Images de page
PDF
ePub

suppose that Philip, some how or other, ("although he was full of wisdom and of the Holy Ghost,") made a mistake, and baptized an improper candidate in that particular case.

The true state of the case seems to have been this Philip entered Samaria, commenced preaching Christ, and, to confirm his doctrine, began to "heal the lame,” “to cure the palsied," and to cast out unclean spirits, that cried with a loud voice as they came out of those who were possessed of them. Simon and the Samaritans heard his message, saw the miracles, were convinced that the message was true, were willing to enter the school of Christ as disciples, by baptism, that they might be made better acquainted with this new religion.

Christianity was established by miracle, and those who gave it credence in the early part of its history rested their faith or conviction of its truth, not so much upon a thorough knowledge of its peculiar doctrines, as upon the evidence brought home to their minds through the medium of their senses; and those senses were powerfully addressed by the miracles of our Lord and his apostles. So ignorant were the apostles themselves of the peculiar doctrines of Christianity, that up to the period of the Saviour's crucifixion, " they wondered what the rising from the dead should mean." Eloquent Apollos himself knew so little of the peculiarities of Christianity, (even after he had convinced the Jews that Jesus was Christ,) that it was necessary a plain mechanic and his wife should teach

him the way of the Lord "more perfectly." And so ignorant were the twelve disciples, found by Paul at Ephesus, that they knew not that there was any Holy Ghost. See Acts, ch. xix. And those disciples received the Christian baptism from the hands of the apostles, in addition to the baptism of John, which they had previously received; and when they had received water baptism in the name of Jesus, and Paul had laid his hands on them, "the Holy Ghost came on them."

The case of Saul of Tarsus, as found in the Acts, ch. xxii, is in point. He was exhorted by Ananias to "arise and be baptized and wash away his sins, calling on the name of the Lord." To this penitent sinner he said, "Why tarriest thou? arise and be baptized." It would not look well to fly in the face of the text, and say that his sins were washed away before he was admitted to the ordinance.

The Ethiopian eunuch is the only person that we find in the Acts professing to believe with the heart unto. righteousness, in order to baptism. And his faith seems to have had reference to one point alone; he said to Philip, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." He heard but one sermon, was in company with Philip perhaps one hour, and, ere they parted, Philip made a disciple of him by baptism.

It is true that Cornelius, and those in his house, Acts, ch. x, did receive the Holy Ghost while Peter was speaking the word, and received Christian baptism subsequently; but the

reader will observe that this was a peculiar case; it was the opening of the gospel dispensation to the Gentiles; when Peter, with the keys which Christ gave him, was to “ open the kingdom of heaven to the Gentiles,” as he had done previously to the Jews. And the same

reason that made it necessary to show Peter a vision to induce him to go to Cornelius, made it necessary to send upon those Gentiles the Holy Ghost prior to baptism; and, by examining the passage, you may observe that the six brethren who came from Joppa with Peter were astonished when they observed that God had given the Gentiles the Holy Ghost. "Then said Peter, who can forbid water ?" &c. When the news of this visit reached Jerusalem, they of the circumcision contended with Peter; and he, in making his defence, adduces this circumstance as his vindication: "While I WAS SPEAKING, the Holy Ghost came on them," &c., "and what was I that I could withstand God?"

These, doubtless, had a religious experience, in the fullest sense of the word; but it will appear evident, we think, to all who examine the gospels and the Acts, that the ordinance was never delayed for the want of an experience of grace. In almost every case, both Christ and his apostles gave the ordinance to all without exception, and without delay, who applied to them, and were willing to assume the responsibilities of discipleship. Hence we find in John vi, 60, 66, "Many, therefore, of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is

a hard saying, who can bear it? &c. And Jesus said, Doth this offend you? But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.".

Now, here are many disciples, who, of course, were baptized persons, that did not believe. And we are told that "Jesus knew from the beginning" that they believed not. They therefore never had believed; and consequently were not believers at the time of their baptism. And they never had faith afterward; for we read, "they went back and walked no more with him."

In further proof, it may be observed, that of all the thousands that Christ baptized before his death from "Jerusalem and the region round about," of them, on the day of Pentecost, there were to be found but one hundred and twenty disciples, until the conversion of the three thousand. Where were they? Had so many thousand true believers, with one consent, made shipwreck of faith? No, reader; they had been struck with the splendour of his miracles, they offered themselves as disciples, were entered into his school by baptism; but, disliking afterward his spiritual teachings, and the simplicity of his religion, they "went back." It is much easier to enter the church of Christ as disciples by baptism, than to perform those solemn, spiritual, and important duties to which we are introduced by taking this badge of discipleship.

From what we have written above, it will be gathered that we consider all as fit subjects for

baptism who credit the gospel message, are willing to receive Christ as their Saviour, and assume the responsibilities of Christianity. I was informed lately by a minister of the old Baptist Church, that a certain Dr. T., who, I am told, is one of Mr. Campbell's preachers, has been engaged lately re-baptizing the members of the old Baptist Church, who, years ago, received what is called "believers' baptism." They received believers' baptism before. What are they receiving now? I suppose the doctor is baptizing them "for the remission of sins." Query-Is not this reversing the order of Christian experience? or tacitly confessing that they were deceived before, and only had a false hope? I presume they repented, believed, and were baptized upon an experience of grace. And now do they go back? If they were baptized before, according to Mr. C's "law of baptism," pray what law are they now baptized under? Has Dr. T., in "expounding the ancient gospel" to them, added a supplement to the law? This reminds me of the case of a member of the Baptist Church, not one hundred miles from this, who has received baptism three different times. Do men who read their Bibles imagine that they find a "Thus saith the Lord" for giving Christian baptism to any man more than once? It is trifling with God's ordinance, and has as little authority from God's word as from common sense. In the close, suffer me to repeat the language of

« PrécédentContinuer »