« AnteriorContinuar »
justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.' Eph. v. 26. that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word.' Tit. iii. 5. by the washing of regeneration.'
Union with Christ in his death, &c. 1 Cor. xii. 13. ' by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body.' Gal. iii. 27. 'as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.' Rom. vi. 3. ·know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death. Coloss. ii. 12. buried with him in baptism. Hence it appears that baptism was intended to represent figuratively the painful life of Christ, his death and burial, in which he was immersed, as it were, for a season: Mark x. 38. can ye be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with ? Compare also Luke xii. 50. Respecting the administration of baptism, see Chap. xxix. on the visible church, and Chap. xxxi. on particular churches.
The baptism of John was essentially the same as the baptism of Christ ; but it differed in the form of words used in its administration, and in the comparative remoteness of its efficacy. If it had not been really the same, it would follow that we had not undergone the same baptism as Christ, that our baptism had not been sanctified by the person of Christ, that Christ had not fulfilled all righteousness, Matt. iii. 15. finally, that the apostles would have needed to be rebaptized, which we do not read to have been the
In some respects, however, there was a difference; for although both baptisms were from God, Luke iii. 2, 3. vii. 29, 30. and both required repentance and faith, Acts xix. 4, 5. these requisites were less clearly propounded in the one case than in the other, and the faith required in the former instance was an imperfect faith, founded on a partial manifestation of Christ; in the latter, it was faith in a fully revealed Saviour. The baptism of Christ was also administered with a more solemn form of words, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, (although it is nowhere said that this form was ever expressly used by the apostles) and attended, as above observed, with a more immediate efficacy; inasmuch as the baptism of John was with water only, Matt. iii. 11. John i. 33. Acts i. 5. xix. 2. except in the single instance of Christ, the design of which exception was not to prove the virtue of John's baptism, but to bear testimony to the Son of God. Hence the apostles did not receive the Holy Ghost till a much later period, Acts i. 5. and the Ephesians, who had been baptized with the baptism of John, had not so much as heard whether there was any Holy Ghost, xix. 1, 2. whereas the baptism of Christ, which was with water and the Spirit, conferred the gifts of the Spirit from the very beginning.
It is usually replied, that in the places where the baptism of John is said to be with water only, it is not intended to oppose the baptism of John to baptism with water and the Spirit, but to distinguish between the part which Christ acts in baptism, and that of the mere minister of the rite. If however this were true, the same distinction would be made with respect to other ministers of baptism, the apostles for instance; which is not the case: on the contrary, it is abun
dantly evident that the apostles baptized both with water and the Holy Spirit.
Considering, therefore, that the baptism of John either did not confer the gifts of the Spirit at all, or not immediately, it would appear to have been rather a kind of initiatory measure, or purification preparatory to receiving the doctrine of the gospel, in conformity with the ancient Hebrew custom that all proselytes should be baptized, than an absolute sealing of the covenant; for this latter is the province of the Spirit alone ; 1 Cor. xii. 13. Hence it appears
that the baptism of Christ, although not indispensable, might without impropriety be superadded to the baptism of John. Acts xix. 5. when they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus ;' those, namely, who had been already baptized by John, v. 3. •I have said, not indispensable, inasmuch as the apostles and many others appear to have rested in the baptism of John ; according to which analogy, I should be inclined to conclude, that those persons who have been baptized while yet infants, and perhaps in other respects irregularly, have no need of second baptism, when arrived at maturity : indeed, I should be disposed to consider baptism itself as necessary for proselytes alone, and not for those born in the church, had not the apostle taught that baptism is not merely an initiatory rite, but a figurative representation of our death, burial and resurrection with Christ.
Previously to the promulgation of the Mosaic law, Noah's ark was the type of baptism: 1 Pet. iii. 20, 21.
while the ark was a preparing, &c. ..... the like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us--'
Under the law it was typified by the cloud. 1 Cor. x. 2.
all our fathers were baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.'
The Lord's Supper is a solemnity in which the death of Christ is commemorated by the breaking of bread and pouring out of wine, both of which elements are tasted by each individual communicant, and the benefits of his death thereby sealed to believers. Matt. xxvi. 26–29. 'as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat, this is my body; and he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it: for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.....I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine until that day,' &c... See also Mark xiv. 22 -25. Luke xxii. 19, 20. he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you; this do in remembrance of me: likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.' John vi. 33. “the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.' v. 35. “I am the bread of life; he that cometh to me shall never hunger, and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.' v. 50, 51.
this is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die: I am the living bread which came down from heaven : if any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever: and the bread that I give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.' v. 53–58. he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in
him: as the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father, so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.' v. 63. it is the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing; the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.' It is true that this chapter of John does not relate exclusively to the Lord's Supper, but to the participation in general, through faith, of any of the benefits of Christ's incarnation: for what is called so repeatedly, v. 50, &c.
eating the flesh of Christ' and drinking his blood,' is described in v. 35. 'as coming to Christ' and · believing in him ;' in the same manner as the phrase in chap. iv. 10, 14. that living water, of which whosoever drinketh he shall never thirst,' cannot be referred in a primary sense either to baptism, or to the Lord's Supper, but must be considered as an expression purely metaphorical. Nevertheless the words of Christ to his disciples in this chapter throw a strong light, by anticipation, on the nature of the sacrament which was to be so shortly afterwards instituted, (for the passover was nigh,' v. 4.) They teach us, by an obvious inference, that “flesh,' or the mere bodily food received, has no more spiritual efficacy in the sacrament than it had in the miracle of the loaves there recorded; and that the flesh which he verily and indeed gives is not that which can be eaten with the teeth, and by any one indiscriminately, but the food of faith alone; a heavenly and spiritual bread, which came down from heaven,' not earthly, (as it must be, if we suppose that what he gave on that occasion, was his literal flesh born of the Virgin) but heavenly in a higher sense than manna itself, and of which he that eateth shall live for ever,'