THE BAPTISTS.

BY F. A. COX, D.D., LL.D.

Christian Church, have admitted this to be the primary signification and the primitive practice; and that the use of the term in the modern Greek corroborates this translation.

THE two great peculiarities of the Scripture, and in the history of the Baptist denomination respects the mode and subjects of baptism. In the former they differ from the Independents, or, as they are controversially called, the Pædobaptists; in the latter with the communions that agree with the Church of England, in thinking that children ought to be "discreetly dipped."

2. That the circumstances attending the administration of the ordinance of baptism at the introduction of Christianity, as recorded in the New Testament, are equally significant and conclusive. They remark that persons were "baptized in Jordan," (Matt. iii. 6; Mark i. 9 :)" in the river Jordan," (Mark i. 5 ;) that baptize cannot, therefore, mean to pour, because to pour applies to the element, not to the person; and in that case the water would be said to be poured upon the person, not the person poured in or into the water; nor can it mean to sprinkle, for it is evidently needless to place a person in a river to sprinkle a little water upon him, nor is it ever done by those who maintain that sprinkling is baptism. The Baptists also remark that Jesus, after having been baptized, went up

In support of their views respecting the MODE, they maintain that the Greek word, of which baptism is but the English form, properly and exclusively signifies immersion, and that, consequently, the command to baptize can only be fulfilled in this manner. Hence the idea entertained by many that the application of water in any way, by sprinkling, pouring, or plunging, as equally legitimate, according to the design of the institution, they entirely repudiate. In the critical discussion of the subject, some of their body also zealously argue that immersion is not at all a mode of baptism, but is baptism itself; on the same ground that to represent immersion as a mode of immersion would be a pal-straightway out of the water," (Matt. iii. pable absurdity; and this would seem 16;) that "both Philip and the eunuch obvious enough if it be admitted that went down into the water;" that the the Greek term can only be represented latter was baptized while there, and that by the word immersion. In proof of they both came “ up out of the water," this, the Baptists allege(Acts viii. 38, 89 ;) circumstances which 1. That the term is used in the sense plainly show that to baptize is to dip of immersion throughout the whole ex- under water; they also refer to the extent of Greek literature, as the dipping pression, "buried with Christ by bapof a pitcher in water, dipping an arrow tism," as implying that in baptism in poisonous matter, dipping a pen in persons were "buried" in the water; ink; that persons the most profoundly and that when the gift of the Spirit skilled in the original language of on the day of Pentecost, (Acts i. 5,) is

66

66

called a baptism, and our Lord says of son baptized went down into the water, his last agony, "I have a baptism to be and was, as it were, buried under it." baptized with," (Luke xii. 20;) there Bishop Pearce. Note on 1 Cor. xv. 29. is an evident allusion to the fulness of "We grant that baptism, then, (in the that gift, and the depth of those suffer- primitive times,) was by washing the ings, both of which find an emblem in whole body. Though we have thought immersion, but none in the use of a it lawful to disuse the manner of diplittle water, as in pouring or sprink-ping, and to use less water, yet we ling. presume not to change the use and sigBut as it regards the mode of bap-nification of it."-Baxter. On Matt. tism, this body of Christians contend iii. 6. The same writer says, "Therethat they are not distinguished from fore, in our baptism, we are dipped the vast mass of the Christian world. under water, as signifying we are They appeal to the testimonies of eminent dead and buried to sin."-On Rom. divines, not of their own body, and to vi. 4. "It being so expressly declared the practices of the Catholic, the old here (Rom. vi. 4, and Col. ii. 12) that English Episcopal Church, and to the we are buried with Christ in baptism, Greek and Armenian Churches of the by being buried under water, and the present day. The following may be argument to oblige us to a conformity regarded as a specimen of such Pædo- to his death by dying to sin being baptist evidence on the subject taken hence, and this immersion being religiously observed BY ALL CHRISTIANS FOR THIRTEEN CENTURIES, and approved by our church, and the change of it into sprinkling, even without any allowance from the Author of the institution, or any license from any council of the church, being that which the Romanist still urgeth to justify his refusal of the cup to the laity, if it were to be wished that this custom might again be of general use."-Whitby. Note on Rome vi. 4. "In England, of late years, I ever thought the parson baptized his own fingers, rather than the child."-Selden. "It is certain that, in the words of Rom. vi. 3, 4, there is an allusion to the manner of baptism, which was by immersion."Whitefield. Eighteen Sermons. "Buried with him in baptism.' It seems the part of candour to confess that here is an allusion to the manner of baptizing by immersion, as most usual in those early times.”—Doddridge. The same excellent writer, noticing the case of Philip and the eunuch, says, "It would be very unnatural to suppose that they went down into the water, merely that Philip might take up a little water in his hand to pour on the eunuch." "Mary Welsh, aged eleven days, was baptized, according to the first church,

They (the primitive Christians) led them into the water, and with no other garments but what might serve to cover nature, they at first laid them down in the water as a man might be laid in a grave, and then they said these words, I baptize or wash thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.' Then they raised them up again, and clean garments were put on them: from whence came the phrases of being baptized into Christ's death; of being buried with him by baptism into death, of our being risen with Christ, and of our putting on the Lord Jesus Christ; of putting off the old man and putting on the new. (Rom. vi. 3-5; Col. ii. 12, iii. 1-10; Rom. xiii. 14."-Bishop Burnet, Ex. xxxix. Art., p. 374. "To baptize signifies to plunge, as is granted by all the world."-Bishop Bossuet. "The word baptize signifies to immerse, and the right of immersion was observed by the ancient church; and from these words it may be inferred that baptism was administered by plunging the whole body under water." -Calvin. Obs. on John iii. 23. "The custom of the ancient churches was not sprinkling, but immersion."-Bishop Taylor. Duct. dubit. B. iii. "The per

It would be exceedingly easy to add to these statements multitudes of similar testimonies; such as that of

66

and the rule of the Church of England, concurrence of the sanctified mind is by immersion."-Wesley. Journal of the essential element of all Christian the time he passed in Georgia. obedience. One of their writers asks, as all do in one form of expression or another, Ought the profession of Christianity to be a matter of mere imposition, or a matter of free conviction and choice? and if religion be personal, all religious acts and ordinances must Vitringa." The act of baptizing is be so? It is plain that acts and ordithe immersion of believers in water;nances of a different description would this expresses the force of the word; be out of harmony with the character thus also it was performed by Christ of religion itself." "Believers, and his apostles ;"—or,

Beza. "Christ commanded us to be baptized, by which word it is certain immersion is signified;"—or,

and believers only," it is further said, Salmasius." Baptism is immer-"who have been convinced by the sion, and was administered in ancient Word and Spirit of God that they are times according to the force and mean- in a sinful and dangerous condition, and ing of the word ;"—or,

who have been guided by the same Archbishop Tillotson." Anciently, Word and Spirit to the Lord Jesus those who were baptized were im- Christ, as a Redeemer able and willing mersed and buried in the water, to re- to forgive, and sanctify, and save them; present their death to sin, and then did these, and these only, are the proper rise up again out of the water, to sig-subjects for the significant and solemn nify their entrance upon a new life, and ordinance of baptism." to these customs the apostle alludes, Romans vi. 2-6;"—or,

Dr. Campbell." The word baptize, both in sacred writers and classical, signifies to dip, to plunge, to immerse."

The words of Martin Luther are remarkable:-"I could wish that such as are to be baptized should be completely immersed into water, according to the meaning of the word, and the signification of the ordinance; not because I think it necessary, but it would be beautiful to have a full and perfect sign of so perfect and full a thing; as also, without doubt, it was instituted by Christ."

The Baptists plead the various instances recorded in the New Testament as confirmatory of their views of what they distinctively denominate "believers' baptism," as exclusively theirs. Those baptized by John confessed their sins. (Matt. iii. 6.) The Lord Jesus Christ gave the command to teach and baptize. (Matt. xxviii. 19; Mark xvi. 15, 16.) At the day of Pentecost, they who gladly received the word were baptized, and they afterwards continued steadfastly in the Apostles' doctrine and fellowship. (Acts ii. 41, 42, 47.) At Samaria, those who believed were baptized, both men With regard to the SUBJECTS of and women. (Acts viii. 12.) The baptism, the distinction of the Baptists eunuch openly avowed his faith, (in from other denominations of Christians reply to Philip's statement- - If thou is, that they require a personal profes- believest with all thine heart thou sion of faith in Christ as an indispen-mayest,) and went down into the wasable requisite to the ordinance. They ter and was baptized. (Acts viii. 35, insist on the absolutely personal nature of true religion, which in none of its acts can be performed by proxy, or that those who are unconscious, as infants, of what is done can be members of the Christian Church, or competent to its institutions; that, in fact, the

39.) Saul of Tarsus, after his sight was restored, and he had received the Holy Ghost, arose and was baptized. (Acts ix. 17, 18.) Cornelius and his friends heard Peter, received the Holy Ghost, and were baptized. (Acts x. 44-48.) Lydia heard Paul and Silas; the Lord

opened her heart, and she was baptized, connects it with the doctrine of the and her household. Paul afterwards Trinity; preaching and believing the went to her house and comforted the Gospel; fulfilling all righteousness; and brethren. (Acts xvi. 14, 15, 40.) The the promise of salvation. (Matt. iii. 15; jailor, and all his house, heard the xxviii. 19; Mark xvi. 16.) Paul conword, and were baptized, believing and nects it with the death, burial, and rejoicing in God. (Acts xvi. 32, 34.) resurrection of Christ; with the beCrispus, and all his house, and many liever's dying unto sin, living unto Corinthians, heard, believed, and were God, and putting on Christ. (Rom. vi. baptized. (Acts xviii. 8.) The disciples 3, 4; Gal. iii. 27.) He connects it of Ephesus heard and were baptized. also with "one body, one Spirit, one (Acts xix. 5.) The household of Ste- hope, one Lord, one faith, one God and phanus, baptized by Paul, were the Father of all." (Eph. iv. 4-6.) Peter first fruits of Achaia, and addicted connects it with the "remission of sins." themselves to the ministry of the saints. (Acts ii. 38.) And also with salvation (1 Cor. i. 16; xvi. 15.) and a good conscience. (1 Peter iii. 21.) To discontinue the ordinance would be to dissolve its connection with all these doctrines, duties, and privileges. And who, without authority from the Divine Author of the institution, can do this with impunity?

In opposition to many who deny the perpetuity of baptism, the Baptists maintain that the ordinance is as obligatory at the present time as it was at its first institution; assigning the following reasons for this persuasion:1. That baptism was divinely instituted as an ordinance of the Christian religion, and administered by inspired apostles to both Jews and Gentiles, is plain from the preceding remarks.

2. There is no intimation that the law of baptism was designed to be restricted to any nation, or limited to any period of time. It is a general law, without any restriction, except that which refers to character-" he that believeth."

3. A Divine law must continue obligatory until it is repealed by Divine authority. There is no intimation in the Scriptures that the law of baptism has been repealed, and therefore there is no reason to suppose its obligation has ceased.

4. The permanent duration of the ordinance is plainly implied in the promise, "Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world." (Matt. xxviii. 19, 20.) This important promise was given at the time the ordinance was instituted, and it plainly supposes the continuance of baptism 66 even to the end of the world."

5. Baptism is connected with the most important doctrines, duties, and privileges of the Gospel. The Saviour

6. Baptism answers all the purposes at this day which it answered in the first age of Christianity, and these are as needful now as they were then. No reason can be assigned for the observance of the ordinance in the Apostles' days, which will not apply in all its force to believers in every age of the Christian Church.

7. The above considerations afford incontestible proof of the perpetuity of Christian baptism, and show that its observance is as obligatory at present as it was in the days of the Apostles; and that it will continue to be as obbligatory until the consummation of all things.

8. It being thus evident from the Scriptures that baptism is designed by the Head of the Church to be co-existent with the Gospel system, as a constituent part of it, and co-extensive with repentance toward God and faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ; it is manifestly a great error to imagine that the obligation to baptism has ceased. There is not the slightest foundation for such opinion; against it there is the strongest evidence. Should this fall into the hands of any who dispute this statement, we would entreat them seriously to consider

whether they are not, through their | Peter command the Pentecostal converts mistaken opinions regarding the per- to be baptized? And is it not expressly petuity of water baptism, doing great recorded that they were baptized? Did dishonour to the Saviour by disobeying not the same inspired Apostle command his command, and to the Holy Spirit, by rejecting his written will, in setting aside what the Scriptures so plainly teach to be binding on all believers to the end of the world.

Cornelius and his friends to be baptized in water, and assign their being baptized in the Holy Ghost as a reason for their being baptized in water? "Can any man forbid water, that these should not 9. To suppose that the necessity of be baptized, who have received the water baptism is superseded by the Holy Ghost as well as we ?" Is it not baptism of the Holy Ghost, is mani-passing strange that what an inspired festly erroneous on two accounts :- Apostle urged as a reason for the obFirst: There is now, in the Scriptu- servance of water baptism, should be ral sense of the words, no baptism of adduced by some professing Christians the Spirit. No miraculous gift, no as a reason for their neglect of that converting operation, no sanctifying in- baptism? fluence of the Spirit, is ever, by the inspired writers, called the baptism of the Holy Ghost, except what took place on the day of Pentecost, and at the first calling of the Gentiles in the house of Cornelius. On these two occasions the promise of baptism in the Holy Ghost was fulfilled, and in reference to no other events do the sacred writers speak of the baptism of the Holy Ghost. The bestowment of the Spirit on these two occasions is quite different from every former and every subsequent testowment of the Spirit, so far as our knowledge extends. As the Word of God mentions no other baptism in the Holy Ghost than what took place at Pentecost, and in the house of Cornelius, we have no warrant to expect the Scriptural baptism of the Spirit in the present day. We may, indeed, experience the converting and sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit, but these influences are not the Scriptural baptism of the Spirit, nor ought we to call them the baptism of the Spirit. But if there is now, in the Scriptural sense, no baptism of the Spirit, how can we reasonably suppose that baptism in water is rendered unnecessary by our being baptized in the Spirit?

Secondly: But supposing every believer was as truly baptized in the Holy Ghost as Cornelius was, this would in no wise diminish his obligations to be baptized in water. Did not the Apostle

Having stated the principles, we proceed to a brief history of the Baptists. They claim for themselves the highest antiquity, inasmuch as they plead apostolic authority and practice, and find multitudes from the earliest times who have maintained their sentiments, and administered the ordinances of religion in the same manner. Mosheim states that the "true origin of that sect which acquired the denomination of Anabaptists, is hidden in the depths of antiquity;" and Cardinal_Hosius, chairman of the Council of Trent, in 1555, says, "if the truth of religion were to be judged of by the readiness and cheerfulness which a man of any sect shows in suffering, then the opinions and persuasions of no sect can be truer or surer than those of the Anabaptists; since there have been none for twelve hundred years past, that have been more grievously punished." Bishop Burgess remarks, that the early British churches bore a striking resemblance to the model institution at Jerusalem."

It must be observed that the denomination of Baptists as at present existing, regard the term Anabaptists as a term of reproach, because it seems to identify them with the Anabaptists of Munster, who were guilty of great excesses at the time of the Reformation in Germany, and adopted sentiments which they entirely disclaim. The only point in which there seems to be an agreement,