make it straight that is the way of Christs Communications in his Institutions and Ordinances And John declaring that he was sent to baptize with Wâ—ter John 1.31 32 33. and the Scripture mentioning this especially as to Johns Ministry Acts 13.24 25. Matth. 21.25 Acts 10.27 do shew that the great work of John the Baptist was to baptize the people with Water that they might come to Christ to be baptized with the holy Ghost and should John have baptized by dipping and Christ baptize by pouring upon or sprinkling was this to make a straight and clear diâ—covery of the way of the Lord Would it not have made the way of Christ more dark and dubious and crooked than to make it straight clear and plain to be apprehended and that too Then Moses who put a Vail over his Face for they had sprinkling to set forth sprinkling Psalm 51.6 7. 6. From the Promise of God revealed by John to the people That all flesh should see the Salvation of God Luke 3.6 Let that Salvation of God be meant of the person of Christ or of the Dispensations of Christ or both it is all one for that For they must have the Promise or not the Promise Christs person being to be manifest by his baptizing with the Holy Ghost John 1.31 32 33. and this to be done and so foretold by pouring out his Spirit upon them Should John have baptized by dipping he must of necessity have kept all from having a clear fight of Christ in his Dispensations by this representing to them the manner and way of Christs Communicating to them his Favours For who of all Flesh could see pouring or spâ—inkling set forth by dipping and plunging or who could understand it by Johns Words and â—xpressions of it when it was both expressed by one and the same word in the same Mood 7. From Christs Commendation of John and his Ministry and that in point of clearness above all other of the Prophets and this could never have been had John performed the Sign one way and yet expressed Christs performance of it another way by the same word and that without the least Explanation and this not in private to an understanâ—ing Company but in publick to all the Multitude This would have made Johns Doctrâ—nes â—â—d Administrations harder to be understood than Ezekiels Visions that the People caâ—â— â—â—â—â—eâ—ies As to the setting forth of the manner of Christs baptizing with the Holy Ghost whereas ohns Ministry was more clear than any of the Prophets Matth. 11.6 7 8 9. Luke 7.27 28. 8. It may be proved that John did not intend Dipping by his Baptizing with Water by the Holy Ghosts making use of another word to set forth dipping by in the New Testament and that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 see John 13.26 Luke 16.24 Rev. 19.13 Mark 14.20 Matth. 26.23 and so maketh a difference between Baptizing and Dipping in that Dipping is expressed by another word in the Original always where it is mentioned in the New Testament 9. From Johns saying nothing of the alteration of the manner of his performance of this Ordinance from any other typical Ceremonial Purification instituted by God among this People And if there be nothing said of it no Man can have warrant for Divine Faith to believe without a Scripture warrant and to be the external matter to be believed 1 Cor. 15.3 4 to 12. And how any can teach that for Doctrine to others that they have no ground in Scripture to believe themselves I do not know See Heb. 7.14 If John did baptize by Dipping he must do it either from his Commission by Divine Revelation but of that we read nothing Or 2. By way of imitation of Moses and that could not be for his was by Sprinkling Numb 19. Heb 9.13 14 19 20 21 22. Or 3. To be a sign of Christ's Baptizing with the Holy Ghost nor that could not be for that was by Pouring upon or Sprinkling 4. Or to make the way of the Lord more straight and plain to all the people nor that could not be for it would rather eclips and darken it None can discern Sprinkling by Dipping Or 5 That all Flesh among them might see it that is enjoy and partake of it and that could not be neither for then all Infants and infirm persons must be excluded from it Or 6. That Christ might be the clearer known but that could not be because he performed his another way Or 7. To fulfil some Gospel Promise or Prophecy but that could not be neither for that expresly hâ—ld forth sprinkling or pouring upon Ezek. 36.25 Isa 52.15 Joel 2.28 Isa 44.3 Prov. 1.23 Zech. 12.10 Or 8. In Imitation of the Pharisees and the Jews in those days for they sinned against the express Law of God if they performed any of their Purifications either by Blood or Water any other way than by sprinkling and they were a People that made it the all of their Religion to keep to the Letter of the Law Rom. 2.27 And John accounted them a Generation of Vipers Matth. 3.7 8. and they said John had a Devil Matth. 11.17 18 19. What warrant Men will have for John's imagined dipping I know not how confident soever they be 10. From the Enemies silence and their never quarrelling at John for any alteration of this Purification from what Moses's was but they were the first that John does record that called John's Administration Baptizing John 1.25 and surely they did not intend dipping by it because there was no such way in any of their Typical Personal Purifications and they were great pretenders to the strict keeping to Moses and the observation of the Letter of the Law And they could not be so ignorant as not to know it to be a Sign only and John's words in declaring Christ's Baptizing with the Holy Ghost was enough to declare it to them and yet we never find one word of their quarrelling or gain-saying or finding fault with John as bringing in any new way of Administration of the sign contrary to what Moses had delivered to them from the Lord. 11. Another Argument to prove that John did not intend dipping by his saying he baptized with Water may be taken from Apollos who knew only the Baptism of John and was mighty in the Scriptures and was able to prove that Jesus was Christ Acts 18.24 to the end which could never have been had John's Administration of the Sign been so contrary to Christ's Administration of the thing signified Where could Apollos have any thing from the Scripture to prove the Baptism of John to set forth Christ's Baptism or from his Doctrine by expressing Christs Baptism by pouring upon by the same word that he expressed his own if he did perform his own by Dipping If any say that the word has a two-fold acccepâ—ation in the New Testament let them that say it prove it by the New Testament if they can for my part I shall thank them
passive voice and then one part of the person must not be in the water before for then it cannot be dipt in nor must one part stand upon terra firma for then that person cannot be wholly passive in the reception of Baptism in the whole person unless any do account the lower part of the person no part of the person or a part not â—o be purified or else do Baptize pars pro toto and yet then but one part of the person can be in the power of the Baptizer and that not solely neither but in such conjunction with the rest that it cannot be wholly passive as it ought to be And is and must be all of the person in the Baptism signified by it Acts 2.2 3 4 5. Acts 11.15 16 17. Titus 3 5 6. Or else if they will have the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie into they must have the meaning to be I have baptized you into water as Christ commands to baptize into the name of the Father Son and holy Ghost But that I suppose none that make conscience will admit of But how any of these constructions not agreeing with Baptism with Water to be a sign of Baptizing with the holy Ghost is yet unknown to some But if the matter of difference do consist in and depend upon the meaning and acceptation of this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Baptize then it will be Necessary to enquire into the New Testament how this word is taken to signify there Arguments and Reasons grounded upon Scripture to prove that John Baptist did intend pouring upon or sprinkling by the word Baptize 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mentioned in Matth. 3.11 when he Prophesied to the people that Christ should Baptize them with the holy Ghost in the latter end of the verse And also Arguments and Reasons grounded upon Scripture to prove that he did not intend Dipping by the word Baptize 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when he told the people that he indeed had baptized them with water in the beginning of 11. verse of Matth. the 3d. When John the Baptist told the people that Christ that should come after him should Baptize them with the holy Ghost and with fire that he did intend by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptize pouring upon shedding upon or sprinkling with and not dipping or plunging into may be clearly proved from other places of Scripture First In that the people that were ear-witnesses of what John spake of Christ and eye-witnesses of the manner In which Christ performed that which John spake of him do testifie that all that John spake of Christ was true John 10.41 Now this of Christs Baptizing with the holy Ghost and with fire is one of the things that John did speak of Christ and therefore this was true and intended by John as so to be performed as Christ did perform it when he did come For if John should not have intended and meant by these words that Christ should baptize them with the holy Ghost that Christ should pour out his spirit upon them and shed it upon them or sprinkle them with it which was Christs way of Baptizing them with it Acts 1.5 Acts 2.3 4 5. Then what John spake of Christ could not be true But all that John spake of Christ was true Therefore he did not intend dipping into the holy Ghost by Christs Baptizing them with it but pouring upon shedding upon and sprinkling with by Christs baptizing them with the holy Ghost Acts 2.15 16 17. Titus 3.5 6. Heb. 10.22 1 Peter 1.2 Acts 10.44 45 46. Acts 11.15 16 17. Acts 15.8 9. 2. In that it was ground of faith in the people to believe in Christ John 10.42 What John spake of Christ was true even all things of it and many believed on him there The conjunction copulative knitting together Johns words and the truth of it and their believing sheweth that the things that John spake of Christ being true they believed on him upon that Testimony John had given What was ground of faith in the people and that to many and not a few And in the very place too that John spake these things at first and baptized were certain truths But Johns words or Testimony of Christ was ground of faith to many of the people in the very place where John at first Baptized and spake them Therefore Johns words of Christ were certainly true And therefore John did not mean nor intend by Christs Baptizing dipping into but pouring upon or sprinkling with the holy Ghost by Christ Matth. 3.11 When he did come 3. It may be further Proved from the holy spirit that John was filled with and acted by in the work of his Ministry He was filled with the holy Ghost from his mothers womb and came in the spirit of Elias Luke 1.16 17. Now if it was by the same spirit of truth and holiness that John the Baptist spake by and was acted by as others of the holy Prophets of the Lord were acted by then what John spake of Christ was true and was in every thing intended by him as it should be and was performed by Christ when he came and did perform them Therefore John did intend sprinkling or pouring upon by Christs Baptizing them with the holy Ghost 4. It may be further proved from Johns office He was a Prophet And what John spake of Christ he spake as a prophet foretelling of it both as to the matter and the manner of the performance And that he was a prophet Christ himself doth witness and the greatest of Prophets Matth. 11.7 8 9. And the word of God came to him in an immediate manner as to others of the Prophets Luke 3.2 3 4. And therefore he did intend by Christs baptizing with the holy Ghost his pouring out the holy Ghost upon them and shedding it upon them and his sprinkling them with it which titles the holy Ghost does afterwards give to the thing that John expressed and intended by baptizing Matth. 3.11 with the holy Ghost And for any to gain say it is to deny Johns being a prophet of the Lord. The Prophet did foresee what they foretold Isaiaâ— aw his glory when he spake of him John 12.41 And did not John see it also 5. Another Argument may be taken From Christs giving the Disciples of John a â— stimonâ— that he was the Messias from the works that he did and the manner of his doâ—â—â—f thâ— which is included in the matter of them Matth. 11. â— 4 5 6. Go and tell joâ— agaiâ— things that ye see Which sheweth that Johns Discovery and Prophesie of Christ haâ— been his works And if Christ had not done the things that John â—ad foretold and as they haâ—â—een foretold then they must have been at a loss for the knowledg of the Lâ—rd Jeâ—â—â— to 〈◊〉 â—e Messiah and if John had intended Dipping when Christ should do it by pouring upon Johns tâ—â—â—imony must have been against Christ that he was
this word Baptizing than what would consist with the Baptizing of all that were to bring forth good fruit or be cut down if they did not and that were all the trees in that visible field of that visible church or than what would consist with the Baptizing of all that were either chaff or wheat or that should be purged out or kept in by Christ or tâ—at should be gathered into the Barn or Garner or be burnt up with unquenchable fire Matth. 3.12 It would be strange If any should suppose that John should deny any the Ordinance of Baptism and the participation of it as means to bring forth fruit and yet charge them upon the pain of Damnation or Salvation to bring forth fruit and good fruit And if his exhortation did extend to none but what were Baptized then all that were of Israel were baptized or it was their own default and sin if they were not baptized and not from Johns denying of it to them And if all both small and great were baptized then his Baptism must be performed in such a manner as that they might partake of it which must be by sprinkling and not by Dipping and then he must intend sprinkling and not Dipping by this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when he said he indeed had baptized them with water 7. John Intended no other manner of baptizing by this word and by his act in performance of what he expressed thereby than what would consist with the ordinary natural strength of one person to do and perform to persons of all sorts sexes and ages stature and Corpulency whatsoever for he did nothing in this Ordinance by a miraculous strength because he did no miracle John 10.41 42. And he said he indeed baptized them with water which he could never do by Dipping or plunging for whether their wearing apparel were on or off it is beyond the Natural strength of any ordinary individual to Dip all persons of all ages and sexes and stature into water a d take them out again himself whether it were to be done Diametrical or perpendicular And if their Apparel should be all put off it must be to the shame of humane nature And the baptism must be of two kinds if any part of the bâ—dy were grasped or held by the dipper and the Dipping must be contrary to the way of Dipping as discovered in Scripture if that part of the person or thing were Dipped in that was held by the Dipper and yet be accounted dippâ—d It was an act of Great condescention in God Almighty that when he could by his Immeâ—iate Power have dipped the whole Host in the red Sea with as great ease and freedom as ever he â—prinkled them by the cloud but by this he condescended to our weakness to perform it 〈◊〉 â—hat manner that any one of his Officers and Servants were câ—pable by their natâ—ral ordinaâ—â—â—â—rength to baptize any one individual of whatsoever stature â—â—eportion age sex or condition â—â— y were And if this of sprinkling had not been the right way of performance the great Law giveâ— and Judge would never have given us that Example 1 Cor. 10.2 8. John intended no other manner of Baptizing with Water than what would consist with the Gravity Holiness and Austerity that he came in which could never be by taking up Male and Female of all ages and dipping them in Water and taking them out again Neither would it consist with the Modesty and shamefacedness of Humane Nature in them that were baptized nor with the honour praise and comliness of so Solemn an Ordinance in the sight of so many spectators which he stiled a Generation of Vipers and therefore he must intend and did intend sprinkling or pouring upon by this word when he said That he indeed baptized them with Water 9. No other signification is intended by this word by J hn than what will consist with other discoveries in Scripture concerning the acceptation of this word and if the Holy Ghost have discovered no other signification of it than pouring upon shedding upon or sprinkling with then there can be no ground of Faith for any to believe or teach any other for if it be not so written or said by the Holy Ghost there can be no ground for any to believe any other for there was no other if the Holy Ghost said nothing of any other Heb. 7.14 10. He could intend no other baptizing by this word as to the manner of performance of it than what would consist with the nature of the External Ordinance which was and is still to be a sign of the Internal Baptism by the Holy Ghost For if he did he must be supposed to intend otherwise than what God did intend in the appointment of it 1 Pet. 3.21 and in â—ll the resemblances whereby it is set forth in Scripture Rom. 6.3 4. Gal. 3.27 They that can suppose this and imagine this of one that Christ did commend no wonder if they imagine all evil of all others of his Servants 11. John could intend no other bapt zing by this word than what would consist with the Title given to it by the Jews and John's Disciples John 3.22 23 24 25. which could be no other than what Peter intended in Acts 15.7 8 9. with Acts 11.15 16 17. in both places it is stiled Purifying and one speaks of the Outward and the other of the Inward Baptism and all their legal Purifyings were by Sprinkling whether it was by Blood or Water Heb. 9.13 14 19 20 21 22. Numb 19. If it had not been performed the same way as their Purifying was the Jews that were envious at Christ and John too would never have given to it that name â—ohn 3.22 23 24 25 26. compared with John 4.1 2. If any will say that Baptism is not expressed John 3.25 26. I answer It is intended of that which was the matter in question that they came to John with and desired his Resolution of with respect to Christ and if that was not about Bâ—ptism the word must be denyed that expressed it 12. Such a manner of baptizing John intended by it as would consist with clearness perspicuity and plainnâ—ss of the Gospel Dispensations that he was sent to be the first publisher of and the first adminiâ—trator of That all flesh might see the salvation of God Luke 3.6 it is called Lights coming into the World John 3.19 20. And the day spring from on high visiting of them Lâ—ke 1.78 And the day of Salvation 2 Cor. 6.2 And that which made John's Ministry in point of clearnesâ— greater than all the Prophets that were before him and certainly this must not be by dipping and plunging to set forth and make Representation and to typifie â—ne Christ's sprinkling them with the Holy Ghost or pouring out the Holy Ghost upon them This could nâ—ver be the clearest way to represent Christ's Baptizing for if John should have inâ—â—nded dipping and performed
23.25 26. Matth. 15.7 8 9. In vain do they worship me c. it was matter of worship with them Mark 7.8 9 10. But Ouâ— Lord Jesus does acknowledge it a cleansing of the outside of the cup and platter and that it â—as a making clean The word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used again John 3.25 about Christs and John Baptizing with water about their sprinkling of old Heb. 9.13 14.22 This sheweth that Luke understandeth by baptizing of the hands the application of water to the hands by way of sprinkling and this by the Law was to be done by a clean person Numb 19.18 19. Christ was used among the multitude and did use to raise the Dead and cleanse the Lepers and therefore the Pharisee did suppose he might be unclean and therefore admired that he had not first Baptized that is purified himself Because that Law was then in force and Christ doth grant it to be a cleansing of the cup and platter But condemns them for resting in that and never labour after that which was typified out by it which was the cleansing of their hearts as David did Psalm 51.6 7. and though this was an addition of their own inventions to the Law of God yet they kept to the manner of performance or else it could not have born the title or denomination of cleansing Rom. 2.17 27. and should they have done it otherwise it would have made their own Inventions to have been known from the commands of God and the people would have slighted them and also Christ would have detected their wickedness should they have turned sprinkling to Dipping And if they should have performe it by Dipping whether it were in their clothes or naked Their frequent Baptizings woâ— have been a burthen intolerable and Impossible to all and utterly Destructive to their 〈◊〉 mane nature as often as they came from market or went to receive any food to have 〈◊〉 all over into water or to have been put into water or should they have Imposed it upon 〈◊〉 that they Invited to Diâ—e with them to have been Dipt all over in water and where 〈◊〉 hey have â—h ad water to Dip in or heifers enough to kill to have the ashes of them t◠〈◊〉 the water see Numbers 19. what it was made with and besides he that was to be cleansed was not to touch the water for then he had defiled it and if the clean person that was to sprinkle it did touch the water he was defiled Numbers 19.21 22. c. So that of necessity it must be performed by sprinkling all which declares Luke his acceptation of this word 6. Besides his recording Pauls baptizing Acts 9.18 and makes no Discovery of his going out of the house being blind and of the Jailors being baptized the same hour of the night Acts 16.30 31 32. and whatever faith persons have to believe rivers running through these houses yet the Scripture discovers none So that they have no ground for their faith and also Pauls Baptizing the Disciples in Acts 19.3 4 5 6 7. and of Philips Baptizing the Eunuch in Acts 8.38 which could never be by Dipping If it be true what is supposed by some That they went both into the water both Philip and the Eunuch The particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rendered into is in 1 Cor. 10.2 Translated unto But if any will have it that they went both into the water How can they Imagine that Philip could baptize that is as they suppose Dip him could he baptize or Dip that part of the Eunuch that was in before How far they went into the water do they know and can any thing or person be Dipt into the water or any part of it either that is not out before It may be moved in the water but not be Dipt into it And could he Dip him while he stood upon terra firma upon firm ground must not what is dipped Immediately before the act of Dipping be loose from every thing else and could he Dip that part that he Grasped to Dip him was he in his wearing apparel or not how many baptisms must there be in this way of Baptizing If any part of his body was uncovered that might be Dipped Immediately they Imagine what was covered must be baptized mediately and what was Grasped must be baptized Secondarily to the rest of the mediate Baptism and when must the bottom of the feet be baptized upon which he stood we do not read of any change of the position whatever faith any have to assert wiâ—hout warrant If Philip did baptize the Eunuch by Dipping of him it must be diametrically or perpendicularly And when they can prove That Philips arms were so much longer than the common race of mankind and his strength so much more to do it when I say this is proved by Scripture I hope I shall have faith to believe it but not till then It was no other than what one person could perform for he baptized him and it would be strange If Philip should engage to do this any other way than what all others of Christs servants had done it There is enough in the former Testimonies by Luke to signifie his acceptation of the word to the contrary to this Imagination Seventhly Let us Enquire how John the Beloved Disciple and the Pen-man of the Gospel did understand this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and what he did intend by it in his use of it and his Testimony with respect to Christs Baptizing with the holy Ghost must of necessity be the same with the rest of the Apostles being he was a subject partaking of it with the rest of the Disciples Acts 2.23 4. and also we may see his Testimony of it in his recording the words of Christ to Nicodemus who was one of the Pharisees that rejected Baptism John 3.3 5 8. and our Lord Jesus assureth of the necessity of it with the Inward Baptism under the terms of a new birth and the words should be rendered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whosoever is not born again let him be male or female young or old and so it is also in verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the manner how this birth is brought about or effected we have this holy pen man of Scripture recording in verse the 8th 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The wind bloweth where it listeth thou hearest the sound thereof but canst not tell whence it cometh or whither it goeth So is every one that is born of the spirit and if none know whence it cometh and whither it goeth God does not put the person into it in that it cometh to him and can any one put the person into it here It cometh to him and bloweth upon him and enters into him Ezekiel 37.3 4 5. Ephe. 2.1 and also it appears that John the Evangelist did understand the Baptizing with the holy Ghost to signifie applying to and pouring upon and sprinkling with and not Dipping into by the