perfons on that fubject, but the repeated writings which have been published to the world on his fide the queftion. If the different fentiments of his people, about Baptifm," make no manner of difference in affection, church-relation," &c. as he fays p. 9. why does he give them any disturbance? what could provoke him to write after the manner he has done? He knows very well, however miftaken they may be about this ordinance, in his apprehenfions, yet that they are conscientious in what they do; why fhould he then fneer at them, as he does for their practice of plunging, and fix upon them the heavy charges of superftition and will-worship? Is not this man a wife fhepherd, that will give difturbance to his flock, when the fheep are ftill and quiet?

3. He would have his reader believe, that in ufing this fentence, I would infinuate, that the notions wherein they differ from us about Baptifm are poisonous, when I intend no fuch thing; nor does the proverb, as expreffed by me, lead to any fuch thought, but is used for a naufeous repetition of things, with which his performance, we are confidering, very plentifully abounds. We do not look upon mistakes about the grace of God, the person of Christ, and the perfon and operations of the Spirit, to be of a leffer nature than those about Baptifm, as he reproachfully infinuates; for we do with a becoming zeal and courage, oppose such erroneous doctrines in those who are of the fame mind with us, refpecting baptism, as much as we do in those who differ from us therein.

Page 10. He seems to be angry with me for calling him an anonymous author; what should I have called him, fince he did not put his name to his book? he afks, "Who was the penman of the epiftle to the Hebrews?" Very much to the purpose indeed! and then brings in a scrap of Greek out of Synefius, with whom, however he may agree in the choice of an obscure life, yet will not in the affair of Baptifm; for Synefius was baptized upon profeffion of his faith, and after that made bishop of Ptolemais. "Hundreds of precious tracts, he says, have "been published without the names of their authors;" among which, I hope, he does not think his must have a place, it having no authority from the scripture, whatever elfe it may pretend to; as I hope hereafter to make appear.

The proofs for immersion, taken from the circumstances which attended the Baptifm of John, Chrift, and his Apoftles, maintained: and Mr M's demonftrative proofs, for pouring or Sprinkling, confidered.

ΤΗ

HE ordinance of water-baptifm, is not only frequently inculcated in the New Teftament, as an ordinance that ought to be regarded; but also many inftances of perfons who have fubmitted to it, are therein recorded, and those VOL. II.

I I

attended

attended with fuch circumstances, as manifeftly fhow, to unprejudiced minds, in what manner it was performed.

1. The baptism of Chrift administered by John deferves to be mentioned, and confidered first: This was performed in the river Jordan, Matt. iii. 6, 13. and the circumstance of his coming up out of the water, as foon as it was done, recorded ver. 16, is a full demonftration that he was in it; now that he should go into the river fordan, to have water poured, or sprinkled on him, is intolerable, and ridiculous to fuppofe. Mr M. in his debate, p. 6. tells us, that "the words "only fignify, that he went up from the water;" to which I replied, that the prepofition am fignifies out of, and is justly rendered fo here. I gave him an inftance of it, which he has not thought fit to except against; yet still he says, "the criticism delivers us from a neceffity of concluding, that Chrift was in the "water" though it has been entirely baffled; neither has he attempted to defend it. And, because I fay, that "we do not infer plunging, merely from. "Chrift's going down into, and coming up out of the water;" therefore he would have the argument from hence, as well as from the fame circumstances. attending the baptifm of the Eunuch, wholly laid afide; which I do not wonder at, because it preffes him hard. He feems to triumph, because I have not, in his positive and dogmatical way, afferted thofe circumstances, to be demonftrative proofs of immerfion; as though they were entirely given up as fuch; but he is more ready to receive, than I am to give. This is a manifeft indication, I will not say, of a wounded caufe only, but of a dying one, which makes him catch at every thing to fupport himself under, or, free himself from those preffures, which lie hard upon him. We infift upon it, that thofe proofs are demonstrative, fo far as proofs from circumftances can be fo; and challenge him to give the like in favour of pouring or sprinkling. Is it not a wretched thing, to use our author's words; that not one text of fcripture can be produced, which will vindicate the practice of fprinkling in baptifm; and that among all the inftances of the performance of the ordinance, which are recorded in fcripture; not one fingle circumftance can render it so much as probable?

2. We not only read of many others baptized by John, but also the places which he chose to administer it in, which will lead any thinking, and considering mind to conclude, that it was performed by immerfion: Now, one of those places, where John baptized a confiderable number, and among the reft Chrift Jefus, was the river Jordan, Matt. iii. 6. Mark i. 5, 9. the latter of which texts Mr M. fays, p. 12. "leads us to no other thought, than that Jesus was bap"tized of John at Jordan; as the prepofitiones, he fays, is fometimes tran"flated;" though he gives us no one inftance of it. Now in his debate, p. 7. he fays, "that the holy Ghoft himfelf tells us, that nothing elfe is intended by

"it than baptizing in Jordan ;" and yet this man takes a liberty to differ from him. What will he be at next? to fuch ftraits are men driven, who oppose the plain words of the holy Ghost, as he is pleased to say in another case.

Enon was another of thofe places, which John chofe to baptize in; and the reason of his making choice of it was, because there was much water there, John iii. 23. which was proper and neceffary, for the baptizing of perfons by immerfion. Mr M. fays, p. 19. " that the holy Ghoft does not fay that they were "baptized there, because there was much water; but that John was also bap

tizing in Enon because there was much water there;" but what difference is there? Why only between John's adminiftering the ordinance, and the perfons to whom it was administered. He fays, p. 21. " that I have granted that the "words, he means ura, literally denote, " many rivulets or streams;" which is notoriously falfe; for I do in exprefs words utterly deny it; and have proved from the use of the phrafe in the New Teftament, and in the Septua gint version of the Old, as well as from Nonnus's paraphrase of the text, that it fignifies" large waters, or abundance of them: " I do affure him, that neither of the editions of Nonnus, which he has the vanity to mention, was made ufe of by me; but if there had been any material difference in them, from what I have made ufe of, I fuppofe he would have obferved it to me, if he has confulted them; and I would alfo inform him, that Nonnus has not always a Latin verfion printed along with it, as he wrongly afferts.

I have confulted Calvin upon the place directed to by him: the text fays, that Jefus and his difciples came into the land of Judea; and Calvin upon it says, that he came into that part of the country which was nigh to Enon;" but neither the text, nor Calvin upon it, say that they were both at Enon, as our author infinuates; fo that from hence there appears no neceffity of concluding that choice was made of this place for the accommodation of the large number of people which attended, either upon the miniftry of Christ or John; that fo both they and their cattle might be refreshed, as he ridiculously enough suggefts. As to the account he has given of the land of Canaan, it is manifeft, notwithstanding all his fhifts and cavils, that he did reprefent it in general as a land that wanted water, especially a great part of it; now whatever little spots (for the land itself was not very large) might not be fo well watered, yet it is certain, that in general it was; and is therefore called a land of brooks of water, &c. But fince he acknowledges there was plenty of water at Enon, where John was baptizing, which is fufficient for our purpose, we need not further inquire about the land.

3. Another remarkable inftance of baptism is that of the Eunuch's, in Aïts viii. 38. which is attended with fuch circumstances, as would leave any person, that

112

that is feriously inquiring after truth, without any fcruple or hesitation, in what manner it was performed. In verfe 36 we are told, that they came unto a certain water, where the Eunuch defiring baptifm, and Philip agreeing to it, after he had made a confeffion of his faith, it is faid, verfe 38. that they went down both into the water; they first came to it, and then went into it; which leaves that obfervation without any real foundation, which fuppofes that their going down into the water fignifies no more than the defcent which led to the river, for they were come thither before, as appears from verse 36. where a phrase is made ufe of different from this in verfe 38. Now though I had obferved to our author, that it was not to, but into the water they went, to which he has not thought fit to reply; yet he ftill produces his impertinent inftance of going down to the fea in fhips; which is all that can be obtained from him, to set aside the force of this evidence; which, how weak and ridiculous it is, will easily ap pear to every judicious reader.

Now if perfons will but diligently confider those plain inftances of baptifm, ia an humble and hearty fearch after truth, they will find that they amount to little less than a full demonftration that it was performed in thofe early times of John, Chrift, and his apoftles, by an immersion or plunging of the whole body under water, as has been fully acknowledged by many great and excellent divines. But now let us confider Mr M's demonftrative proofs for pouring or fprinkling water in baptifm, produced by him, p. 14.

He fays, "pouring water in baptifm, is a true representation of the donation "of the Spirit; being, according to God's word, inftituted for that end." But the word of God no where expreffes, or gives the leaft intimation, that baptifm was instituted for any fuch end; it is true, the donation of the Spirit is sometimes called a baptism, and so are the sufferings of Chrift; but do we make use of such mediums as these to prove the reprefentation of them to be the end of this ordinance? though it would with equal ftrength conclude the one as the other: Befides, he might as well argue, that the end of baptism is to represent the passage of the Ifraelites through the Red sea, because that is called a Baptism also. But how does pouring of water in baptifm, according to the practice of our modern Pædobaptifts, represent the donation of the Spirit, when they only let fall a few drops of water upon the face? But the Spirit's grace is expreffed by pouring floods of water upon his people in Ifaiah xliv. 3. one of the texts referred to by our author. Though I have acknowledged, and ftill do, that the ordinary donation of the Spirit is fometimes expreffed by pouring, and fometimes by sprinkling, yet that it was the extraordinary one which the difciples received on the day of Pentecoft, that is particularly called the baptifm of the Spirit and of fire,

Ifai. xliv. 3. Ezek. xxxvi. 25. Matt, iii. 11. 1 Cor. xii. 13.

by

by John and Chrift. Now fays Mr M. p. 17. if this was by pouring, then you are undone : perhaps not. But what does he think will undo us? why the prophecy of Joel, cited in As ii. 16, 17. I will pour out of my spirit upon all flesh. To which I reply, that though this extraordinary inftance of the Spirit's grace is expreffed, as well as the more ordinary ones are, by pouring, under the Old-Teftament-difpenfation, in allufion to those frequent libations, or drinkofferings, which were then used; yet it need not feem ftrange, that when this prophecy was nearer accomplishing, and there was a greater display of divine grace, that another word fhould be used which more largely expreffed the abundance of it: It is no wonder that it should be more abundant in the exhibition than in the prophecy; befides this text, and all others in the Old Testament, which exprefs the Spirit's grace in this, or any other form of language whatever, can never be looked upon as fufficient proofs of the manner in which a New-Teftament-ordinance is to be administered, which was never inftituted with a view to represent it.

2. He fays, it, that is, "pouring water in baptism, exactly answers to John's baptifm: he said that he baptized with water." But it seems, according to him in p. 15. that the phrase of baptizing with water, regards the strength of the administrator's arms, wherewith he performs, and not the mode of baptizing; fo that he can pretty easily tell us wherein and wherewith a person may be plunged, though he ftill fays plunging with water is an expreffion without sense; but he cannot yet inform us how a man can be plunged in it, without being plunged with it. I urged that in all the evangelifts the words are ev uda, "in "water," excepting Luke iii. 16. where the prepofition is omitted, which has occafioned fome to think it redundant in the other Evangelifts, which I obferve no ways hurts our fenfe and reading of the words; now he wonders that this fhould make for our reading, or be of any ufe to us; when all that I obferve is, that it does not make against us; if it does, let him make it appear. John. baptized in water, perfons were baptized by him in the river Jordan, and not with it.

3. Another demonstrative proof of "pouring water in baptifm, is, that it is exactly agreeable to the fignification of the word, as the Lord gives it to us "in the New Teftament." Which place I fhall more fully confider hereafter,. and make it appear, that it is there to be understood in the sense of dipping or plunging.

4. His last proof is, "that it directly answers the promise of what Christ "should do, Ifaiab liii. 15. so shall be sprinkle many nations;" to this text he fays, p. 43. the commiffion in Matthew xxviii. 19. refers, which if it does,. though