Page images

And then they would have been sent to baptize others with a baptism themselves never received. But they received freely, and were freely to give, and could not give what they never received, nor what they did receive, before they had received it: and therefore were under an absolute necessity to wait till they actually did receive the baptism of the holy ghost, before they possibly could baptize others with it. This they did receive, and this they did administer; and their not presuming, nor being allowed by their Lord, to attempt baptizing according to the commission, till first thus baptized themselves, shows evidently what the baptism of the commission was, and that the qualification for its administration was through the same baptism first received in themselves-the enduement of power from on high. But had the commission intended John's baptism, that they were qualified to administer, and did administer before; had it intended water, and yet not as John's, they never receiving it after the commission, any more than before, were no more qualified to administer it afterwards, than before. Hence, it results, that Christ's is that they waited for, received, and then, through the communications of it, administered to others; that is, the one baptism of the gospel.

X. Because whoever receive Christ's baptism, are initiated thereby into the church of the first born, the pillar and ground of truth, and have their names written in heaven, have the white stone, and new name: and being buried, and rising with Christ, are joint heirs with him; and he is not ashamed to call them brethren, they in all things reverently ascribing to him the pre-eminence. But this is by no means true of all that are baptized into water. This is in substance somewhat the same as the 8th reason; but may serve to show, that as baptism in water is not saving, so it never initiates any into the church of Christ, however it is extolled as an initiatory ordinance.

XI. Because Christ himself, though he was circumcised, baptized, &c. outwardly, in order to fulfil, terminate, blot out, and for ever disannul, all such ceremonials, never circumcised or baptized others outwardly; nor ever ordered any of the multitudes that believed on him, that we have any account of, to receive either. He even washed his disciples' fect, and taught

them to wash one another's; but never baptized them in water, which we may venture to believe, he would by no means have omitted, had it been his own baptism, the one saving and perpetual baptism of all true believers.

XII. Because he did baptize them with the holy spirit, declaring he sent them even as his Father sent him; that is, anointed with the holy ghost, that they should do the works which he did. (Baptize with the holy ghost, be sure, was a work which he did.) And as, in order to qualify them, he breathed on them, and bid them receive the holy ghost, this was truly sending them as he was sent, and turning their minds, and fixing their dependance, on the like anointing for qualification for the like services.

XIII. Because baptism in water is certainly one of the old things, one of the things that can be shaken; and not one that remains, when and where all are shaken and removed, that can be shaken; not one that can remain, when and where not only the earth, not only sin, carnality, and earthly mindedness, but also heaven-things esteemed heavenly, and which were once really ordinances of God-are thoroughly shaken,. and all removed, but what cannot be shaken; which alone can remain in this truly gospel state. The rejoicing of true Christians is in that which God creates, after the old heavens and old earth are shaken, and all typical righteousness is passed away; that is, in the pure antitypical righteousness which must remain, because it cannot be shaken, but is of the very nature of, and pertaineth to, the new heavens, and new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness, in its pure, uncumbered, unceremonious simplicity and beauty. The elements (these elementary, figurative observations) are known, in the truly gospel state, to melt with fervent gospel heat; whilst too many are retaining these, and expecting the outward material elements to be melted with outward material fire, at the end of this outward material world: thus missing the marrow and substance of things, through the outwardness of their ideas and expectations.

XIV. Because it is certain, that it does please God to save some through the foolishness of preaching, to wit, such as truly believe. No soul can be saved, but according to God's mercy

[ocr errors]

"by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the holy ghost." This is Christ's baptism. And hence it follows, that every soul saved through preaching, must thereby be baptized with the holy ghost and fire, or witness the regenerating washing, and renewal of the holy ghost. For this being that without which none can be saved, it is idle to think of preaching, saving, or contributing towards the salvation of any, but through the work of this baptism. If preaching at any time contributes more or less to salvation, it certainly contributes in the same degree to this spiritual baptism. Thus Paul begat souls to God through the gospel. But no ministry that is not baptizing, can ever do this. And this is the reason why they who run without God's sending and qualifications, do not profit the people. They cannot baptize them into the name, by all their arts of rhetoric, and powers of elocution. That is a work surpassing the utmost influence of all such unauthorized ministry, and effected instrumentally by no other preaching than that which has its efficacy from the power received from on high. This even the apostles were under an absolute necessity to wait for, and receive too, before they could thus "teach baptizing." And the same necessity of waiting for the same qualification will remain, to all Christ's true ministers, to the world's end. Indeed, the substance of the injunction, "Tarry at Jerusalem till you are endued," &c., rests now with equal force on all who are equally observant of divine direction, in the work of the gospel. And to these Christ's words forever hold good," He that receiveth you receiveth me; and he that receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me." Mat. x. 40. They who truly receive Christ, receive his baptism. Hence none truly receive his ministers, and their ministry, but therein and therethrough they receive him and his baptism. This must hold good forever; they who truly receive him, know it. It would be as true, if it had never been so expressed. Experience would livingly confirm it. But they rejoice that this great truth is so clearly, and by so many modes of expression, established in the sacred records. And their prayers are sincerely and fervently to God, that seeking souls may be enabled to see, hear, and believe it, to the salvation of their souls, in the saving operations of the one only soul-saving baptism of Jesus.

VOL. II.-72






THE writer of this Essay on Liberty and Necessity, maintains, that in every possible situation in which a human or thinking being can be placed, his volitions must be determinate and certain; that the volitions of all mankind are so; and, finally, that as every event comes to pass in consequence of causes previously existing, "the whole series of events is under the influence of an absolute and uncontrolable necessity." If this be true, free agency is not only, not existent in man, or angel, but has no existence at all, not even in God himself. If "every event," yea," the whole series of events" from first to last, is "under the influence of an absolute and uncontrolable necessity," then God neither now can, nor ever could interfere, control, or order any, even the minutest circumstance or thing, any otherwise than just as every thing has been, and is,

If in "every possible situation, in which a human or thinking being can be placed, his volitions must be determinate and certain," and absolutely governed by this "uncontrolable necessity;" then it never was, from all eternity, possible for God to place a "human or thinking being," in any "possible situation" in which that being could have acted any otherwise than it has acted and does act. For if this "uncontrolable necessity" comprehends, and has absolute influence over the whole series of events," God could not possibly have placed any being whatever, in any "possible situation," but precisely in that, in which he has placed it. And if so, it follows, that there does not exist, and that there never has existed, such a

thing, power, or faculty, as free agency, not even in God; unless he acts as a free agent in producing a concatenation of events, every particular, and the "whole series" whereof, are under the absolute influence of "uncontrolable necessity"-a necessity which he has never been able, in a single instance, nor in the smallest circumstance, to violate, supersede, or control; but, a necessity by which all his actions and proceedings are, and ever have been absolutely bound, limited, and controled. If in the most trivial circumstance or event, God could have ordered it otherwise than it is, or has been, in fact, then, "the whole series of events," has not been under the absolute influence of this "uncontrolable necessity." If he could have placed any thinking being, either human or angelic, in any other "possible situation," than that in which it has been placed, then this supposed universal and "uncontrolable necessity" has not existed.

After arguing for some time, upon the divine prescience, the author concludes his essay thus: "If the absolute foreknowledge of God is admitted, every one must see, that contingency is excluded, and consequently, the whole fabric reared upon the shallow and visionary basis of man's free agency, must instantly dissolve, "and, like an unsubstantial pageant faded, leave not a wreck behind."

But did he not perceive that this doctrine tends as much to 'the total wreck or ruin, or to the proof of the non-existence of 'God's free agency, as of man's? If free agency in man, or a power to act differently from what he does act, is inconsistent with the divine prescience, surely free agency in God, or a power in him, to act differently in any respect from what he does, is just as inconsistent with his foreknowledge. And is it not truly mournful, that poor, purblind man, who sees and. knows but in part, should take upon himself to determine that God's foreknowledge is such as prevents all choice, interposition, or power of control, in the Most High? Shall a mole in the dust, presume he sees and knows so clearly, as that he can determine exactly how God sees and knows? Or shall the mole, because he cannot see how God can foresee future contingencies, make himself the standard of all penetration, and

« PreviousContinue »