle being within our power. And in like manner 
 the miraculous faith may be possessed where sanctifying 
 faith is not; as we learn from our Lord’s words— 
 “ Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have 
 we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name cast 
 out devils ? and in thy name done many wonderful 
 works? And then will I profess unto them, I never 
 knew you; depart from me, ye that work iniquity:” 
 Matt, vii, 22, 23. So St. Paul supposes that a man 
 might “ speak with the tongues of men and of angels,” 
 “ might have the gift of prophecy, and understand all 
 mysteries and all knowledge, and have all faith, so that 
 he could remove mountains, and yet have not love: ” 
 (ayuKri) 1 Cor. xiii, 1,2. Sanctifying faith, “worketh 
 by love:" (Gal.v,6:) the other faith worketh by miracle. 
 Yet they are both called faith, and that in the compass 
 of one chapter: 1 Cor. xiii, 2, 13. Miraculous faith is 
 intended to be the completing and adorning of sanctify¬ 
 ing faith; the seal of God set on the justified by faith. 
 And therefore the apostle in the eleventh chapter of the 
 Hebrews confounds (as many would be ready to say) 
 together the sanctifying and the miraculous effects of 
 faith. By sanctifying faith Abel’s sacrifice was accepted: 
 ver. 4. By miraculous faith Enoch prophesied, (Jude 
 14,) and was translated: ver. 4. By faith Abraham 
 left his native land—sanctifying faith : ver. 8. By faith 
 Abraham and Sarah obtained Isaac, beyond the time 
 and powers of nature—'miraculous faith: ver. 11, 12. 
 
 d 2 
 
30 
 
 So also in the fourth of Romans, St. Paul, having 
 taught us that Abraham was justified by faith, (ver. 3, 
 9,) adds, in the nineteenth verse, that his faith was the 
 ground of the miraculous birth of Isaac. But to return 
 to the eleventh of Hebrews. Moses’ sanctifying faith is 
 celebrated in one verse, as leading him to give up the 
 prospect of worldly riches and honor, for the sake of 
 Christ; and in one closely following, miraculous faith is 
 noticed as the ground of the passage of the Red Sea. 
 
 And in truth, the two kinds of faith, though they 
 may be separated, have the same object. They both 
 look to the same God, but under a different aspect. 
 The attributes of God are commonly divided into two 
 classes—the natural attributes, and the revealed. The 
 natural are those of power, benevolence, wisdom, and 
 foresight, which are displayed in the works of creation. 
 The revealed are those of mercy, justice, truth, and 
 holiness, which are presented to us in the word of God. 
 The distinction is just and real. Now it is faith in the 
 revealed attributes by which the soul is sanctified, and 
 transformed into the divine likeness, in mercy, truth, 
 justice, and holiness. In like manner, as it appears t»o 
 me, God’s natural attributes, jointly with his revealed, 
 are the object of miraculous faith. The point where 
 faith in the present day fails, is the belief that the God 
 of the Bible is the God of nature ; and that the laws 
 of nature are in entire subjection to the God of the 
 Scripture—that they are of secondary import, and 
 capable of being moved and altered in subordination to 
 his revealed purposes. While Jesus is looked to as an 
 all-sufficient Savior, he is not regarded as the creator 
 and sustainer of the world and its processes; and as 
 ready to change for the moment his usual modes of 
 action, (commonly called the laws of nature,) in answer to 
 the petitions of the faithful. The God of nature is now 
 separated from the God of revelation. The actings of 
 God in the world are looked upon as proceeding by a 
 sort of fatal iron-bound necessity, never now to be 
 interrupted by any petition of his people. To look for 
 
31 
 
 a miraculous interposition is presumptuous. What is 
 this but to disjoin the government of the world of 
 nature from that of the world of grace? This view 
 accounts for the fact that miraculous power may be 
 disjoined from sanctifying faith. The magician, as 
 Simon—or the exorcist, as the sons of Sceva—might 
 perceive and be fully convinced that the name of Jesus 
 of Nazareth is far more potent than his strongest spells, 
 and might use it in the belief that he is the Ruler of 
 nature, while yet he might hate his holy character and 
 his salvation. Saving faith restores the image of God’s 
 moral attributes. But God is a being of power, as well 
 as of holiness. That the believer then may be the Son 
 of God fully, it is necessary that he should be pos¬ 
 sessed of divine energy, as well as divine holiness. 
 And as these attributes of God are distinct, so are the 
 kinds of faith, and the times and modes of imparting 
 holiness and power respectively. God’s holiness is 
 imparted by a secret operation of the Spirit, for holiness 
 is a revealed attribute and unknown till discovered by 
 Holy Writ. But power is bestowed and exercised 
 openly, because God is proclaimed even by the works 
 of nature to be a God of power. The union of the 
 faith of holiness and the faith of power was intended to 
 be a testimony to the world and the unbelieving, that 
 Christianity came from the hand of the Creator. The 
 presence of this proof would shut the infidel’s mouth. 
 Its loss emboldens him. 
 
 Hence also the two baptisms are as independent each 
 of the other, as the two kinds of faith are. Yet in 
 order to completeness, both ought to be present. The 
 baptism of the Spirit is still needed when that of water 
 has been received: as we see from the case of the 
 Samaritans and the declaration of St. Peter at Pentecost. 
 The baptism with water, on the other hand, is not to be 
 set aside, even where the baptism with the Spirit has 
 been received : as we see from the example of Cornelius 
 and the Gentiles with him. 
 
 The first baptism was the mode of making a man a 
 
disciple. It was a baptizing him into or unto the name 
 of Christ: Acts viii, 16; x, 48. The second was a 
 gifting him with Christ’s power; and gave the disciple 
 a right to use the name of Jesus in works of miracle. 
 The first made a man a visible member of the Christian 
 body; the second gave him his office or function in 
 that body. Was the gift bestowed prophecy? He was 
 the far-reaching eye of the body—the church. Was it 
 the gift of healing? He was the hand of power. Was 
 it the word of wisdom or of knowledge? He was the 
 mouth of the church, uttering divine oracles to the 
 edifying of all. 
 
 At the baptism of water the disciple professed his 
 belief in the coming kingdom of Christ, and became a 
 subject of it. By the baptism with the Holy Ghost he 
 was made a witness of it; a witness, not in word, but 
 in power. Who could doubt that Christ’s kingdom 
 was surely to be set up, when the energies of the 
 coming kingdom—“ the powers of the age to come”— 
 were bestowed on every believer? Then it was seen 
 that “ the kingdom of God was not in word but in 
 power.” Now our testimony on its behalf is in word. 
 in word alone. It ought to be in power. The spies 
 that were witnesses of the glory of the promised land, 
 did not bring back with them words alone, but a 
 sample of its grapes, of its pomegranates, and its figs : 
 Numb, xiii, 23, 24. 
 
 The baptism of water was generally administered by 
 inferiors in the church, rarely by apostles. Paul tells 
 us that he did not baptize, because he was rather sent 
 to preach the gospel: 1 Cor. i, 17. It was a ceremony 
 that might be and was performed by those not qualified 
 for the higher offices of the church. He speaks, 
 therefore, as the physician might—‘ It is not my part 
 to mix, compound, and triturate drugs; my office is to 
 prescribe medicines: ’ or as the general in a siege 
 might say—‘ It is not my part to dig the trenches and 
 make fascines and gabions; my business is to superin¬ 
 tend the assault.’ 
 
33 
 
 Hence when the three thousand on the day of 
 Pentecost were received, we do not read of apostles 
 baptizing them; but only, “Then they that gladly 
 received his word were baptized:” Acts ii, 41. And 
 when upon the preaching of Peter, Cornelius and his 
 fellow' Gentiles were acknowledged by him, we find 
 that Peter did not baptize them himself, but only, 
 “ He commanded them to be baptized in the name of 
 the Lord Acts x, 48. 
 
 On the other hand the gift of the Holy Ghost was 
 imparted ordinarily by the hands of the apostles: as 
 we have seen in the instance of the Samaritans. Paul 
 also supposes it bestowed by the hands of the apostles, 
 as a natural and intended result of the preaching of the 
 gospel. How, without these establishing gifts, (Rom. 
 i, 11,) could a church be built up in a city where the 
 apostle had been but two or three weeks ? 
 
 And answerably to this difference in those that 
 administered each baptism was the difference in the 
 things signified. The one was a baptism unto the 
 name of Messiah : the other a baptism unto the power 
 of Messiah. The one unto remission of sins; the 
 other unto the clothing with the wisdom , and energy of 
 God. The one introduced a member to the Christian 
 body ; the other made the man an edifying and gifted 
 member. The one was the disciple’s attestation to the 
 genuineness of faith; the other the seal royal of God 
 impressed by his own hand, a lasting token of his 
 mercy and approval. 
 
 But perhaps it may be said, this is not a doctrine at 
 all necessary now. It is one of the deep and secret 
 things of God. Even if it were so, it would be a mark 
 of spirituality to look and search into the doctrine of 
 the gifts (^;ag/o' j aara) of the Spirit; as it is written : 
 “ Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have 
 entered into the heart of man to conceive, the things 
 which God hath prepared for them that love him.” 
 (Most stop here; but how does the apostle proceed?) 
 “ But God hath revealed them to us by his Spirit; 
 
34 
 
 for the Spirit searcheth all things , yea the deep things 
 of God.” And again, “We have received, not the x 
 Spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God, 
 that we might know the things which are freely given 
 us of God:” (^a^ickvTci) 1 Cor. ii, 9, 10, 12. 
 
 But the very idea is a mistake. So far from this 
 being one of the deep things of the Christian dispensa¬ 
 tion, it is by Paul placed as one of the first principles 
 of it; as will appear from a right translation of a 
 passage much misunderstood. I refer to Heb. vi, 1—9. 
 The first part of it is thus translated: “Therefore 
 leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us 
 go on unto perfection ; not laying again the foundation 
 of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward 
 God, of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of 
 hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal 
 judgment.” Now the difficulty of this passage turns 
 on the words, “ of the doctrine of baptisms and of 
 laying on of hands.” For why is “ baptism ” called 
 specially “a doctrine ,” when the others are not? 
 Surely if any of the points named be less fittingly 
 called a doctrine than the others, it would be baptism 
 and the laying on of hands. Moreover the word 
 “ foundation” which precedes, had served to signify 
 what we should now express by the term fundamental 
 doctrine. ‘ Omitting to notice (as we should say) the 
 fundamental doctrines of repentance and faith—“ of 
 the doctrine of baptisms.” ’ Why this tautology ? But 
 there is another difficulty. “ The doctrine of bap¬ 
 tisms.” Now it is firmly maintained by all Christians, 
 that baptism is but once to be administered. How 
 then does the apostle speak of baptisms , in the plural?* 
 
 * Take hereupon part of Bloomfield’s note in his Greek Testa¬ 
 ment. “ The plural here involves some difficulty; there being but 
 one Christian baptism ; and to take the word in a distributive sense 
 would be harsh. Most commentators regard it as plural for singular, 
 and denoting Christian baptism; alleging a similar use in a///,ara, 
 Kccebica, ‘7T02VZiai J &c.; yet they have never proved by a single 
 
35 
 
 Some, in order to get rid of the difficulty, have said, 
 that it means the various purifications under the Jewish 
 law. This is overthrown by the context, which directly 
 denies it. The apostle is speaking of the first principles 
 of the doctrine “ of Christ,” that is, of Christian 
 doctrine. 
 
 But there is a further, and as I believe, insuperable 
 difficulty to translating it as it stands. The two words 
 of which the phrase consists are violently wrested from 
 the order in which they stand in the Greek. And for 
 this there is no authority. The phrase should be trans¬ 
 lated “ the baptisms of doctrine .” But perhaps this 
 may be thought to involve yet greater difficulty. A 
 few remarks however will clear it up. The word trans¬ 
 lated “ doctrine” {hibayri) is, in Titus i, 9, translated 
 “ as he hath been taught”—“ Holding fast the faithful 
 word, as he hath been taught.” 
 
 It signifies in almost all the passages of the New 
 Testament ‘ personal teaching,’ or ‘ instruction.’ Now 
 
 example that this idiom extended to ; which indeed 
 
 were very improbable.” The learned reader will I think at once 
 allow, that neither in Hebrew nor in Greek is it permitted to alter 
 at will the relations of two construct nouns. pj/d is a 
 
 “ den of dragons” but cannot reverse the nouns. H a^arrj 
 rou ffhovrov is “ the deceitfulness of riches” not “ the riches of 
 deceitfulness.” In some cases indeed it is thought that by 
 Hendiadys the second noun may be taken as an adjective. But 
 here the noun cannot be taken adjectively. The Hebrew trans¬ 
 lations of the New Testament manifest the truth of what is here 
 stated. They saw that the sense would be very different according 
 as they adhered to the Greek or the English order of the words. 
 Hence, coinciding with the view given by the English, the one has 
 
 rvfracon np^n and the other mVacon rmm & 
 
 should be, as I suppose, "1D1D rVlVOtD Th e 
 
 T£ following connects hihayrig with ztnQzffzug (as it appears to me) 
 in a manner that confirms the whole of the foregoing: /SaTrrtgfiuv 
 dida^/ig, ZKiOzGiug rz yzi^uv, and proves that the places of didd^ri^ 
 and /3afiT/<7 ( u.wv cannot be interchanged. Baptismatum doctrinae, 
 impositionis quoque manuum— Vulg . 
 
36 
 
 let us look at this and the next clause, and the sense 
 yielded is simple and agreeable with other Scriptures. 
 “ Not laying again the foundation of the baptisms of 
 instruction, and of the laying on of hands.” The 
 Vulgate, Beza, and the Bibles of Tyndal and Cranmer, 
 take it in the order here given. 
 
 There are then, two baptisms , the first called here 
 “ the baptism of instruction ;” the second, “ the bap¬ 
 tism of the laying on of hands.” These have been 
 before presented to the reader as the baptism of water, 
 and the baptism of the Holy Ghost. The baptism of 
 water is also that of instruction, according to the words 
 of the Lord. “ Go teach all nations, baptizing them.” 
 “ Go ye unto all the world and preach the gospel to 
 every creature. He that believeth and is baptized 
 shall be saved.” And the succeeding words manifest 
 the second baptism or that of power. “ And these 
 signs shall follow them that believe : in my name they 
 shall cast out devils : they shall speak with new tongues; 
 they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any 
 deadly thing it shall not hurt them : they shall lay 
 hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” Instances 
 of the instruction necessarily given before baptism with 
 water, we see in the case of Philip and the Eunuch : 
 (Acts viii,) and in the case of Paul and the disciples of 
 John at Ephesus : (Acts xix.) 
 
 But the second baptism was that of the laying on of 
 , hands. This is equivalent to the expression, the bap¬ 
 tism of the Holy Ghost. “ Thus they laid their hands 
 on them and they received the Holy Ghost." “ Give 
 me also this power, that on whomsoever I may lay 
 hands , he may receive the Holy Ghost:" Acts viii, 
 17, 19. ‘‘And when Paul had laid his hands on 
 them , the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake 
 with tongues, and prophesied :” Acts xix, 6. “ Neg¬ 
 
 lect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by 
 prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presby¬ 
 tery :” 1 Tim. iv, 14. “ Stir up the gift of God which 
 is in thee by the putting on of my hands ;” 2 Tim. i, 6. 
 
37 
 
 Whence it appears that the baptism of the Holy 
 Ghost, so far from being one of the deep things of God, 
 is one of the first principles of the Christian faith! 
 What marvel then that the church is so fallen, when 
 it not only has it not, but does not even see the neces¬ 
 sity for it! But the passage contains farther evidence. 
 
 “ For it is impossible for those who were once 
 enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and 
 were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have 
 tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the 
 coming age (/ isWovrog a/uvog) if they shall fall away, to 
 renew them again unto repentance : seeing they crucify 
 to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to 
 an open shame. For the land which drinketh in the 
 rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs 
 meet for them by whom it is also tilled, receiveth bless¬ 
 ing from God. But that which beareth thorns and 
 briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end 
 is to be burned.” 
 
 And first a word respecting the doctrine of these 
 verses. Many believers have been stumbled at it, as 
 though it contained a sentiment at variance with other 
 passages, which assert the believer’s assured perse¬ 
 verance to the end. But there is no real contradiction. 
 The apostle does not say, that any will fall away—he 
 says it only with an if; “ If they shall fall away.” 
 But it may be answered, ‘ Even so, that “ if” supposes 
 the possibility of the thing.’ Let us grant it: and 
 even then the case stands good. For many things are 
 possible , that never have and never will take place. 
 It is possible that fifty dice flung up at once into the 
 air may fall with the ace side uppermost. And yet it 
 has never taken place since the world began; nor, I 
 suppose, ever will. Thus then it is with the Christian. 
 He may fall away; he is quite liable and certain to fall 
 away, in himself and if left to himself. But his 
 destruction, though quite possible, as far as he himself 
 is concerned, never has taken place and never will. 
 The thing is possible , but never yet actual , never to 
 
 E 
 
38 
 
 be realized, is the solution of the difficulty, as it regards 
 the general doctrine. And the fear lest the possibility 
 should occur, is one of the means in the hand of God of 
 preventing so fatal a result. 
 
 .Next let us regard the character here described. 
 Our examination will be rendered easier, by adopting 
 an arrangement that will show how the parts of the 
 passage are put together. 
 
 “ It is impossible for those 
 
 a \ And have tasted the good word of God, 
 b 1 And the powers of the age to come, 
 
 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance.” 
 
 This is a case of what is called parallelism. That is, 
 the sentence marked A, answers to, and contains some¬ 
 thing of a like kind to that marked a; and the sen¬ 
 tence B, answers in like manner to b. 
 
 Now the lines A and a describe (as I believe may be 
 shown) the result of instruction. For Paul describes 
 by this very term the effect of the instruction commu¬ 
 nicated by him. “ To me .... is this grace given to 
 preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of 
 Christ; and to make all men see ((puncai vccvrag —the 
 word used above in sentence A) what is the fellowship, 
 &c. : Eph. iii, 8. The sentiment of sentence a is also 
 attributed to the preaching of the gospel. “As new¬ 
 born babes desire the sincere milk of the word, . 
 
 if so be (or ‘ since’) ye have tasted that the Lord is 
 gracious 1 Peter ii, 3. 
 
 The other two sentences B and b describe corres¬ 
 pondingly the effects of the second baptism , or that of 
 the laying on of hands. By means of this they were 
 made to taste “the heavenly gift;” and this has been 
 shown (in the earlier part of the present tract) to signify 
 the baptism of the Spirit, in contradistinction from that 
 of water. But it is explained more exactly still in the 
 
39 
 
 next line. It is declared to be “a partaking of the 
 Holy Ghost,” in one of his many endowments, as pro¬ 
 phecy or healing-. For in the first baptism, the Holy 
 Ghost gives —faith; in the second, he is given —in 
 power. Lastly, in the line b , it is described as a 
 tasting of “ the powers of the age to come”—that is, 
 the powers of the millennium. For the gifts of the 
 Holy Ghost, which, during this dispensation were 
 intended only for believers, will then be bestowed on 
 all, because all will believe—“ I will pour out my Spirit 
 upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters 
 shall prophesy.” The gifts of the Holy Ghost now, 
 are foreshadowings of that time of joy; the gift of 
 healing—of that day when sickness shall be cast out, 
 and life vastly prolonged ; and the taking up serpents— 
 of that time, when “ the sucking child shall play on 
 the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his 
 hand on the cockatrice’ den : they shall not hurt nor 
 destroy in all my holy mountain:” (Isaiah xi, 8, 9) 
 and the discerning of spirits—of that time when the 
 evil shall be gathered out from among the just. 
 
 But to return. I would ask, is the character here 
 described an ordinary or an extraordinary one ? If it be 
 said, an extraordinary one—then the apostle’s example 
 . is beside the purpose at which he is aiming. For he is 
 endeavoring to deter from falling back to^ Judaism, 
 those who were weak in the faith. In order to this, it 
 was most fitting that he should describe the terrible 
 results of apostacy as exemplified in a common case. 
 But suppose him to say—‘ If a Christian, extraordi¬ 
 narily enlightened and gifted , fall away, he cannot be 
 restored,’ and the common Hebrew Christians would 
 not have felt any fear impressed as regarded themselves. 
 Be it so, they would have said, that there is no hope for 
 one apostatizing after extraordinary enlightening and 
 endowment of the Spirit. This does not touch us; 
 we have but his ordinary graces. The instance adduced 
 says nothing affecting our case. 
 
 Nor will any think that an extraordinary state is 
 
40 
 
 described, who hold that apostacy from grace is possible, 
 and that the warning applies to us. 
 
 I conclude then that Paul is presenting to our notice 
 the case of an ordinary Christian. And if so, why 
 have we not “ the heavenly gift” of the Spirit’s bap¬ 
 tism ? Why do we not possess, as the apostle supposes 
 that the common Christian should, “ powers of the age 
 to come?” It is no marvel that our Christianity 
 is so weak and our graces so low, if one of the 
 fundamentals of the Christian faith is not only not 
 possessed, but not even taught or held, and by many 
 expressly denied. ‘ The age of miracle is past/ With 
 it then has passed a fundamental article of faith, and 
 the choice privilege of the church ! But the following 
 words also confirm the belief that the ordinary Christian 
 is intended. For how does the apostle proceed ? “ For 
 the land (yrj) that drinketh in the rain that cometh oft 
 upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by 
 whom it is also tilled ( '/.at ysMoysirai) receiveth blessing 
 from God ; but that which beareth thorns and briers is 
 rejected and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be 
 burned.” 
 
 Here the ordinary results of land are set before our 
 eyes; answering to the case of the ordinary Christian. 
 And in order to the harvest two processes are needful— 
 one within human power—the tillage ; one wholly to be 
 looked for from God—the rain. So in the case’before 
 us. The tillage answers to instruction given by man, 
 or the baptism of water, which denotes its completion. 
 The other, the descending rain, answers to the baptism 
 of the Spirit. As then, from land tilled by the husband¬ 
 man, and watered by the rain of heaven, (“ the heavenly 
 gift" as it regards the land,) we expect useful herbs 
 and a result of profit; so from the Christian instructed 
 by man, and gifted by God the Spirit, blessed results 
 of temper and conduct are justly expected. But if the 
 reverse ensues, nothing can be looked for but judgment. 
 What can be done more for land than tillage and 
 watering ? If, after this, it bear only thorns and briers, 
 
41 
 
 it is good for nought—its “end is to be burned/’ I 
 conclude then, that, as the descent of rain on lands is 
 an ordinary thing, so did the apostle suppose the 
 bestowal of the Spirit’s miraculous gifts to be intended 
 for all believers. 
 
 The necessity for this baptism is seen in every one of 
 its several aspects. First, as it regards the church. 
 These gifts were given to each member of the Christian 
 church to profit the whole : 1 Cor. xii, 7. They were 
 given “ for the perfecting (or “ knitting together,” 
 xaragr/ff/Aov.—applied to the mending of nets: Matt, 
 iv, 21 :) of the saints , for the work of the ministry , 
 for the edifying of the body of Christ , until we all 
 come in the unity of the faith , and of the kyiowledge 
 of the Son of God to a perfect man\ ,} Eph. iv, 
 7—13. Will any say that all these purposes are 
 already attained, or likely to be attained without them ? 
 Are we so wise and holy as not to need them ? They 
 are necessary also for the dependence of each member 
 of the church upon the other. No man was complete 
 in himself. The speaker of tongues was not complete 
 without the interpreter; nor the prophet without the 
 discerner of spirits. Hence each one was obliged to be 
 aided by his fellow’s gift, and one part sympathized 
 with another. 
 
 Moreover when the gifts departed, the church fell 
 back necessarily to the Jewish standing under the law, 
 and while some are plunged deeper into that gulf than 
 others, all are more or less immersed in it. Our worship 
 now is, in its mode, synagogue worship. The rule in the 
 synagogue was human : so is it now. Men choose and 
 men rule. Then the Holy Ghost appointed : Acts xx, 28. 
 Then those who ministered, did so by gifts imparted 
 miraculously on believing; and hence the most unlearned 
 was equally able to edify the body as the most learned ; 
 for he spake by the Holy Ghost. Now human, natural 
 abilities, sharpened by study and education are em¬ 
 ployed ; and, such as a man was, before he believed, in 
 natural and acquired endowments, such is he afterwards. 
 
 e 2 
 
42 
 
 Hence scarcely a few in any congregation can be trusted 
 to speak to its edification. When then the gifts de¬ 
 parted, the extempore teachings of the Holy Ghost, 
 were exchanged for liturgies; and God was worshipped 
 in the letter instead of in Spirit and in truth. So in 
 preaching. Our standing now is just that under the 
 law. Certain persons mentioned by Nehemiah and the 
 Levites “ read in the book of the law of God distinctly , 
 and gave the sense and caused them to understand the 
 reading:” Neh. viii, 8. What does preaching now 
 beyond this? But in those days there was fresh 
 revelation , or some new song, or hymn, or prophecy, 
 taught by the Spirit at their every assembly: 1 Cor. 
 xiv, 6, 26. 
 
 Human preparation and natural ability stand now 
 in the place of divine gift, and spontaneous power. 
 These our Lord, in his conversation with the woman of 
 Samaria, contrasted, noticing the difference between 
 the mode of her quenching her thirst by obtaining 
 water from the well; and the mode in which those who 
 received from him the gift of God would be satisfied. 
 She needed daily toil and apparatus in order to obtain 
 a sufficiency of water to meet daily wants. The rope, 
 and the bucket, and a daily journey were requisite to 
 furnish the household—an apt emblem of the human toil 
 requisite in preparing sermons and employing natural 
 abilities, to obtain a sufficiency of truth wherewith to 
 refresh the waiting congregation. But Christ’s gift was 
 to be “ a fountain of water springing up unto ever¬ 
 lasting life.” Paul, and those inspired by the Holy 
 Spirit, needed no study, no excogitation to prepare them 
 for their duties. Spontaneously the Spirit brought 
 before them his ever new and refreshing discoveries, 
 and enabled them to give utterance thereto. 
 
 But secondly it was designed also for a testimony to 
 the world —to the world in its two divisions of Jew and 
 Gentile. How strong the proof to the Jew, arising 
 from the baptism of the Spirit, that Jesus of Nazareth 
 was the predicted Messiah ! The spirit of prophecy at 
 
43 
 
 distant intervals, and in a few persons, testified under 
 the law, of Messiah to come. After the ascension, the 
 spirit of prophecy, deserting the Pharisees and those 
 zealous of the law, inspired some in every Christian 
 church to testify to Jesus as the Messiah; and signs 
 and wonders were every where done in his name. No 
 believer was to be found who had not, through faith in 
 his name, some miraculous endowment. Was then 
 Moses’ law divine, because he himself wrought miracles'? 
 The religion of Jesus must be so, on evidence a hundred¬ 
 fold stronger! Not only did he work miracles himself; 
 he imparted gifts of miracle to his every follower! 
 
 To the Gentiles the proof was equally strong. Here 
 were powers superior to their highest magical attain¬ 
 ment. The utmost effects of power that were exhibited 
 in their temples, were daily exerted by ignorant and 
 poor Christians. And we see how the blaze of the power 
 of the Holy Ghost caused magical practices to wax 
 dim, in the result of the struggle at Ephesus, between 
 Paganism and Christianity. 
 
 Now the testimony to the world for Christ is grown 
 faint. The tidings of a miraculous kingdom to appear 
 were hushed, as soon as the gifts of the “age to come” 
 departed from the church. The church no longer 
 testifies to the world of judgment to come, by heavenly 
 powers startling the reluctant to listen and inquire. Its 
 preaching is not with the power of God, but with study, 
 preparation, and arts of composition and delivery, which 
 the world can understand and sympathize with. Its 
 sharp, clear, vivid trumpet-note of testimony has died 
 away. 
 
 Its testimony of God’s love has also been despoiled 
 of power. When gifts of healing were in the church, 
 how strong the proof of the kindness of God, even to 
 the mind of the unbeliever! Beneficence was made 
 evident even to the senses. ‘ How much more gracious 
 then, must be the message, to recommend which these 
 gifts were given ! ’ was the evident lesson taught to the 
 unbeliever by the voice of God. 
 
44 
 
 But I cannot here enter any farther into detail. The 
 gifts were a testimony to the flesh of a higher life and 
 power than its own. To the angels , they bare witness 
 of the wisdom of God : Eph. iii, 10. How marvellous 
 must it have seemed to them and how glorious, that 
 beings so weak and ignorant as men, should yet, when 
 joined to Christ in his church, wield, each in his several 
 allotted sphere, almost every attribute of God! One 
 while, reading the heart; at another, foretelling the 
 secrets of God ; at another, healing diseases ; at another, 
 uttering his wisdom; at another, bidding the dead arise ! 
 To Satan it was a testimony of judgment to come, and 
 that he himself will be cast out of his usurped empire 
 by the very powers then exercised. To the believer it 
 was the proof of God’s indwelling; and of his sonship : 
 1 John iii, 241 And the nearness it gave him to God, 
 and the Holy Spirit’s mighty energies on his soul, greatly 
 edified and strengthened him : 1 Cor. xiv, 4. Now the 
 believer is not different in point of power from the 
 world’ly man. He is now without any proof to show to 
 the unbeliever that he is born again of a heavenly race, 
 and a Son of God. He is now too often fascinated 
 by the world, instead of “zealous for spiritual gifts.” 
 
 Lastly, the same conclusion is warranted also by the 
 concluding words. Here the heart of man is compared 
 to land tilled and sown, and expected to bring forth 
 fruit. In order to this, rain descends upon it from 
 heaven, and the cultivator expect a harvest. This 
 answers to the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the 
 believer; the “heavenly gift” of rain answers to the 
 “ heavenly gift” in the higher sense, of the Holy Ghost. 
 If then the land, in spite of the tilling and the rain, 
 bear only thorns and briers, it is rejected and is fit only 
 for a curse. Now the case supposed here with regard 
 to the land, is only an ordinary one. So then I con¬ 
 clude, the case put by the apostle was only an ordinary 
 one then among all Christians, and therefore that the 
 gifts of the Holy Ghost were bestowed on all; and 
 therefore that they ought to be possessed now. 
 
45 
 
 The first baptism is a passing into water, for the 
 purpose of washing or purification : the second, (where 
 the emblem of water is made use of,) is spoken of as the 
 possession of a springing fountain or flowing river. By 
 this difference it is marked, that the former communi¬ 
 cated nothing, and was only a temporary effect; while 
 the latter was abiding — a “ gift,” a lasting, beneficial 
 possession. The former was only a passing through 
 water lying without them; the latter was represented 
 as the continual issuing of water from within them. 
 Or, the first is spoken of as the external application of 
 water; the other, the internal advantage of it, for the 
 allaying of thirst and the communication of it for the 
 benefit of others. These remarks will lead us to 
 observe, that under the Old Testament, types of this 
 gospel blessing were given. Thus, as we have seen, 
 the baptism by water was foreshown by the passing of all 
 Israel through the sea. But the baptism of the Spirit 
 was represented on two other and later occasions. The 
 first occurred in Exod. xvii, 1—4.— u And all the con¬ 
 gregation of the children of Israel journeyed from 
 the wilderness of Sin, after their journeys, according to 
 the commandment of the Lord, and pitched in Rephi- 
 dim : and there was no water for the people to drink. 
 Wherefore the people did chide with Moses, and said, 
 Give us water that we may drink. And Moses said 
 unto them, Why chide ye with me ? wherefore do ye 
 tempt the Lord ? And the people thirsted there for 
 water; and the people murmured against Moses, and 
 said, Wherefore is this that thou hast brought us up 
 out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and our cattle 
 with thirst ? And Moses cried nnto the Lord, saying, 
 What shall I do unto this people ? they be almost ready 
 to stone me.” 
 
 In this passage Israel is represented as chiding with 
 Moses, because of the non-fulfilment of his promise in 
 bringing them up out of Egypt. So the same people 
 were afterwards dissatisfied with Christ, because the 
 kingdom of heaven came not as early as they expected 
 
46 
 
 it. They require water of Moses; but Moses had none 
 to give; even as the law could not bestow the Holy 
 Ghost and his gifts. God then informs him how the 
 water is to be procured. “ Go on before the people, 
 and take with thee some of the elders of Israel; and 
 thy rod wherewith thou smotest the river, take in thine 
 hand, and go. Behold, I will stand before thee upon 
 the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and 
 there shall come water out of it, that the people may 
 drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of 
 Israel:” Exod. xvii, 5, 6. 
 
 Now as “ the elders of Israel” were to be present at 
 the smiting of the rock, so were “ the elders of Israel” 
 present beholding the crucifixion of our Lord: Matt, 
 xxvii, 41. And by the rod is intended the curse of the 
 law; for it is described as that which brought the wrath 
 on Egypt. “The rod wherewith thou smotest the 
 river , take in thine hand.” So Christ was “ made a 
 curse for us: as it is written, Cursed is every one that 
 hangeth on a tree: (and for the very purpose here 
 supposed:) that the blessing of Abraham might come 
 on the Gentiles; that we might receive the promise of 
 the Spirit Gal. iii, 13, 14. Moreover the whole 
 Trinity is here set forth to us. The Father standing 
 on the rock : so God is revealed to us in Christ. The 
 Lord Jesus represented by the rock : “ that rock was 
 Christ: ” 1 Cor. x. The Holy Spirit represented to 
 us by the water: the drink was “ spiritual drink.” 
 And as from the smiting of the rock by Moses , the 
 water came forth; so in consequence of Christ’s bearing 
 the curse of the law , the blessing of the Holy Ghost 
 was given. It was well called Messah and Meribah— 
 the Temptation and Chiding; and Israel could only 
 have expected wrath in recompence of their murmur- 
 ings ;• yet blessing came instead of judgment. It is to 
 be observed, however, that the analogy does not stop 
 here. While they were encamped in this very spot, 
 Amalek comes and wars against Israel, who is under the 
 leading of Joshua, with various success; but the Lord 
 
47 
 
 issues his declaration that he would have war from 
 generation to generation with Amalek, until he had put 
 out the remembrance of that nation from under heaven. 
 Even so, soon after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, 
 came the Romans and warred with Israel, and at a 
 time when partly Moses and partly Jesus (the true 
 Joshua) were ruling Israel, and prophecy represents the 
 Romans and their city as an abomination before God, 
 to be blotted out from under heaven. 
 
 But another point of interest and importance arises 
 from this history. We hear henceforth nothing more 
 of the water or what became of it. St. Paul informs 
 us indeed that it followed them ; but how far we cannot 
 tell, or how they were supplied during thirty-eight 
 years. So, during many centuries of the Christian 
 era, indeed almost immediately after the bestowal of 
 the powers of the Holy Ghost, we hear little or 
 nothing of it, nor can we tell how it ceased, or why, or 
 when. But there is much hope for the future in what 
 follows, nay, there is the certainty of the restoration of 
 the gifts of the Spirit. 
 
 Just when Israel is about to enter into the promised 
 land, a like cry and murmuring for water again arise : 
 Nurn. xx, 2—6.—“ And there was no water for the 
 congregation: and they gathered themselves together 
 against Moses and against Aaron. And the people 
 chode with Moses, and spake, saying, Would God that 
 we had died when our brethren died before the Lord! 
 And why have ye brought up the congregation of the 
 Lord into this wilderness, that we and our cattle should 
 die there? And wherefore have ye made us to come 
 up out of Egypt, to bring us in unto this evil place ? 
 it is no place of seed, or of figs, or of vines, or of 
 pomegranates; neither is there any water to drink. 
 And Moses and Aaron went from the presence of the 
 assembly unto the door of the tabernacle of the con¬ 
 gregation, and they fell upon their faces : and the glory 
 of the Lord appeared unto them.” 
 
 God’s command to Moses in providing a supply is now 
 
48 
 
 different. “ Take the rod, and gather thou the assembly 
 
 (mj/n ritf bnpn —iTcxXriGiam rqv ffwayc^y'/jv) to¬ 
 gether, thou and Aaron thy brother, and speak ye to 
 the rock before their eyes: and it shall give forth its 
 water, and thou shalt bring forth to them water out of 
 the rock; so thou shalt give the congregation and their 
 beasts drink.” Here it is to be observed, that Israel 
 is no longer described as a u people ,” but as a “ con- 
 gation” Moses is not to smite the rock, but only to 
 “ speak to it.” The rock is called by another name; 
 yet still it is spoken of as “ the rock.” (First it was 
 
 called Hazoor—Then Hasela J/7D1T) In the 
 second instance it is spoken of as containing and pos- 
 sessing the water as its own. “ It shall give forth its 
 water,” and so needing but to be addressed after its 
 first smiting. From which I gather the lesson, that 
 the first rock typifies Jesus in the day of his humilia¬ 
 tion ; the second, now that he is exalted. At first he 
 must be smitten with the curse, ere the Holy Spirit 
 (the promised blessing of Abraham) could come on Jew 
 and Gentile. But after that once smiting, the Holy 
 Spirit is ready to be bestowed on all that thirst, and to 
 all that speak to the rock in faith. 
 
 It foretels most certainly that the gifts of the Holy 
 Ghost will again be poured forth, and that more 
 abundantly than at first, for it is written on this occa¬ 
 sion, “ The water came out abundantly .” 
 
 But the gospel blessing was to be superior to its 
 type. The water of the rock, was but a spring without 
 them. The water of the Holy Ghost was to be a 
 fountain of living water within them. “ Shall be in 
 him a fountain (ct^tj) of water springing up unto ever¬ 
 lasting life.” 
 
 The two baptisms were also foreshadowed in the 
 consecration of the Jewish priests. “ Aaron and his 
 sons thou shalt bring unto the door of the tabernacle 
 of the congregation, and shalt wash them with water ; ” 
 Exod. xxix,4. Here is the baptism of water presented 
 
49 
 
 to us. Then ensued the clothing of Aaron with the 
 holy garments, answering to the clothing with Christ’s 
 righteousness those who believe in him—“ the putting 
 on of Christ.” Next we have the putting on of the 
 “mitre” upon his head; in token of the priestly 
 office; and “the holy crown upon the mitre.” For 
 Christians are anointed like their great High Priest, to 
 be both “ kings and priests Rev. i, 6. But for 
 complete consecration to these offices, anointing was 
 necessary. “Then thou shalt take the anointing oil, 
 and pour it upon his head and anoint him .” Here 
 the second baptism is exhibited ; the anointing with 
 the Holy Ghost. The Holy Spirit’s endowments are so 
 spoken of in the New Testament. “ God anointed 
 Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with 
 power , who went about doing good, and healing all 
 that were oppressed of the devil:” Acts x, 38. So 
 Luke iv, 18; Acts iv, 27. Christians are to be 
 anointed with the like holy oil. “ He that hath 
 anointed us is God, who hath also sealed us and given 
 us the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts: ” 2 Cor. 
 i, 21. And again, “ye have an unction from the 
 Holy One, and know all things.” “ The anointing 
 which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye 
 need not that any man teach you: but as the same 
 anointing teacheth you all things, and is truth, and is 
 no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide 
 in him :” 1 John ii, 27. 
 
 But observe again; how long was the anointing of 
 Aaron’s sons to last? “ Their anointing shall surely be 
 an everlasting priesthood throughout their genera¬ 
 tions Shall the anointing of the law on Aaron’s 
 sons be continually throughout their generations; and 
 shall not the anointing of the gospel priests (i. e. all 
 believers: Rev. i, 6.) have as continual and broad 
 a reference ? 
 
 The descent of the Holy Ghost in fire had also, as I 
 believe, a peculiar significance, arising from the Old 
 Testament history. As soon as the tabernacle was 
 
 F 
 
50 
 
 \ 
 
 completed, the glory of the Lord descended on it, 
 “ and the cloud of the Lord was upon the tabernacle 
 by day, and fire was on it by night in the sight of all 
 the house of Israel, throughout all their journeys.” 
 Exod. xl, 38. 
 
 The out-pouring of the Holy Ghost then, made visible 
 in tongues of fire which abode on each of the disciples, 
 was intended, as I suppose, to show that the assembly 
 and body of believers was now the true temple of God, 
 and that the temple of Jerusalem was no longer well¬ 
 pleasing in the sight of the Father, ever since his Son 
 had pronounced it desolate. Hence also Paul says, he 
 desired that “ the power of Christ might rest (ecrjtfzqvuffy) 
 upon him 2 Cor. xii, 9. Moreover the descent of 
 the Holy Ghost in fire upon these his tabernacles, 
 proved that God regarded the time as night; since the 
 Sun of righteousness was no longer in the horizon of 
 earth. “ Fire was on it by night. 7 ’ It is also worthy 
 of note that the cloud is spoken of as an agent in the 
 baptism of water. The mode of application of the fire 
 in the second baptism is thus distinguished from the 
 application of the water in the first baptism. The bap¬ 
 tized in water went down to it, and came up from it, 
 leaving it behind, his washing presenting the emblem of 
 sin washed away. The baptism with fire on the other 
 hand was effected by the descent of the fire on the 
 parties baptized, and its abiding upon them. The one 
 marked defilement taken away—a momentary act; the 
 other, power bestowed—a permanent glory and advan¬ 
 tage. This was God’s sealing of the individual; as 
 kings mark their letters with a peculiar mark to desig¬ 
 nate them as coming from themselves. As it is written, 
 “ So she (Jezebel) wrote letters in Ahab’s name, and 
 sealed them with his seal'. 77 1 Kings xxi, 8. And 
 
 again, “ Write ye also for the Jews.in the king’s 
 
 name, and seal it with the king’s ring; for the writing 
 which is written in the king’s name, and sealed with 
 the king’s ring, may no man reverse:” Esther viii, 8. 
 But the epistles of God now are believers. “ Ye are 
 
51 
 
 our epistle written in our hearts; known and read of 
 all men ; forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be 
 the epistle of Christ, written, not with ink, hut with 
 the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, 
 but in fleshy tables of the heart2 Cor. iii, 2, 3. 
 
 But a seal, and even the seal-royal, may be copied, 
 and a spurious impression sent forth as the true. Evil 
 spirits may imitate the baptism of the Holy Ghost. 
 How then shall we know whether one inspired is speak¬ 
 ing by an evil spirit, or by the Holy Ghost? This is a 
 point of the highest importance, and hence the Lord in 
 his mercy has most graciously met it, and satisfied our 
 need. Among the gifts is one adapted to this particular 
 point—‘‘the discerning of spirits.” And the apostle 
 recommends, that while the prophet is speaking, the 
 rest should judge or discern the spirit by which he was 
 speaking: 1 Cor. xiv, 29. For the church of Thessa- 
 lonica had, as it appears, been disturbed by the utter¬ 
 ance of a prophet inspired by some false spirit, and 
 by a pretended letter from the Apostle Paul, affirming 
 that the day of Christ was instantly to begin : 2 Thess. 
 ii, 2. Hence they are exhorted to “ prove (or try) all 
 things;” and this exhortation comes after the com¬ 
 mands—“Quench not the Spirit. Despise not pro- 
 phesyings 1 Thess. v, 19—21. 
 
 But since the Holy Spirit foresaw that the gifts 
 would not actually be at all times with the church, 
 and yet the imminent danger that would befal it, if an 
 evil spirit should be received and obeyed by the church, 
 in place of himself, he has therefore given seven marks 
 whereby to try any spirit. 
 
 1 . The first test is the confession of Jesus Christ 
 come in flesh. “ Beloved believe not every spirit, but 
 try the spirits whether they be of God; because many 
 false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby 
 know ye the Spirit of God: every spirit that con¬ 
 fessed that Jesus Christ is come (sXyjXvdora) in the flesh 
 is of God: and every spirit that confessed not that 
 
52 
 
 Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God; and 
 this is the spirit of Antichrist, whereof ye have heard 
 that it should come, and even now already it is in the 
 
 world. Hereby know we the spirit of truth , 
 
 and the spirit of error: 1 John iv, 1—6. Many 
 indeed talk of “ trying the spirits” as if it meant trying 
 doctrines by Scripture : but the personal test proposed 
 shows the absurdity of such an idea. How can a 
 doctrine (transubstantiation for instance) confess or 
 deny Christ come in the flesh ? Besides the apostle 
 still more clearly explains himself, by teaching that the 
 reason of the command was, that “ many false prophets 
 are gone out into the world.” The spirits to be tried 
 then were the spirits of those who were inspired and 
 prophesied : and the indwelling spirit and not the mart 
 was to be questioned. So our Lord in his converse 
 with the demoniac of Gadara addressed the spirits and 
 not the man. 
 
 2. The second test is Christ’s coming again in the 
 flesh. “ Many deceivers are entered into the world 
 who confess not that Jesus Christ is coming 
 
 in the flesh 2 John 7. 
 
 3. The third is the Messiahship of Jesus. “ Who is 
 the liar (o -vj/s uaryj.s) but he that denieth that Jesus is the 
 Messiah ? He is the antichrist (o avr/^pcrrog) that de¬ 
 nieth the Father and the Son 1 John ii, 22. 
 
 4 . The fourth is the acknowledgment of the Lord- 
 ship of Jesus, or confessing him to be Jehovah. “ No 
 one (that is, none under inspiration) can say that Jesus 
 is Lord, (or “Jehovah”— Kvpog answering to nifT in 
 Hebrew) but by the Holy Ghost:” 1 Cor. xii, 3. 
 
 5 . The fifth is a negative proof. No one inspired 
 who pronounces Jesus accursed, can be speaking by the 
 Holy Ghost:” 1 Cor. xii, 3. 
 
 6 . The sixth is the confession, that the commandments 
 regulating the worship of the churches (such as that 
 forbidding women to speak) were dictated by Jehovah. 
 “ If any man think himself to be a prophet or spiritual^ 
 
53 
 
 (that is, inspired,) let him acknowledge that the things 
 which I write unto you are commandments of the 
 Lord : (xug/ou stfftv zvroXa/)” 1 Cor. xiv, 37. 
 
 7. The seventh is the not predicting the day of 
 Christ as instantly at hand, without reference to the 
 apostacy and Man of Sin as about to precede it: 
 2 Thess. ii, 2, 3. 
 
 I conclude then, that no baptism of water is the bap¬ 
 tism of Christ. Christ’s is the baptism of fire:—the 
 baptism of the Holy Ghost. The two baptisms differ 
 in almost every point in which they can be compared. 
 
 The first, is 
 A command and dutv 
 
 Administered by man 
 
 An ordinance addressed to man 
 
 Represented sin taken away 
 
 Represented death 
 
 Water-emblem of weakness 
 
 Bestowed a name 
 
 The seal of discipleship from man 
 
 Spoke of self-condemnation 
 
 Supposes justifying faith 
 
 Made a subject of Christ’s kingdom 
 
 Administered by inferiors 
 
 The second is 
 
 A promise, and blessing, and 
 privilege 
 
 Administered by Christ 
 A gift received from God 
 Added some lasting endowment 
 Bestowed power and intelligence 
 Fire-emblem of power 
 Granted a heavenly faculty 
 The true seal from God 
 Betokened God’s acceptance 
 Conferred miraculous faith 
 Authenticated a witness of it 
 Conveyed through apostles 
 
 The first baptism was, in the name of Christ , admin¬ 
 istered by a disciple, and it supposed Christ to be 
 absent, and that his authority in this matter has been 
 delegated to another. “ Go ye , baptize ye,” are 
 Christ’s words to the disciples. It is your baptism, 
 not mine. As John’s baptism of water was his, so is 
 this yours. And therefore Paul is jealous lest any 
 should think that he baptized into his own name. But 
 the baptism of the Holy Ghost was in every sense 
 Christ’s, not merely as sanctioned by him, like the first, 
 but also as conferred by him : the power over the Spirit 
 belonging alone to himself. 
 
 How then can any think that this inestimable boon— 
 the great privilege, the one great promise of the present 
 
 f 2 
 
54 
 
 dispensation has passed away beyond recovery ? Of 
 the two baptisms, if one is to pass away, we should 
 conceive it necessary that the preparatory baptism of 
 water should be abandoned. But if even that be made 
 enduring- by the command of Christ, how much more 
 the baptism dependent on himself; that with a view to 
 which t.he other was submitted to ? . If the baptism of 
 John the servant is not only retained, but expanded 
 and made binding on all believers; much more must 
 the master s baptism be lasting, and open to all united 
 to him by faith ! If a command be lasting, under a 
 dispensation of grace; much more a promise which 
 carries with it the blessing of the dispensation! And 
 this very point shows why it is not received now. It 
 is a promise, and the promise is not claimed. Yet no 
 promise of God held by grace can ever be withdrawn. 
 
 “ The gifts . of God are without repentance 
 
 Bom. xi, 29. A rite or ceremony might pass away— 
 But if even the rite of water baptism be retained, 
 much more must the reality of God’s bestowal remain ! 
 The gift of the Holy Ghost is neither rite nor ceremony. 
 And it is an extreme insult to. the Holy Ghost, to 
 suppose that any gift of God can be useless or super¬ 
 seded by natural abilities. Was not human nature the 
 same in the days of the apostles as now ? Were not 
 its abilities in those days what they are at present ? If 
 then they are needless now , they were so then. 
 
 The baptism with water was not to pass away, 
 though given before Jesus was glorified. But the 
 baptism of the Holy Ghost was not possible till then. 
 How much less can this pass away which is the witness 
 of the glory of Christ! If Christ’s glory before God 
 is to pass away, then so may the baptism which is the 
 token and proof of it. The baptism of water which is 
 the witness of the disciple’s sinfulness and unworthi¬ 
 ness remains. And is the baptism of the Spirit to pass 
 away, which is the proof of the worthiness of the 
 Messiah, the Son of God? As lasting, surely, as the 
 testimony of the sinfulness of man } must be the 
 
55 
 
 witness of the perfection of Christ! The baptism of 
 John began during his mortal life; yet it ceases not. 
 The baptism of Jesus did not begin till his endless resur¬ 
 rection-life, as if to prove that it is to run on unceas¬ 
 ingly. So Paul argues with regard to the Redeemer’s 
 ability to save. “ He is able to save to the uttermost 
 
 . seeing he ever liveth .” So we may argue of 
 
 his baptism. “ He is able to baptize to the last day of 
 this dispensation, seeing he ever liveth .” 
 
 It is only on this ground (I conceive) that our 
 Savior’s words can be seen to be true. “ It is expedient 
 for you that I go away; for if I go not away, the 
 Comforter will not come unto you:” John xvi, 7. 
 Jesus could be personally present with but one church 
 at once. The- Holy Spirit in his blessed gifts could and 
 would be not only in every church , but in every 
 believer; and more than the Redeemer’s powers (the 
 gift of tongues, for instance) would be exercised in the 
 church. But now under our present fallen state, in 
 what way is it true that it is expedient for us that 
 Christ should be away ? We have none now to whom 
 to carry our ecclesiastical and spiritual questions, that 
 they may be authoritatively decided. Then it was 
 possible while Jesus was on the earth. It was still 
 more blessedly possible while the Holy Ghost spake in 
 every Christian church. It is not so now. 
 
 Again, the whole question in the Acts of the 
 Apostles and in the Epistles, is dealt with as referring 
 to abiding masses , and not as a question of time. It 
 is first communicated to the Jews and Samaritans— 
 and then to the Gentiles. It was therefore viewed, 
 and rightly viewed, as a question—whether God would 
 bestow the gifts of his Spirit on the Samaritan as well 
 as on the Jew, on the Gentile as well as on the natural 
 descendant of Abraham? This being settled by fact, 
 as long as the Jew shall be a Jew, and the Gentile a 
 Gentile, the question is at rest. It was a promise and 
 a baptism for the Gentiles, as Gentiles: Gal. iii, 14; 
 Eph. iii, 6. So long then as the difference of Jew and 
 
56 
 
 Gentile shall subsist, so long the baptism of the Spirit. 
 It never was a question in the minds of any in the 
 apostle’s day, whether it was intended for those of one 
 age or century, rather than another. The only age 
 (cauv) in God’s view is his own dispensation, (a/wv.) 
 So long then as the present age lasts, and Christ’s 
 appearing has not introduced “the age to come,” 
 so long is the promise of the gifts of the Spirit in force. 
 
 The baptism of the Spirit is not only not to cease in 
 this age, but it is, in fuller measure and universal 
 extent, to be the glory of the age to come. “ I will 
 pour out my Spirit on all flesh : and your sons and 
 your daughters shall prophesy .” The cessation of 
 prophecy therefore since the days of the apostles is not 
 its final cessation. It shall be restored in far deeper 
 flow, in the glorious days of Christ’s kingdom. It 
 will be restored before Christ’s appearing. The two 
 witnesses are “two prophets:” Rev. xi, 10. The 
 earth and Babylon are plagued of God for “ shedding 
 the blood of saints and prophets : ” Rev. xvi, 6 ; xviii, 
 24. In the latter days “ false prophets shall arise and 
 shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch that, if 
 it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect: ” 
 Matt, xxiv, 24. Shall then no true prophets arise to 
 meet and oppose them ? Yes, Paul, speaking of the 
 evil men and seducers of the last perilous days, says, 
 “ Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do 
 these also resist the truth.But they shall pro¬ 
 
 ceed no further, for their folly shall be made manifest 
 unto all, as their’s also was 2 Tim. iii, 8, 9. That 
 is, by miracle will these apostates resist the true 
 miracles of God: but, as the Egyptian magicians were 
 at last overpowered and driven from the field, so will 
 they in like manner be defeated by superior powers of 
 miracle. 
 
 Which is the superior of the two baptisms, none can 
 doubt. When Cornelius and his friends are baptized 
 with the Holy Ghost, the apostle says to his fellow 
 disciples, “ Can any one forbid water that these should 
 
57 
 
 not be baptized which have received the Holy Ghost?’ 1 ’ 
 That is, the greater includes the less. But when the 
 Samaritans are baptized by Philip, the Holy Ghost is 
 not given till apostles come down and specially pray 
 for it. That is, the less does not include the greater. 
 The two are entirely independent of each other. So 
 with our Lord Jesus and John. John baptizes with 
 water, but cannot baptize with the Holy Ghost;' for 
 the less does not include the greater. Jesus is the 
 baptizer with the Holy Ghost, and he baptizes with 
 water, for the greater includes the less. “ John did 
 no miracle,” and his baptism was not miraculous; 
 Jesus did miracles abundantly, and his baptism was 
 and is miraculous. But water baptism, even as sanc¬ 
 tioned by the Savior’s presence, and administered by 
 the hands of his disciples, carried with it no more 
 miraculous effects than that of John. But both are to 
 abide in the church, both are sanctioned by the same 
 authority. Peter assigns as the reason why the 
 Gentiles were to be baptized with water, that they had 
 already been baptized with the Holy Ghost. The 
 Quakers affirm, that the baptism of the Holy Ghost 
 supersedes the necessity of that of water. How strange, 
 that what an apostle urges as the reason for the 
 observance of water baptism, they produce as a ground 
 for neglecting and refusing it! 
 
 The baptism of water, as instituted by Christ, differs 
 from the same as practised by John in these respects. 
 First, John’s was to the Jews only : that of Jesus is 
 for all nations. Secondly, John’s was a profession of 
 faith in Messiah to come : that of Jesus, more definite, 
 supposes faith in himself as the Messiah, and in his 
 revelation of the Godhead in the threefold characters of 
 the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. But in every 
 other respect, so far as I can see, they are the same in 
 character; though the Epistles show that the immer¬ 
 sion in water had a meaning deeper than John under¬ 
 stood; betokening, as it does, the believer’s death, 
 burial, and resurrection with Christ. But both are 
 
58 
 
 preparations for Christ’s kingdom of glory. The 
 baptism of water is God’s requirement from the 
 disciple, the baptism of the Holy Ghost is God’s 
 qualifying him for the kingdom. The baptism of 
 repentance and faith, showed the man to be a child of 
 Abraham; the baptism of the Holy Spirit conferred 
 the blessing of Abraham Gal. iii, 7, 14. 
 
 Those baptized with the baptism of water, were 
 not baptized with the baptism of Messiah or Christ. 
 Therefore, the baptism of water is not the baptism 
 of Christ. John the Baptist distinctly affirmed this : 
 that though he baptized with water, this was not the 
 baptism of Christ. Those rightly baptized with water, 
 were yet to look for that of fire. We see this in 
 those baptized by John, in the case of the Samaritans, 
 and the disciples of Ephesus. This was only the 
 baptism of submission , Christ’s of desirableness and 
 privilege. The requirements of the baptism of water 
 now, are still what they were in John’s day—repentance 
 and faith. Its intention is to draw forth the virtual or 
 actual confession of sin on the part of the receiver; and 
 to present the emblem of the washing away of sin on 
 the part of God. But there is yet a higher and super¬ 
 natural baptism to be received from the Lord Jesus 
 himself. 
 
 To all Christians then I would say, You are indeed 
 living below your privileges, so long as you are destitute 
 of some spiritual and supernatural gift of the Holy 
 Ghost. If you have been baptized with the disciples’ 
 baptism, you still need the baptism bestowed by the 
 Master. O seek for it! 
 
 Finally, do you ask for whom it is intended ? 
 
 It is to be granted, 1.—To the asking : John iv, 10 ; 
 Luke xi, 13. 2.—To the believing : John vii, 37—39. 
 3.—To the called of God : Acts ii, 39. 4.—To the 
 obedient; Acts v, 32. 
 
23p tf)* same &utJ)or. 
 
 THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN, Literal and 
 Future ; being an Exposition of that Book: to which are 
 added, Remarks in Refutation of the Ideas that the Pope is 
 the Man of Sin, and that Popery is the Apostacy predicted 
 by St. Paul, with Special Reference to Dr. O’Sullivan on the 
 Apostacy. 12 mo. Price 65 . Qd. 
 
 ISAIAH UNFULFILLED; being an Exposition of the 
 Prophet, with a New Translation and Notes: to which are 
 added Two Dissertations; one on the Giants, or Sons of 
 God, of Genesis vi; and the other a Comparative Estimate 
 of the Hebrew and Greek Texts. 8vo. Price 10s. Qd. 
 
 GOSPEL ANALOGIES: and other Sermons. 12mo. 
 Price 7s. 
 
 CALVINISM, by Calvin : with an Introductory Essay 
 by the Editor. 18mo. Price 2 s. 
 
 HADES: or the Place of Departed Spirits. 12mo. 
 Price Is. 6d. 
 
 THE GIFTS OF THE HOLY GHOST AND 
 
 MIRACLE ESSENTIALLY CONNECTED WITH JUSTIECATION 
 
 by faith. 12 mo. Price 9 d. 
 

 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 .. . ■■ 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ( ,'r'r 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 i > 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 . ■; r i •