meant of _Water_, and not of the _Spirit_; which if it be, then it will
exclude Baptism of the _Spirit_, as well as of _Water_?_
[Sidenote: _Answ._] I _answer_, Such as ask the Question, I suppose,
speak it not as doubting that this was said of Water-baptism, which is
more than manifest. [Sidenote: _That which converts to _Christ_ is the
Baptism of the Spirit._] For since the Apostle _Paul_’s Message was,
_To turn People from Darkness to Light_, and _convert them to God_;
and that as many as are thus turned and converted, (_so as to have the
Answer of a good Conscience toward God, and to have put on Christ, and
be risen with him in Newness of Life_) are baptized with the Baptism of
the Spirit. But who will say that only those few mentioned there to be
baptized by _Paul_ were come to this? Or that to turn or bring them to
this Condition was not, even admitting our Adversaries Interpretation,
as principal a Part of _Paul_’s Ministry as any other? Since then our
Adversaries do take this Place for _Water-baptism_, as indeed it is,
we may lawfully, taking it so also, urge it upon them. Why the Word
_Baptism_ and _Baptizing_ is used by the Apostle, where that of _Water_
and not of the _Spirit_ is only understood, shall hereafter be spoken
to. [Sidenote: Part 2.] I come now to consider the Reasons alleged by
such as plead for _Water-baptism_, which are also the Objections used
against the Discontinuance of it.
§. VIII. [Sidenote: Obj. 1.] _First_, Some object, [117]_That Christ,
who had the Spirit above Measure, was notwithstanding baptized with
Water_. As _Nic. Arnoldus_ against this _Thesis_, Sect. 46. of his
_Theological Exercitation_.
[117] John 3. 34.
[Sidenote: _Answ._] I _answer_, So was he also _circumcised_; it will
not follow from thence that _Circumcision_ is to continue: [Sidenote:
_Why _Christ_ was _baptized_ by _John.] For it behoved Christ to
fulfil all Righteousness, not only the Ministry of _John_, but the
_Law_ also, therefore did he observe the _Jewish Feasts_ and _Rites_,
and keep the _Passover_. It will not thence follow that _Christians_
ought to do so now; and therefore Christ, _Matt._ iii. 15. gives _John_
this Reason of his being baptized, desiring him to _suffer it to be so
now_; whereby he sufficiently intimates that he intended not thereby to
perpetuate it as an Ordinance to his Disciples.
[Sidenote: Obj. 2.] _Secondly_, They object, _Matt._ xxviii. 19. _Go
ye therefore and teach all Nations, baptizing them in the Name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost_.
[Sidenote: _Answ._] This is the great Objection, and upon which they
build the whole _Superstructure_; whereunto the first general and sound
_Answer_ is, by granting the whole; [Sidenote: _What Baptism _Christ_
doth mean in _Mat. 28.] but putting them to prove that _Water_ is
here meant, since the Text is silent of it. And though in Reason it
be sufficient upon our Part that we concede the whole expressed in
the Place, but deny that it is by _Water_, which is an Addition to
the Text, yet I shall premise some Reasons why we do so, and then
consider the Reasons alleged by those that will have _Water_ to be here
understood.
[Sidenote: Arg. 1.] The _First_ is a Maxim yielded to by all, _That we
ought not to go from the literal Signification of the Text, except some
urgent Necessity force us thereunto_.
But no urgent Necessity in this Place forceth us thereunto:
Therefore we ought not to go from it.
[Sidenote: Arg. 2.] _Secondly_, That Baptism which Christ commanded his
Apostles was the one Baptism, _id est_, his own Baptism:
But the one Baptism, which is Christ’s Baptism, is not with _Water_, as
we have already proved:
Therefore the Baptism commanded by Christ to his Apostles was not
_Water-baptism_.
[Sidenote: Arg. 3.] _Thirdly_, That Baptism which Christ commanded his
Apostles was such, that as many as were therewith baptized did put on
Christ:
But this is not true of _Water-baptism_:
Therefore, _&c._
[Sidenote: Arg. 4.] _Fourthly_, The Baptism commanded by Christ to his
Apostles was not _John_’s Baptism:
But Baptism with Water was _John_’s Baptism:
Therefore, _&c._
[Sidenote: Alleg. 1.] But _First_, They allege, _That Christ’s Baptism,
though a Baptism with Water, did differ from _John_’s, because _John_
only baptized with Water unto Repentance, but Christ commands his
Disciples to baptize in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost;
reckoning that in this Form there lieth a great Difference betwixt the
Baptism of _John_ and that of _Christ.
I _answer_, In that _John_’s Baptism was unto Repentance, the
Difference lieth not there, because so is Christ’s also; yea, our
Adversaries will not deny but that _adult Persons_ that are to be
baptized ought, ere they are admitted to _Water-baptism_, to repent,
and confess their Sins: And that _Infants_ also, with a Respect to and
Consideration of their Baptism, ought to repent and confess; so that
the Difference lieth not here, since this of Repentance and Confession
agrees as well to _Christ_’s as to _John_’s Baptism. But in this our
_Adversaries_ are divided; for _Calvin_ will have _Christ_’s and
_John_’s to be all one, _Inst. Lib. 4. Cap. 15. Sect. 7, 8._ yet they
do differ, and the Difference is, in that the one is by Water, the
other not, _&c._
_Secondly_, As to what Christ saith, in commanding them to _baptize
in the Name of the Father, Son, and Spirit_, I confess that states
the Difference, and it is great; but that lies not only in admitting
_Water-baptism_ in this different Form, by a bare Expressing of these
Words: For as the Text says no such Thing, neither do I see how it can
be inferred from it. [Sidenote: _Of the Name of the Lord how taken in
Scripture._] For the Greek is [Greek: eis to onoma: εις το ονομα],
that is, _into the Name_; now the _Name_ of the _Lord_ is often taken
in Scripture for something else than a bare Sound of Words, or literal
Expression, even for his _Virtue_ and _Power_, as may appear from
_Psal._ liv. 3. _Cant._ i. 3. _Prov._ xviii. 10. and in many more.
[Sidenote: _The _Baptism_ into the _Name_, what it is._] Now that the
Apostles were by their Ministry to baptize the Nations _into this
Name_, _Virtue_, and _Power_, and that they did so, is evident by these
Testimonies of _Paul_ above-mentioned, where he saith, _That as many
of them as were baptized into Christ, have put on Christ_; this must
have been a _Baptizing into the Name_, i. e. _Power_ and _Virtue_, and
not a mere formal Expression of Words adjoined with Water-baptism;
because, as hath been above observed, it doth not follow as a natural
or necessary Consequence of it. I would have those who desire to have
their Faith built upon no other Foundation than the Testimony of
_God’s Spirit_, and _Scriptures_ of _Truth_, throughly to consider
whether there can be any Thing further alleged for this Interpretation
than what the Prejudice of Education and Influence of Tradition hath
imposed. Perhaps it may stumble the unwary and inconsiderate _Reader_,
as if the very Character of _Christianity_ were abolished, to tell him
plainly that this Scripture is not to be understood of _baptizing with
Water_, and that this Form of _Baptizing in the Name of the Father,
Son, and Spirit_, hath no Warrant from _Matt._ xxviii. _&c._
[Sidenote: _Whether Christ did prescribe a Form of_ Baptism _in_ Matt.
28.] For which, besides the Reason taken from the Signification of
[_the Name_] as being the _Virtue_ and _Power_ above expressed, let
it be considered, that if it had been a _Form_ prescribed by Christ
to his Apostles, then surely they would have made use of that Form in
the administering of _Water-baptism_ to such as they baptized with
Water; but though particular Mention be made in divers Places of the
_Acts_ who were baptized, and how; and though it be particularly
expressed that they _baptized_ such and such, as _Acts_ ii. 41. and
viii. 12, 13. 38. and ix. 18. and x. 48. and xvi. 15. and xviii. 8.
yet there is not a Word of this Form. And in two Places, _Acts_ viii.
16. and xix. 5. it is said of some that they were _baptized in the
Name of the Lord Jesus_; by which it yet more appears, that either
the Author of this _History_ hath been very defective, who having so
often Occasion to mention this, yet omitteth so substantial a Part of
_Baptism_ (which were to accuse the _Holy Ghost_, by whose Guidance
_Luke_ wrote it) or else that the Apostles did no Ways understand that
_Christ_ by his Commission, _Matt._ xxviii. did enjoin them such a Form
of _Water-baptism_, seeing they did not use it. And therefore it is
safer to conclude, that what they did in administering _Water-baptism_,
they did not by Virtue of that Commission, else they would have so
used it; for our Adversaries I suppose would judge it a great _Heresy_
to administer _Water-baptism_ without that, or only in the _Name of
Jesus_, without Mention of _Father_, or _Spirit_, as it is expresly
said they did, in the two Places above-cited.
[Sidenote: Alleg. 2.] _Secondly_, They say, _If this were not
understood of_ Water-baptism, _it would be a Tautology, and all one
with_ Teaching.
[Sidenote: _Answ._] I say, _Nay: Baptizing with the Spirit_ is somewhat
further than teaching, or informing the Understanding; [Sidenote:
_How Teaching and Baptizing differ._] for it imports a _Reaching
to_, and _melting the Heart_, whereby it is _turned_, as well as the
_Understanding informed_. Besides, we find often in the Scripture, that
_Teaching_ and _Instructing_ are put together, without any Absurdity,
or needless Tautology; and yet these two have a greater Affinity than
_Teaching_ and _Baptizing_ with the _Spirit_.
[Sidenote: Alleg. 3.] _Thirdly_, They say, _Baptism in this Place must
be understood with _Water_, because it is the Action of the Apostles;
and so cannot be the Baptism of the Spirit, which is the Work of
Christ, and his Grace; not of Man_, &c.
[Sidenote: _Answ._] [Sidenote: _The Baptism with the _Spirit_ ascribed
to godly Men as Instruments._] I answer; _Baptism with the Spirit_,
though not wrought without _Christ_ and his _Grace_, is instrumentally
done by Men fitted of God for that Purpose; and therefore no Absurdity
follows, that _Baptism_ with the _Spirit_ should be expressed as the
Action of the Apostles. For though it be Christ by his Grace that
gives _spiritual Gifts_, yet the Apostle, _Rom._ i. 11. speaks of HIS
_imparting to them spiritual Gifts_; and he tells the _Corinthians_,
that HE had _begotten them through the Gospel_, 1 Cor. iv. 15. And
yet to beget People to the _Faith_, is the Work of _Christ_ and his
_Grace_, not of Men. To convert the Heart, is properly the Work of
Christ; and yet the Scripture oftentimes ascribes it to Men, as being
the Instruments: And since _Paul_’s Commission was, _To turn People
from Darkness to Light_ (though that be not done without _Christ_
co-operating by his Grace) so may also _Baptizing with the Spirit_ be
expressed, as performable by Man as the Instrument, though the Work of
_Christ_’s _Grace_ be needful to concur thereunto. So that it is no
Absurdity to say, That the Apostles did administer the _Baptism_ of the
_Spirit_.
[Sidenote: Alleg. 4.] _Lastly_, They say, _That since Christ saith
here, that he will be with his Disciples to the End of the World,
therefore _Water-baptism_ must continue so long_.
[Sidenote: _Answ._] If he had been speaking here of Water-baptism, then
that might have been urged; but seeing that is denied, and proved to be
false, nothing from thence can be gathered: He speaking of the Baptism
of the _Spirit_, which we freely confess doth remain to the End of the
World; yea, so long as Christ’s Presence abideth with his Children.
§. IX. [Sidenote: Obj. 3.] _Thirdly_, They object _the constant
Practice of the Apostles in the Primitive Church, who_, they say,
_did always administer _Water-baptism_ to such as they converted to
the Faith of Christ; and hence also they further urge that of _Matt.
xxviii._ to have been meant of _Water_; or else the Apostles did not
understand it, because in _baptizing_ they used _Water_; or that in so
doing they walked without a Commission_.
[Sidenote: _Answ._] I _answer_, That it was the _constant Practice
of the Apostles_, is denied; for we have shewn, in the Example of
_Paul_, that it was not so; since it were most absurd to judge that
he converted only those few, even of the Church of _Corinth_, whom
he saith he baptized; nor were it less absurd to think that that was
a _constant apostolick Practice_, which he, who was not inferior to
the chiefest of the Apostles, and who declares he laboured as much as
they all, rejoiceth he was so little in. But further; the Conclusion
inferred from the Apostles Practice of _baptizing with Water_, to
evince that they understood _Matt._ xxviii. of Water-baptism, doth
not hold: [Sidenote: _How the _Apostles_ baptized._] For though they
baptized with Water, it will not follow that either they did it by
Virtue of that Commission, or that they mistook that Place; nor can
there be any _Medium_ brought, that will infer such a Conclusion.
As to the other insinuated Absurdity, _That they did it without a
Commission_; it is none at all: For they might have done it by a
_Permission_, as being in use before _Christ’s Death_; and because
the People, nursed up with outward Ceremonies, could not be weaned
wholly from them. And thus they used other Things, as _Circumcision_,
and _legal Purifications_, which yet they had no Commission from
Christ to do: To which we shall speak more at Length in the following
_Proposition_, concerning the _Supper_.
[Sidenote: Object.] But if from the _Sameness_ of the Word, because
Christ bids them _baptize_, and they afterwards in the Use of Water are
said to _baptize_, it be judged probable _that they did understand that
Commission_, Matt. xxviii. _to authorize them to baptize with_ Water,
_and accordingly practised it_;
[Sidenote: _Answ._] Although it should be granted, that for a Season
they did so far mistake it, as to judge that _Water_ belonged to that
Baptism, (which however I find no Necessity of granting) yet I see
not any great Absurdity would thence follow. For it is plain they did
mistake that Commission, as to a main Part of it, for a Season; as
where he bids them _Go, teach all Nations_; since some Time after they
judged it unlawful to teach the _Gentiles_; [Sidenote: _The Apostles
did scruple the Teaching the _Gentiles.] yea, _Peter_ himself
scrupled it, until by a Vision constrained thereunto; for which, after
he had done it, he was for a Season (until they were better informed)
judged by the rest of his Brethren. Now, if the Education of the
Apostles as _Jews_, and their Propensity to adhere and stick to the
_Jewish Religion_, did so far influence them, that even after Christ’s
_Resurrection_, and the _Pouring forth_ of the _Spirit_, they could not
receive nor admit of the Teaching of the _Gentiles_, though Christ, in
his Commission to them, commanded them to preach to them; what further
Absurdity were it to suppose, that, through the like Mistake, the
chiefest of them having been the Disciples of _John_, and his Baptism
being so much prized there among the _Jews_, they also took Christ’s
Baptism, intended by him of the Spirit, to be that of Water, which was
_John_’s, and accordingly practised it for a Season? It suffices us,
that if they were so mistaken, (though I say not that they were so)
they did not always remain under that Mistake: Else _Peter_ would not
have said of the Baptism which now saves, _That it is not a putting
away of the Filth of the Flesh_, which certainly Water-baptism is.
But further, They urge much _Peter_’s baptizing _Cornelius_; in which
they press two Things, First, _That Water-baptism is used, even to
those that had received the Spirit_. Secondly, _That it is said
positively, He commanded them to be baptized_, Acts x. 47, 48.
But neither of these doth necessarily infer Water-baptism to belong to
the _New Covenant Dispensation_, nor yet to be a perpetual standing
_Ordinance_ in the Church. [Sidenote: _Whether _Peter_’s baptizing
some with Water makes it a standing Ordinance to the Church._] For
_First_, All that this will amount to, was, That _Peter_ at that Time
baptized these Men; but that he did it by Virtue of that Commission,
_Matt._ xxviii. remains yet to be proved. And how doth the Baptizing
with Water, after the Receiving of the Holy Ghost, prove the Case, more
than the Use of _Circumcision_, and other _legal Rites_, acknowledged
to have been performed by him afterwards? Also, it is no Wonder if
_Peter_, who thought it so strange (notwithstanding all that had been
professed before, and spoken by Christ) that the _Gentiles_ should be
made Partakers of the Gospel, and with great Difficulty, not without
an extraordinary Impulse thereunto, was brought to come to them, and
eat with them, was apt to put this Ceremony upon them; which being,
as it were, the particular Dispensation of _John_, the _Forerunner_
of Christ, seemed to have greater Affinity with the Gospel, than the
other _Jewish Ceremonies_ then used by the _Church_; but that will no
ways infer our Adversaries Conclusion. _Secondly_, As to these Words,
_And he commanded them to be baptized_; it declareth Matter of _Fact_,
not of _Right_, and amounteth to no more, than that _Peter_ did at
that Time, _pro hic & nunc_, command those Persons to be _baptized
with Water_, which is not denied: But it saith nothing that _Peter_
commanded Water-baptism to be a standing and perpetual Ordinance to the
Church; neither can any Man of sound Reason say, if he heed what he
says, That a Command in _Matter of Fact_ to particular Persons, doth
infer the _Thing commanded_ to be of general Obligation to all, if it
be not otherwise founded upon some positive Precept. Why doth _Peter_’s
commanding _Cornelius_ and his Houshold to be baptized at that Time
infer _Water-baptism_ to continue, more than his constraining (which is
more than commanding) the _Gentiles_ in General to be _circumcised_,
and observe the _Law_? We find at that Time, when _Peter_ baptized
_Cornelius_, it was not yet determined whether the _Gentiles_ should
not be _circumcised_; but on the contrary, it was the most general
Sense of the _Church_ that _they should_: And therefore no Wonder if
they thought it needful at that Time that they should be baptized;
which had more Affinity with the Gospel, and was a Burthen less
grievous.
§. X. [Sidenote: Obj. 4.] _Fourthly_, They object _from the
Signification of the Word _[baptize]_ which is as much as to _dip_ and
_wash_ with _Water_; alleging thence that the very Word imports a being
baptized with_ Water.
[Sidenote: _Answ._] This Objection is very weak. [Sidenote: Baptizing
_signifies Dipping or Washing with Water._] For since _baptizing_ with
Water was a Rite among the _Jews_, as _Paulus Riccius_ sheweth, even
before the Coming of _John_; and that the Ceremony received that Name
from the Nature of the Practice, as used both by the _Jews_ and by
_John_; yet we find that Christ and his Apostles frequently make use of
these Terms to a more spiritual Signification. _Circumcision_ was only
used and understood among the _Jews_ to be _that of the Flesh_; but
the Apostle tells us of the _Circumcision of the Heart and Spirit made
without Hands_. So that though Baptism was used among the _Jews_ only
to signify a _Washing with Water_, yet both _John_, Christ, and his
Apostles, speak of a being _baptized with the Spirit, and with Fire_;
which they make the peculiar Baptism of Christ, as contra-distinguished
from that of _Water_, which was _John_’s, as is above shewn. So that
though Baptism among the _Jews_ was only understood of _Water_, yet
among _Christians_ it is very well understood of the _Spirit_ without
_Water_: As we see Christ and his Apostles spiritually to understand
Things, under the Terms of what had been _Shadows_ before. Thus
Christ, speaking of his _Body_, (though the _Jews_ mistook him) said,
_Destroy this Temple, and in three Days I will raise it up_; and many
more that might be instanced. But if the _Etymology_ of the Word
should be tenaciously adhered to, it would militate against most of
our Adversaries, as well as against us: [Sidenote: [Greek: Baptizô:
Βαπτιζω] _immergo_, _intingo_, to plunge and dip in.] For the Greek
[Greek: Baptizô: Βαπτιζω] signifies _immergo_, that is, to _plunge_
and _dip in_; and that was the proper Use of Water-baptism among the
_Jews_, and also by _John_, and the primitive Christians, who used it;
whereas our Adversaries, for the most Part, only _sprinkle_ a little
Water upon the Forehead, which doth not at all answer to the Word
[_Baptism._] [Sidenote: _Those that of old used _Water-baptism_ were
_dipped_ and _plunged_, and those that were only _sprinkled_, were
not admitted to any Office in the Church, _and why.] Yea, those of
old among Christians that used Water-baptism, thought this _Dipping_
or _Plunging_ so needful, that they thus _dipped_ Children: And
forasmuch as it was judged that it might prove hurtful to some weak
Constitutions, _Sprinkling_, to prevent that Hurt, was introduced; yet
then it was likewise appointed, that such as were only _sprinkled_, and
not _dipped_, should not be admitted to have any Office in the Church,
as not being sufficiently _baptized_. So that if our Adversaries will
stick to the Word, they must alter their Method of _Sprinkling_.
[Sidenote: Obj. 5.] _Fifthly_, They object, _John_ iii. 5. _Except a
Man be born of _Water_, and of the _Spirit_, &c. hence inferring the
Necessity of _Water-baptism_, as well as of the Spirit_.
[Sidenote: _Answ._] But if this prove any Thing, it will prove
Water-baptism to be of absolute Necessity; and therefore _Protestants_
rightly affirm, when this is urged upon them by _Papists_, to evince
the absolute Necessity of Water-baptism, that [_Water_] is not here
understood of outward Water; [Sidenote: _The Water that regenerates,
is mystical and inward_.] but mystically, of an inward Cleansing and
Washing. Even as where Christ speaks of being _baptized with Fire_,
it is not to be understood of outward material Fire, but only of
purifying, by a _Metonymy_; because to _purify_ is a proper Effect of
Fire, as to _wash_ and _make clean_ is of Water; where it can as little
be so understood, as where we are said to be _saved by the Washing of
Regeneration_, Tit. iii. 5. Yea, _Peter_ saith expresly, in the Place
often cited, as _Calvin_ well observes, [118]_That the _Baptism_ which
saves, is not the putting away of the Filth of the Flesh_. So that
since [_Water_] cannot be understood of outward Water, this can serve
nothing to prove Water-baptism.
[118] In the 4th Book of his _Instit._ C. 15.
[Sidenote: Object.] If it be said, That [_Water_] _imports here_
necessitatem præcepti, _though not_ medii;
[Sidenote: _Answ._] I _answer_, That is first to take it for granted
that outward Water is here understood; the contrary whereof we have
already proved. [Sidenote: _Necessitas præcepti _and_ medii _urged.]
Next, _Water_ and the _Spirit_ are placed here together, [_Except a
Man be born of_ Water _and the_ Spirit] where the Necessity of the
one is urged as much as of the other. Now if the Spirit be absolutely
necessary, so will also Water; and then we must either say, that _to be
born of the Spirit_ is not absolutely necessary, which all acknowledge
to be false; or else, that _Water_ is absolutely necessary; which,
as _Protestants_, we affirm, and have proved, is false: Else we must
confess, that _Water_ is not here understood of outward Water. For to
say that when _Water_ and the _Spirit_ are placed here just together,
and in the same Manner, though there be not any Difference or Ground
for it visible in the Text, or deducible from it, That the _Necessity_
of _Water_ is here _præcepti_, but not _medii_, but the _Necessity_ of
the _Spirit_ is both _medii_ and _præcepti_, is indeed confidently to
affirm, but not to prove.