Part 29

He also observes, that though the original and natural signification of the word imports, to _dip_, to _plunge_, to _dye_; yet it also signifies to _wash_ or _cleanse_: Nevertheless, he thinks that it is so far from signifying nothing else but to _dip_ or _plunge_, that when it is to be understood in that sense, the words ought to be εμβάπτω, or εμβαπτιζω, rather than βαπτω, or βαπτίζω; and also that it no where signifies to _dip_, but as denoting a mode of, and in order to washing; and that it signifies to _wash_, in all good authors. He also refers to Scapula and Stephanus, as translating the word βαπτιζω by _lavo_, or _abluo_; and Suidas, as rendering it by _madefacio_, _lavo_, _abluo_, _purgo_, _mundo_: And he speaks of some authors, that he had searched in every place wherein they mention baptism, and that he found not one word to the purpose; and therefore concludes, that he was obliged to say, and was ready to make it good, that no honest man, who understands the Greek tongue, can deny the word to signify to _wash_, as well as to _dip_.[89]

Footnote 89:

Dr. Wall, in the appendix of his reply to Dr. Gale, mentions a remarkable instance, in which the mode of wetting or of applying water was certainly that of pouring, and not that of dipping. It is as follows:—St. Origen, when commenting on the Baptism of John, enquires thus of the Pharisees; “How could you think that Elias, when he should come, would _baptize_, who did not in Ahab’s time _baptize_ the wood upon the altar, which was to be washed before it was burnt by the Lord’s appearing in fire? But he ordered the priest to do that; not once only, but he says, do it the second time; and they did it the second time. And do it the third time; and they did it the third time. Therefore, how could it be likely that this man, who did not then _baptize_, but assigned that work to others, would himself _baptize_, when he should, according to the prophecy of Malachi, again appear here on earth?”

We find in the first book of Kings, xviii. 33, that the order given by Elijah was to fill four barrels with water, and _pour_ it on the wood and on the burnt offering. This _pouring of water_, Origen, that accurate scholar, who lived in the second century, and was well acquainted with the Greek classics, and Greek Testament, calls baptizing. In the very same sentence, he makes use of the Greek word _Baptizo_ four times; twice with express reference to the _Baptism_ of John; and twice with express reference to that _Baptism_ which took place in the days of the Prophet Elijah; which baptism, we are expressly told, was not performed by _dipping_ the wood and sacrifice into water, but by _pouring_ water upon them.

It is also evident, even from the frequent use of the word baptizo, by heathen authors, that it does not always signify a total immersion. Mr. Walker tells us, “that Porphyrie mentions a river in India, into which if an offender enters, or attempts to pass through it, he is immediately _baptized_ up to his head:” (_baptizetai mechri Kephales_.) Here a person is said to be baptized, although his head did not go under, but remained above the water. This certainly was not a total immersion.

“He also instances a case from Mr. Sydenham, as delivered by the oracle (viz. _askos baptize, dunai de toi ou themis esti_.”) In which instance, if _dunai_ signifies to plunge wholly under water, as it certainly does, then _baptize_ must signify something less than a total immersion.—“_Baptize him as a bottle, but it is not lawful to plunge him wholly under the water._” The baptism here described, resembles that of a blown bladder or bottle of leather, which when put into the water, will not sink to the bottom, but swim upon the top.

The same critical author mentions an instance from Schrevelii’s and Robertson’s Lexicons, 19th chapter, in which case, the primitive word _bapto_ signifies a wetting with water, that was certainly less, and very different from a total dipping or immersion. The sentence is this. (“_Baptei men askon, udor de ugron dunei pote._”) “_He indeed baptizeth a bladder or bottle, but it never goeth under the liquid water._”

To these instances, we might add a well known case, taken from a poem attributed to Homer, called the battle of the frogs and the mice, in which the lake is said to be _baptized_ by the blood of a frog. (_Ebapteto de aimati limne porphureo._) This lake was not _dipped_ into the blood of a frog; it was only _bespattered_ and tinged therewith.

We could easily multiply authorities if it were necessary. It appears undeniably evident from the Greek classicks, and from learned writers and commentators, both ancient and modern, that the word _baptizo_ has other significations besides that of a total dipping or immersion.

The most celebrated and respectable Lexicographers and criticks have often translated baptizo into the following Latin words, viz. _baptizo_, _mergo_, _immergo_, _tingo_, _intingo_, _lave_, _abluo_, _madefacio_, _purgo_, _mundo_. No one, I presume, will pretend that all these words are mentioned as being perfectly synonimous—of the same meaning exactly. And certainly if the word baptizo signify any thing less or different from a total immersion, then persons may be baptized in some other mode.

Besides, if it had been the intention of Christ and of his Apostles, to specify the mode, or to have restricted all christians to one and the same mode of baptizing, they might, for this purpose, have selected from the Greek language words of the most unequivocal and definite signification. If it had been their intention to specify the mode of _sprinkling_, they might have used the word _Rantizo_; if the mode of _pouring_, they might have used the word _Ekcheo_; if that mode of _bathing_ or _washing_, which is performed by the application of water with friction or rubbing, they might have used the word _Louo_; and if it had been their intention to specify the mode of _dipping_, they might have used the word _Dupto_ or _Duno_, &c.

REED’S APOLOGY.

Footnote 90:

Ἐις and ἐκ.

Footnote 91:

Ἐις τὴν Θαλασσαν.

Footnote 92:

Ἐκ.

Footnote 93:

_If any one has a mind to see how these particles ἐις and ἐκ, are used in the New Testament, he may consult Schmid. concord. in voc. ἐις and ἐκ, where there are a great number of places mentioned, in which these words are used; and, it will hardly be thought, by any impartial reader, that the greatest part of them can be rendered by, into or out of; but rather to, or from._

Footnote 94:

Γδατκ πολλα.

Footnote 95:

_See Lightfoot’s works, Vol. I. Page 500._

Footnote 96:

In Col. ii. 12. and context, is a succession of figures, designed, in different ways, to illustrate and enforce the same fact. Verse 11. “In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision, _made without hands_, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ.” That is, in putting off the old man, you are circumcised without hands; the work is effected by the Holy Spirit—You are born again, which is spiritual circumcision. “Circumcision is that of the _heart_.” This renewing of the Holy Spirit consists in putting off the body of sin, in renouncing sin, and reforming the life. Or, we are “buried with him in baptism.” As the burial of Jesus Christ gave evidence, that he had really died, the just for the unjust; that he had yielded himself a sacrifice for sin; so we in our spiritual circumcision or baptism, the figure now used, show ourselves to be really dead to sin, crucified in the lusts of our minds. As Christ, when buried, was dead and separated from the world; so in regeneration we become separate from sin. We are new creatures, having put off the old man. We are buried from the wicked indulgences and pursuits of the world.

The death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, are, not only causes, but types and symbols to represent the death of our sins, our putting off the old man, and becoming new creatures.

No reference is made in the text to the water of baptism, any more than to the knife of circumcision in the preceding verse. The writer is speaking of that baptism, and of that alone, in which we “are risen with Christ, through the faith, which is the operation of God.” This certainly can be nothing less than _spiritual_ baptism, or regeneration; for the most violent advocate for dipping, or plunging, or burying, will not pretend, that this, necessarily, is connected with “faith;” he will allow it may be _possible_ for a man to be plunged and buried in _water_, and yet not have “the faith, which is the operation of God.” If he allow this, and allow this he must and will, then our text is no support of his cause. It cannot be water baptism which is mentioned.

Were not this the fact, nothing could be inferred respecting the _mode_ of baptism. It would then only signify that, as Christ was buried and separated from the world; so we in baptism are buried and separated from a world of sin. The zeal for the literal construction of this figure may, perhaps, be extinguished by indulging it in other instances. St. Paul says, “I am crucified with Christ.” Would any person suppose from this, that he had been led to Calvary, nailed to the cross, and pierced by the soldier’s spear? Christians are said to be “circumcised in Christ.” Does any one infer from this that all Christians experience the bloody rite of the Jews? Or, because Christians “are partakers of Christ’s sufferings,” are all christians, therefore, betrayed by Judas, spit upon, buffeted, and crowned with thorns? Or, because St. Paul says the Philippians were his “_crown_,” were they, therefore, formed into a crown of honor, and worn as a badge of future glory? Or, because the sacrament represents the sufferings and death of Christ, are all worthy communicants crucified? Were our baptist brethren consistent with themselves, such would be their explanation of these passages of scripture.

It immediately follows our text; “wherein also you were risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.” Wherein, or in which baptism “we are risen,” actually “risen with Christ by the faith” which God gives to the new creature. You, who have this spiritual baptism, rise like Christ above the selfish motives, and sensual pursuits of a fallen world. You seek the kingdom of God; you aspire after divine good.

Persons, born again, like Jesus Christ, separate their hearts from the world, and rise to a divine life. That this is the only true construction of the text, may be inferred from a corresponding passage, Rom. vi. 4. “Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death, that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” By spiritual baptism we partake the privileges of Christ’s death. By dying to sin ourselves, as we do in the new birth, we resemble Jesus Christ in his death, who died “to make an end of sin.” As Christ was raised from the grave; so we, not in water baptism, but in regeneration or spiritual baptism, are “raised” to walk in newness of life. Old things are done away; _all_ things are become new. If we have experienced this spiritual baptism, we shall have the Spirit of Christ, We shall be separate from the world of sin, as Christ was in the grave, and we shall like him rise to a holy, a new life. We obey a new master, seek a new way of salvation, act from new motives, to accomplish new designs; we choose new companions, experience new sorrows, and new joys. As if buried, we are separate from our former lives.

St. John says, “He [Christ] shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with _fire_.” The Selucians and Hermians understood this literally, and maintained that material fire was necessary in the administration of baptism. Valentinus, like our baptists, rebaptized those, who had received baptism out of the sect, and _drew them through the fire_. Herculian, cited by Clemens Alexandrinus, says that some applied a red hot iron to the ears of the baptized. St. Paul says, we are buried with Christ in baptism. This also has been understood literally; but such persons forget that to be consistent, on their plan, they should continue “buried” three days and three nights, the time Christ lay in the earth. Should any object that this would drown them, the baptist, in his way of treating figures, would have an easy answer, and readily prove that drowning was the very design of baptism. Rom. vi. 4. “We are buried with him by baptism into his death.” We are not merely buried, for this is only a part, any more than sprinkling; but we are buried to death, “buried into his death.” Thus he has scripture for drowning all whom he baptizes, and precisely as much scripture for drowning, as for burying. The very same passage, might he say, which commands burying, commands drowning, commands “death.”

In the present mode of plunging, the resemblance is almost entirely lost. What is the difference between laying a dead body in a rock, covering it with a great stone; sealing it in a solemn manner; all things continuing in this state, three days and three nights, what is the resemblance between this, and suddenly plunging a living body into water, and instantly lifting it out of the water? What possible likeness is there between a _living person_ in the _water_, and a _dead body_ in a _rock_? The similitude is little better than that of the blind man, who supposed the light of the sun was like the noise of a cannon. We have accordingly endeavoured to show in the introduction, that the elegant scholar, the christian orator of Tarsus, had no thought of any such resemblance; his object was to show, that in regeneration or spiritual baptism, which is followed “with newness of life,” or, a new life, “through faith which is the operation of God,” we are dead and buried to sin, and raised or made alive to God, as Christ was. The evident design of the text is to illustrate the preceding verse, which speaks of spiritual circumcision made without hands. This _baptism_ is that by which we are _raised with Christ_; but in water baptism we are not always raised with Christ. If men are plunged they may generally be raised from the water; but this has no necessary connexion with “rising with Christ.” This baptism is also effected “through faith which is the operation of God;” but a man may be raised out of an ocean of water, every day of his life, and remain destitute of faith; therefore, the text has no reference to water baptism.

REV. E. PARISH’S SERMON.

Quest. CLXVII.

QUEST. CLXVII. _How is baptism to be improved by us?_

ANSW. The needful, but much neglected duty of improving our baptism, is to be performed by us all our life long; especially in the time of temptation, and when we are present at the administration of it to others, by serious and thankful consideration of the nature of it, and of the ends for which Christ instituted it, the privileges and benefits conferred and sealed thereby, and our solemn vow made therein, by being humbled for our sinful defilement, our falling short of, and walking contrary to the grace of baptism and our engagements, by growing up to assurance of pardon of sin, and of all other blessings sealed to us in that sacrament, by drawing strength from the death and resurrection of Christ, into whom we are baptized, for the mortifying of sin, and quickening of grace, and by endeavouring to live by faith, to have our conversation in holiness and righteousness, as those that have therein given up their names to Christ, and to walk in brotherly love, as being baptized by the same Spirit, into one body.

In this answer we may observe,

I. That our baptism, together with the engagements which we are therein laid under to be the Lord’s, is to be improved by us; though this duty be too much neglected. That it ought to be improved is evident, inasmuch as it is an ordinance, or means of grace, for our attaining spiritual blessings; therefore we are not only guilty of a sinful neglect, but we lose the advantage that might be expected thereby, if we do not improve it so as to answer the valuable end thereof; and when we consider it as a professed dedication to God, as has been before observed, or a bond and obligation laid on us, to be entirely, and for ever, his, it cannot but be reckoned the highest affront offered to the divine Majesty, and a being unstedfast in his covenant, for us practically to disown the engagement, or, in effect, to deny his right to us. Now, it is farther observed, that this duty is much neglected, and the reason hereof is,

1. Because many have very low thoughts of this ordinance, and understand not the spiritual intent or meaning thereof, nor what it is to improve it. These reckon it no more than an external rite, established by custom, and commonly observed in a Christian nation, without duly weighing the end and design for which it was instituted, or what is signified thereby.

2. Others suppose, that there is nothing in it but a public declaration, that the person baptized is made a Christian, or has that character put upon him; but they know not what it is to be a Christian indeed, being utter strangers to the life and power of religion, and the spiritual blessings hoped for, or, through the grace of God, consequent upon our baptismal dedication.

3. Others have, indeed, right apprehensions of the sign and the thing signified thereby, yet through the prevalency of corruption, and the pride and deceitfulness of their hearts, they do not fiducially give up themselves to God, nor desire the spiritual and saving blessings of the covenant of grace. These therefore do not improve their baptism; and, it is to be feared, that this is the condition and character of the greatest number of professors: Which leads us to consider,

II. How baptism is to be improved by us, and that in several cases,

1. When we are present, at the administration of it to others. We are not, indeed, at that time, so immediately concerned in the ordinance, as the person who is publicly devoted to God therein. Nevertheless, we are not to behave ourselves as unconcerned spectators; and therefore,

(1.) We are to join herein with suitable acts of faith and prayer, as the nature of the ordinance calls for them, and to adore the persons of the Godhead whose name and glory is mentioned therein. And we are to apply ourselves to God, for the grace of the covenant, that is signified thereby, that he would be our God, as well as the God of the person who is particularly given up to him in baptism. We are also to bewail the universal depravity of human nature, and that guilt which we bring with us into the world, which is signified in infant-baptism; and this, together with the habits of sin, which we have contracted, is confessed by those who are baptized when adult, which we cannot but see a great deal of, in our daily experience. We ought also to entertain becoming thoughts of the virtue of the blood of Christ, and of the power of the Holy Ghost, which alone can take away the guilt of sin, and render this ordinance effectual to salvation; which we are not only to desire with respect to the person baptized, but that we ourselves may be made partakers of that grace, which we equally stand in need of.

(2.) We ought to confess before God, with sorrow and shame, how defective we have been, as to the improvement of our baptismal engagements; so that, though we have been devoted to him, our hearts and affections have been very prone to depart from him; and we ought to adore and acknowledge the goodness and faithfulness of God, in that, though we have been unstedfast in his covenant, through the treachery and deceitfulness of our hearts; yet he has been ever mindful thereof, and made good the promises contained therein, to all his servants who have put their trust in him.

2. Our baptism is to be improved by us in the time of temptation, in order to our resisting it, and preventing our being entangled and overcome thereby.

(1.) If the temptation takes its rise from the world, or we are thereby induced to lay aside, or be remiss in our duty to God, from the prosperous circumstances in which we are therein, we should consider, that in having been devoted to God in our infancy, or given up ourselves professedly to him, when adult, it has been intimated and acknowledged, that he is our portion, better to us than all we can enjoy in the world; and therefore we ought to acquiesce in him as such, and say, _Whom have I in heaven but thee; and there is none_, or nothing, _upon the earth that I desire besides thee_, Psal. lxxiii. 25.

Moreover, if we are tempted to be uneasy, and repine at the providence of God, by reason of the many evils that befal us in the world, we ought to consider, that when we were given up to God, this implied in it an obligation to be content to be at his disposal, and to be satisfied with whatever he allots for us, as not questioning the care and justice of his providence, in which we were under an indispensable obligation to acquiesce. Therefore when God tries us, by bringing us under various afflictions, our baptismal engagement obliges us to say, It is the Lord, let him do with us what seemeth good in his sight.

(2.) If we are exposed to the temptations of Satan, or those inward suggestions, whereby sinful objects are presented to our thoughts, and a false gloss put upon them, to induce us to a compliance therewith, we are to improve our baptismal engagement, by considering that it contains a solemn acknowledgment of God’s right to us, exclusive of all others: therefore, we cannot but dread the thoughts of submitting to be vassals to Satan, which is, in effect, to disown that allegiance which we owe to God, and to say, that other lords shall have dominion over us. This will have a tendency to induce us to adhere stedfastly to God, as the result of our having been devoted to him in this ordinance.

And if we are afraid of being ensnared by those wiles and methods of deceit, which Satan often makes use of, that are not always discerned by us, we are to consider ourselves as having been devoted to Christ; and, pursuant thereunto, if we have, in any instance, improved this solemn transaction, we have given up ourselves to him, in hope of being under his protection, and interested in his intercession, so that though we are _sifted as wheat_, our _faith_ may _not fail_, Luke xxii. 31, 32.