• BESIDES, many Things were done by the Apostles, in a way of Condefcenfion to weak Believers, for which they had no Commiffion; Thus Peter in compliance with the Jews, com•pelled the Gentiles to be circumcifed, Gal. ii. 14. and Paul circumcifed Timothy, because of the Jews which were in thofe Quarters; for they all knew that his Father was a Greek, Acts xvi. 3: And alfo purified himself with four Men that had a Vow, according to the Law of the Nazarites. Chap. xxi. 23, 26. which legal Purification he was advis'd to by the Apostle James, and the Elders at Jerufalem; fee ver. 17-24. And the only Reafon there given for this, was the great Zeal that many Thousands of the Jews, that believed, had for the Law, who were informed of Paul, that he taught all the Jews which • were amongst the Gentiles, to forfake Mofes, faying, That they ought not to circumcife their Children, neither to walk after the Customs. ver. 20. 21. And therefore he was advised to take thofe four Men, and purifie himself with them, that all might know, that thofe Things whereof they were informed concerning him, were nothing; but that be himself walked orderly, and kept the Law, ver. 23, 24. Where we fee, that both the Advice • given him in this matter, and the Act of the Apoftle pursuant thereunto, were in meer Condefcenfion to the Weakness of others. From whence it will follow, that if Practice only proves an Inftitution now in Force, and of neceffary Obfervation among Chriftians, then Circumcifion and Purification, may be called Gofpel Inftitutions, because they were practifed, as well as Water-Baptifm, which would be a mixing Judaism with Chriftianity.

<

<

› Arg:

Arg. IV. THAT which was one of thofe divers Washings or Baptifms mention'd Heb. ix. fo. is annulled in Point of Obligation; but Water Baptifm was one of thofe divers Washings or Baptifms mentioned Heb. ix. 10. therefore, &c.

THE major is clear from the Text it felf; ⚫ for thofe divers Washings or Baptifms there mentioned, were impos'd no longer than to the • Time of Reformation, which is the Time of the pure Gospel Difpenfation.

THE minor is apparent from hence, in that Water-Baptifm was an ancient Ceremony in (z) Ufe among the Jews long before John was fent to baptize with it. See Maimonides in Ifurei • Biah. c. xiii. Talmud in Jebameth. c. iv. Pool's Synopfis Crit. on Mat. iii. 6. and Hammond's • Annot. on Mat. iii. 1. and Pract. Catechifm. lib, < vi. Sect. 2.

• Baptifm (as Ainsworth obferves on Gen. xvii. • 12.) was nothing strange nnto the Jews, when John the Baptift began his Miniftry. Mat. iii. 5, 6. they made Question of the Perfon that did it, but not of the Thing it felf. John i. 25. And as John faid of Chrift, He fhall baptize you with the Holy Ghoft and with Fire. Mat. iii. II. So the He• brew

(2) To speak exactly, Baptifm was a concomitant of Cir. cumcifion, if not ancienter; for it is well known, that Baptifm was in Use among the fews, in the initiating of Profelytes for many Years, together with Circumcifion, as may be seen in Selden, De jure naturali & Gentium, juxta Difcipl. Heb. 1. 2. C. 2, 3, 4. Ainswortb's Annot. on Gen. xvii. There is much of this in many Authors befides. Lightfoot in his Sermon intituled Elias redivivus, p. 11. makes it as ancient as Facob. See Tomb's Examin. of Stepb. Marshall's Sermon about Infant-Baptifm p. 89.

nachem on Lev. viii.

• brew Doctors fay, • with Fire, and the the Holy bleffed God baptizeth ball understand. R. Methat the Jews, fome of thereby it appeareth, at leaft, expected, < upon the Coming of the Mel the Baptifm of the Holy Ghost.

Arg. V. THAT Baptifm, which was John's, and not Christ's, is annulled in Point of Obliga tion; but Water-Baptifm was John's Baptifm, and not Chrift's: therefore, &c.

THE Major is undeniable, and the Minor is proved by John's own Words, I indeed have baptized you with Water: but he (viz. Chrift) fball baptize you with the Holy Ghost, Mark i. 8. plainly fhewing by the Antithefis between the two Baptifms, that Water was peculiar to John's Baptifm, which was to decrease; even as the Holy Ghost was to Chrift's Baptism, which was to increase.

Arg. VI. THAT Baptifm, which the Apo-⚫ftles had no Commiffion to baptize with, is annulled in Point of Obligation; but Water Baptifm is that Baptifm which the Apostles had no Commiffion to baptize with: therefore, &c.

THE Minor Propofition, which feems only liable to Exception, is confirmed by the Teftimony of the Apostle Paul, Chrift fent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel, 1 Cor. 1. 17.

Ir cannot reasonably be doubted, but his < Commiffion who faid, In nothing am I behind the very chiefeft Apostles, 2 Cor. 12, 11. was of the fame Nature, and of as large an Extent as any of them: Now, if he had no Commiffion T

'to

274

6

Of BAPTISM.

ne declareth in ex

to baptize with Water, the Argument is evi-
prefs Terms he had
dently conclufive at none of them had any
aching the reft of the Apo-
ftles alfo; viz
hat

• Commiffiop om Chrift to baptize with Water.

· Ars VII. IF Water Baptifm is not the One Bptifm mentioned Eph. iv. 5. then it is annuled in Point of Obligation; but Water-Baptifm is not the One Baptifm mentioned Eph. iv. 5. therefore, &c.

THE Confequence of the Major is easily proved; for therwife there would be two Baptifms in force at the fame Time; and this would contradict the Apoftles Affertion, who fays, • One Lord, One Faith, One Baptifm; but to affirm two Baptifms, one of Water, and another of the Spirit, to be in force at the fame Time, as it is repugnant to the Words of the Text, fo by the fame Rule, a Man might say, there are two Lords, and two Faiths, which, I fuppofe the Advocates for Water-Baptifm will not think ⚫ fit to admit of; though this Conclufion may naturally follow from their manner of arguing:

AND for the Minor, that Water-Baptifm is not the One Baptifm mentioned Eph. iv. 5. what can be plainer? Seeing the One Baptifm, the • Apostle there speaks of, is the Baptifm of Chrift, or of the Holy Ghost, and not the Baptifm of • Water.

THAT it is not the Baptifm of Water, I prove,

1. FROM the Apoftle's own Teftimony be•fore cited, Chrift fent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel, 1 Cor. i. 17. Now, if the

6

Apoftle

Apoftle had no Commiffion to baptize with Water, how is it likely, that the One Baptifm mentioned by him Epb. iv. 5. fhould be the Baptifm of Water?

2. FROM the Effect that certainly accompanied the One Baptifm, viz. Regeneration; for they that were baptized with it, were renewed in the Spirit of their Mind; they put off the • Old Man, and put on the New. For, as many of you, faith Paul to the Galatians, as have been baptized into Chrift, have put on Christ, chap. iii. 27. But this Effect did not certainly accompany Water Baptifm, as our Adverfaries themfelves cannot but acknowledge; unless they ⚫ will be fo confident as to fay, that, as many as have been baptized with Water, have alfo put on Chrift, which would be very abfurd; seeing there have been fo many Instances to the contrary.

4

BUT I remember, when I have fometimes urged this Place of the Apoftle, it has been answered with this Diftinction, that as many as have ⚫ been baptized with Water, have put on Chrift by Profeffion, though not by Poffeffion. But the Answer is weak and impertinent, and doth not ⚫ at all folve the Matter; for the Apoftle treats of putting on Chrift by Poffeffion, and not by Profeffion only. For those whom, he fays, were baptized into Chrift, and had put him on, ver. 27. he calls the Children of God by Faith in Jefus Chrift, ver. 26. and faith, are in Chrift Jefus, ver. 28. Now, if any be in Christ, they are new Creatures, fee 2 Cor. v. 17. And if Children of God, then Heirs, Heirs of God, and joint Heirs with Chrift, Rom, viii. 16, 17. So that the putting on of Chrift, is a real putting him on, an ' experiencing

<

T 2