BAPTISM AN ACT OF FAITH, OF
OBEDIENCE, AND OF SALVATION.
By
Robert Govett, M.A.
SOME
time ago a Christian of note in the North of England, sent the writer a tract
in favour of Infant Baptism. It asserted, that baptism was the act of the baptizer, not of
the baptized. The tract was not to be
retained, but to be sent back with the reply to the objection. Again the same mysterious tract has fallen
into the writer’s hands. And now he puts
forth the present sheet in answer to its errors.
1. - BAPTISM IS AN ACT OF FAITH.
This
great truth lies upon the surface of Scripture.
John the Baptist was sent of God to announce to
"Then said Paul, ‘John verily baptized with the baptism of
repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on Him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.’"
Acts 19: 4.
The
acceptors of John’s tidings were immersed in the
When
baptism was commanded by our Lord after His resurrection, faith was the
pre-requisite. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved :"
Mark 16: 16.
This, or its equivalent - repentance, the apostles sought to produce in
the hearts of hearers, after the Holy Ghost come down, and the Church had begun
to be. "Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of
Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins."
Philip
goes to
Peter
preaches to the Gentile Cornelius and his friends concerning Jesus as the
Saviour. "To Him gave all the prophets witness that whosoever believeth
in Him * has received forgiveness of sins:"
Acts 10: 43.
The gifts of the Holy Ghost were bestowed on these as truly as on the
Jewish disciples at Pantecost: 11: 17.
They were as really believers as the Jewish ones. And the Israelite disciples at
[* Past tense. See also Acts 13: 39]
Paul
arises, and proclaims his Gospel. He
also baptizes those who believe the tidings. "Many
of the Corinthians hearing, believed and
were baptized:" Acts
18: 8. Of
Faith,
then, is the condition previously required of the baptized. What is not of faith is sin:
Peter
knows only of the baptism of believers.
He required repentance to precede it, at Pentecost. And when he writes his first Epistle, he is
still of the same mind. The essential
part of the rite was not the application of water and the bathing of the man’s
whole body, but the answer of “a good conscience toward God by the
resurrection of Jesus Christ:" 1 Pet.
3: 21. But that answer no new
born infant can give. Therefore Peter
never baptized an infant.
The
same truth appears in the, Epistle to the Romans. The Holy Spirit there discovers to us, that
both Jew and Gentile are alike unable to save themselves by their works. Therefore God has been pleased to provide salvation
for the lost, by means of the righteousness and atonement of His Son
Jesus. Believe in Him, and you are
justified. As truly as
you were lost in Adam before you began personally to sin, so you may be saved
in Christ before you begin to work righteousness:
There
is, therefore, no ground on which this imputation against God’s scheme of
salvation can be rested. The justified
by faith in Christ are buried with Him in the waters; undergoing an emblematic
death, along with Christ, to sin; and an emblematic resurrection to
righteousness. But this rite is only for
the justified by faith. For the
objection applies to them alone. The inspired reply touches them
alone.
The objection stated by the apostle lays hold on the reality
of God’s acceptance and salvation of the believer. The more that is seen,
the stronger is the seeming force of the objection. ‘I am saved. May I not then
go on in sin?’ The answer of the Spirit is
- ‘Death to sin, and resurrection with
Christ to holiness are to follow at once on justification
in Him.’ That is God’s
scheme. It leaves no loophole for the
entrance of licentiousness among the justified.
But neither the objection nor the reply hold good in the sprinkling of
infants. They are not justified in
Christ; nor would their evil deeds after coming to adult age prove, that
justification by faith in the righteousness of another is a scheme calculated
to produce immorality. The objection
applies only to the justified by faith.
The Spirit’s answer is - 'Baptism is, by God’s order administered to the
justified by faith,’ and the meaning of that proves that
your objection against God’s scheme is groundless.
Since
infants are not justified by faith, nor will their misdoings afford the
unbeliever a handle against the truth, no infant was then baptized. It was a rite belonging only to the
justified by faith in Christ: Rom. 6: 1-6.
Circumcision
of the Jewish male infant was perfectly right; for the basis of that
dispensation was the flesh put under law, to discover to us what man is. But to perform ceremonies now
in which the receiver is destitute of faith is to degrade Christ’s Gospel to
the level of the flesh, and to set men again under
law. It is to do so, after it has been
expressly told us, that the flesh profiteth nought;
that in it dwelleth no good thing; that the children
of the flesh are not sons of God: Rom 9: 8; 7: 18;
8: 6; John 6: 63.
The
service of God now is service in spirit and in truth. Wherever, therefore, there is not the spirit
in the service of God, there is not truth: John 4:
23. It is to fall into the error
of the latter day, the religion of which is denounced as the form, denying the
power: 2 Tim. 3: 5. Even John the Baptist could refuse the
attempt to present in baptism the flesh of Abraham’s sons of God: Matt. 3: 9.
Take up the flesh as your foundation now, and baptismal regeneration
enters at that door, together with a fleshly priesthood, and a salvation by
ceremonies, not by faith. The only
children God owns now are the receivers of His Son, born not of flesh, but of
the Spirit: John 1: 12, 13.
Are
we to introduce into the assembly of God’s children
those whom we own to be as yet only flesh begotten of the flesh? Nay!
What says the Spirit of God to this proposal? "Do ye not
hear the law?" Even so
far back as Abraham’s days the thing was decided. "Cast out the
bondwoman and her son" [of the flesh]: Gal.
4: 21-31.
It
was bad to work confusion in
The
rite of circumcision recognised and set up the three great distinctions of the
flesh. It discriminated between (1) male
and female. It was designed for males,
not for females. (2) It distinguished
between Jew and Greek. It was designed
for the Israelite; not for the Gentile.
(3) It severed between freeman and slave. The slave was to be circumcised as soon as
bought. But baptism is of God’s express design a rite directly the opposite of
this. It is the burial beneath the
waters of all these fleshly distinctions, to set up instead in the risen Christ
a new unity of the Spirit.
We
come to the next aspect of the subject.
2. BAPTISM IS AN ACT OF
OBEDIENCE.
Here
it is objected - ‘Obedience to an ordinance is
something unchristian, and quite alien to the character of our dispensation.'
1.
What do you mean by an ‘ordinance?’ Do
you mean ‘a command in general?’ Then
obedience to Christ’s commands is of the very spirit of the Gospel. "If ye love Me, keep My commandments:" John 14: 15. "If
ye keep My commandments, ye shall abide in My love, even as I kept My Father’s
commandments and abide in His love:"15: 10. "Ye are My friends if
ye do whatsoever I command you:" 12: 2; 2 Pet.
2: 21; Acts 5: 29, 32.
2.
Will you say, you mean thereby ‘a ceremonial command?’ Even with this narrowing of the sense, it is
untrue. "Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep
the ordinances, as I delivered them unto you:" 1 Cor. 11: 2. "Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but
the keeping of the commandments of God:
" 1 Cor.
7: 19; 14: 37. "Hereby we know that we know Him, if we keep His
commandments:" 1 John 2:
3-6; 3: 22-24; 5: 2, 3.
It
is indeed a weak way of putting the duty of baptism, to say - ‘Submit yourself to the ordinance.’
But did not the writer know WHOSE
command is in question, when that phrase is used? Is not the Church to be obedient to all the
commands of Christ, even as the wife is to obey the husband? Eph. 5.
The sinner accepts the grace of God manifested in Christ, and then
begins to obey Him: Act 5: 29; Heb. 5: 9. The ungodly are, on the contrary,
characterised as "children of disobedience,"
in whom the devil works (Eph. 2: 2), and
on whom the wrath of God is coming: v. 6. Believers are to walk as "the children of obedience:" 1 Pet. 1: 14, 22.
Why was God’s
own people of old shut out from the hope of their calling when now they
had already arrived at the borders of the land? Because of their disobedience arising out of
partial unbelief: (Greek.) Heb. 4: 6, 11. The very object of Paul’s apostleship was to
lead his hearers to "THE OBEDIENCE OF FAITH:"
Rom.1: 5; 4: 12; 16: 26.
‘But (it is objected) baptism
is the act of the baptizer, not of the baptized.’
Was
ever anything more weak? That the baptized is passive while being immersed, is true.
But morally speaking, all through the observance,
he is active. Was not Jesus active in
taking a long journey to seek baptism at the hands of John, and in over-ruling
the resistance of the baptizer? Was not
Paul obedient and active in submitting to baptism at the exhortation of Ananias? Acts
9: 18; 22: 16. Was not the eunuch active in asking for baptism? in descending into the water, and coming, out of it? Acts 7. Doe’s not the Scripture say - "As many of you as were baptized into Christ put on
Christ:" Gal. 3: 27. Is there no activity here?
‘But (says the opponent again), there is only a command to the baptizer to baptize; none to the baptized
to be baptized.’
And
so it is thought that infant baptism may be smuggled in. For certainly infants are not active in
seeking baptism! But to what strange
statements are opposers driven! ‘No command issued by Christ to hearers
of the Gospel to be baptized!' Even in Matthew
28: 19 - the text pointed at - the contrary is apparent. There our Lord commands the disciples to
immerse the receivers of the Gospel. Is
not that an indirect call to the receivers
of the Gospel to be baptized?
When Lysias called to him two centurions,and said - "Make ready two hundred soldiers to go to
Would
they not have been justly punished, if disobedient? Was it not the voice of their commander
issuing through their officers? Of
course it was!
So,
then, when Jesus calls on apostles to baptize disciples, it is an indirect call
to disciples to be immersed. When He
says - "He that believeth and is baptized shall
be saved" - He virtually says to the hearers - ‘As then you
believe My word, and value My salvation, be
immersed!’ Believe the Gospel! Be immersed as the proof of such belief! Ergo, infants are excluded. For infants have
no faith. "How shall, they believe in Him of whom they have not heard?"
Again,
if the call be to the baptizer or the supposed active party alone, where
is the demand on Christian, parents to get their children baptized ? ‘This is their duty,’ you say. Show us, then,
the passage where this call is given! We do not own any duties of Christians
but those written in the New Testament.
But
there are DIRECT COMMANDS TO BELIEVERS TO BE BAPTIZED. (1.) As soon as
the Holy Spirit descended, and the Church began to be built, the direct
and individual command was given.
To the enquiry- ‘Men and brethren, what
shall we do?' comes the answer
- "Repent and BE BAPTIZED EVERY ONE OF YOU IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST:"
Acts 2: 38.
Can he be one well-taught in the Scriptures who overlooks the second of Acts?
(2.)
Peter is sent to preach to Cornelius and his friends. They believe.
"He commanded them to he baptized in the name of the Lord:" Acts 10: 48.
(3.)
Saul the persecutor is arrested by the Lord.
Changed of heart, he enquires, "Lord,
what wouldst Thou have me to do?" Jesus assures him, that in the city of
This
is a most weighty case. He has not been
three days a believer. He has eaten
nothing for that time. But as soon as his
eyes are opened, and before he partakes of food, he is baptized. Even this rapid baptism,
as we think it, is gently chided of delay. "And now WHY
TARRIEST THOU." How long have you tarried,
reader? And why?
Before
he testifies to others of forgiveness in Christ, he is to receive the sign of
forgiveness himself. "Arise and wash away thy sins!" Is that passivity or
activity? And what says he to those
assembled under his teaching? "Be ye followers (imitators) of me, even, as I also am of Christ:
" 1 Cor. 11: 1. Now Christ was immersed, though He might have
pleaded exemption; and with this act of righteousness the Father is so well
pleased, that He opens the heaven, and proclaims Jesus His Beloved Son. In this Paul follows Christ. Being commanded to submit to the ordinance of
baptism, he obeyed. So
then, Christian, if you would not be disobedient, you must follow in the
footsteps of Paul and of Christ.
The
baptism which Paul preached was the baptism of believers. It is an error to speak of as if that were
the point for which we contend. We will
baptize those who believe, even though they should be but
children of twelve or fourteen.
Thus
received, baptism is a testimony of much weight, and is felt by all to be
so. When in heathen lands, one is
wrought upon by the Spirit of God, and is about to join the
Let
me take an example or two. Bundhoo was an Indian idolater. He became servant in a missionary’s
house. There he was taught the
Scriptures, and prayed for. He asked for
a New Testament, that he might read "the good news"
himself. He began to go to chapel, and
his attention to the preacher was observed by many. At home he was often found in some retired
place, on his knees, in prayer. By
degrees, all his heathen practices were given up. That drew upon him scorn and contempt from
his family and friends, though he had done nothing to occasion the loss of
caste. When asked why he did not profess
himself a disciple, he would reply, with tears, "How
can I give up my wife and child?"
He thought he could be a Christian in heart, while a heathen in
name. But the Spirit of God was striving
with Bundhoo.
A short time ago he came to the missionary with whom he now lives, and
said, "My mind is much troubled, I can wait no
longer, I desire to be baptized." You may be sure his minister was very glad to
hear him say so, believing that he had long been a Christian in heart. Not so his friends and neighbours, when they
knew he was determined to join the Christians.
They were very angry, and did all they could to hinder him. He had to endure the scoffs and reproaches of
his relations, and even the curses of his mother. They then drove him away from them, and
he went to stay at the house of the missionary. "His
wife deserted him, but they could not take his little boy from him, though they
tried to do so." "I believe it was on
the 9th of last March, about eight in the morning he was baptized in the river
Take
another case, of a young female in
"No words can tell with what intense interest and love we
watched this lamb daily reaching nearer and nearer to the door of escape from
the dark wilderness of heathenism, into the safe and happy fold of the Good
Shepherd on earth. Again and again she
came imploring to be allowed to receive baptism in the
name of the Good Shepherd. We encouraged
her to wait, and hope, and pray. We told
her she was the Good Shepherd’s little lamb, and He was watching her with tenderest love. He
knew all the dangers to which she was exposed, and that He would protect and
deliver her whilst she kept looking only to Him.
"On Saturday, September 4th, Soobbee
came to us. During five nights previous
to her coming she was unable to sleep, from the multitude of thoughts within;
and no wonder, since she was about to cut herself off from relations and
friends, and moreover, there was the fear lest after all she might not escape.
- She came, and we sent and called for her parents at once. On their arrival,
Mr. - explained to them the reason of calling them, namely, not to ask their
permission as to the baptizing of the child, but as to what they would do with
her after she had been baptized? Would
they receive her again at home, treat her kindly, and give her food? Or would they cast her off? He said there was nothing in the receiving
Christian baptism which justified them in abandoning their children, and he
hoped the day would soon come when parents would allow their children freedom
in their homes to worship, God according to the dictates of their
consciences. This was the point kept
steadily before them, and by it the responsibility of forsaking their child was
thrown on them. It was as a very trying
time. Our hearts ached for the parents,
and ached for the child, placed in so trying a position, who in order to follow
Jesus was obliged to turn a deaf ear to the weeping entreaties of parents and
friends. Her relatives tried every means
to induce her to change her mind, and return home with them without receiving
baptism. Soobbee,
however, by God's grace, was as firm as a rock, proving by her steadfastness
that the inner change was the work of God, and not the work of man. Once and again they seized her as they would
a naughty child, and tried to compel her to go, by angrily commanding her to
arise and go home. Then we interfered
and told them we could allow no violence to be used in our house. Relation after relation, friend after friend,
appealed by turns to her, but in vain.
Finally the mother threw herself at my feet, and entreated me to command
Soobbee to go with them.
To this I replied the door was wide open, and her child was at
liberty to go if she wished to do so; but I could not and would not command her
to go, as she had chosen the right path.
They all went away at five o'clock, and in the presence of several
Christian friends, Mr, C - administered baptism to her, and gave her the name
of Caroline, that being the name of the kind friend who has offered to pay her
wages as monitor.
"Her people came again on Sunday morning to say farewell. In the evening Caroline was very desirous to
go to the Lord’s house, and thinking her people had given her up and would make
no disturbance, we went. Soon, however,
her friends found out she was in their neighbourhood, and shortly after the
church was filled with them. They sat
and gazed upon her as she sat quietly in a row of young companions. She saw them, and whispered to my ayah,
‘Naomi, I am not afraid.’ But some
hearts were afraid for her, lest she should be seized and torn in pieces whilst
in the defenceless attitude of kneeling.
However, the Lord kept them back, and we drove quietly off without
receiving any injury. Then Caroline
said, ‘They would like to kill me; let them do so; I am not afraid; I should go
to my Father’s house, and there is no sorrow there.’ I felt for the sorrowful tone in which the
last words wore said - ‘no sorrow there;’ but in reply said, ‘I hoped she would
be spared for many, many years, to serve faithfully the Lord she loved so
well.’ ‘I wish that too,’ she answered,
quietly. On Monday morning they came
again to demand her few jewels.
"I told Caroline we would give them back in case her parents
asked for them, and I would replace them.
To this her instantaneous reply was, ‘I do not want them any more.’ Native girls are famous for their love of
ornaments; so we see in her reply an additional
evidence how real was the change wrought by the Spirit of God in her.
"Knowing she was fond of cocoa nuts they gave her one. She did not eat it, as we had warned her
against tasting anything given her at this time by her friends. It turned green in the course of the day. Her friends came again and again to ask her
if she would go home with them. They had
put something into the cocoa nut which would have affected her mind. At last, seeing she was unchangeable, her
brother, looking like a demon, furiously exclaimed to me, ‘It is all your
doing; it is all your doing.’ Caroline, frightened, escaped within, and I shut
the door, saving the parents might come within, but no one else."
Was
there no activity here? Was there no
testimony to the power of faith in Christ?
Even so there is, though in less degree, in this country; specially when the party baptized is a female.
(1)
Baptism is a profession of faith on the part of the
believer before the
(2.)
Baptism is a confession before the world. It is a visible
leaving of the perverse generation: God’s own, appointed way of testifying our
death and burial to it. "With many other words
(after the call to be baptized) did he testify and
exhort, saying, ‘Save yourselves from the untoward
generation.' Then they that gladly
received his word were baptized:" Acts 2: 40, 41.
How
strongly did Paul confess Christ, when, after having been the persecutor, as
the follower of Moses, he was buried to the law, in order to follow Christ: Gal. 2: 19.
(3)
It is also full of consolation and benefit to the believer’s self. God witnesses visibly to the immersed man of faith, that his sins are washed away, and that himself is in
Christ. He is set in the place of God’s
grace and acceptance. He has visibly
passed from death to life. He is on his
way to the first and blest resurrection.
He is one of the violent ones, forcing his way to the kingdom and its
glory, despite the opposition of men and Satan: Matt.
11: 12.
‘But
what good would it be, if I, a Christian of twenty or thirty years’ standing,
were to submit to baptism? Would it add
anything to my previous testimony? What
would people say about it?’
‘Would
it be any good?’ Yes, it would! It were indeed rather humiliating to have to
confess, that for so long a period I stood out against the clear command of the
Saviour; the first command addressed to one who has received the Gospel. But ‘Better
late than never!’ Better be humbled before men now, than
rebuked by Christ at His judgment-seat for disobedience? ‘John, did you hear master’s bell ring?’ ‘Yes; but it was half an hour ago. I wish I had gone at first, but it’s too late
now!’ No, disciple! It's not too late yet! But soon the Master will be here, and
then it will be too late. "Thus it becometh us to
fulfil all righteousness."
Jesus had been for thirty years then the Father’s servant, yet He obeys.
Never mind what men say! Look to Christ.
But
why were apostles not baptized with Christian baptism? That they were baptized with John’s, I
grant. But John’s was wholly different
from Christ’s.
This
should be proved, not assumed.
Fundamentally John’s baptism was the same as Christ’s. They used the same element - water. The requisite preparation for
such was repentance, or faith: Mark 1: 4. The spiritual meaning of each was - the
forgiveness of sins; and severance from the evil generation. Baptism in each signified the giving up of
all hope from ourselves:. Mark
1: 5. It was a death and burial
to Moses: a rising in new life, to listen to Jesus the Christ. Its meaning as it regards the future, is a washing and cleansing with a view to entering
the millennial kingdom of glory: Isa. 1: 16, 19, 31.
These things hold good still.
Jesus
before His death is baptized with John’s baptism, in His character of Son
of God: Mark 1: 9. He is the example for the sons of God: 1 Pet. 2: 21.
In it God is well pleased: the heavens open, and the Persons of
the Godhead on whose name our dispensations turns, then manifest themselves:
Matt. 3.; 28: 19. After that, Jesus' and John both
baptized together; and Jesus proclaims the future kingdom of
glory, as John did: John 3: 22; Mark 1: 14, 15. Why was John sent to immerse in water? On purpose to manifest Jesus to
That
there were differences, we admit.
(1)
John was sent to
(2)
John was unable to communicate the miraculous gifts of the Spirit. Jesus sent them at Pentecost. But the immersion in water and its spiritual
meaning continued. Jesus’ baptism, then,
is inclusive of John’s, but goes beyond it.
(3)
And Christian baptism takes a deeper tone because of Christ’s now finished
work. Jesus must be owned to be the
Christ in order to the reception of Christian baptism. Also it should be seen, that the believer is
one with the Christ in His death and resurrection. The supernatural gifts we have not. Jesus accepts the apostles as baptized: in
their case baptism was not to be repeated: John 13:
10.
‘But this is a dispensation of God’s grace - why then not
admit the infant into the place where the Holy Ghost dwells?’
Because the flesh ought not to be set in the Church, where
the Holy Ghost dwells. And no rite can
put the flesh there. The infant is
only flesh begotten of flesh. You are
disobeying Christ, and working confusion, if you do. There are, moreover, two aspects of
grace. The Holy Ghost works in the
world, to convince of sin, of righteousness, and judgment to come. That is the place which
God assigns to all who are of the world, sons of Adam and not sons of God. In the Churches of old all were believers,
sons of God by faith : Gal.
3: 26. Besides if you admit the
infant into the Church because the Spirit is there, why not the adult
unbeliever? To put the unbeliever among
the sons of God is mischief to the souls of multitudes.
Either
give the infant the Lord’s Supper as well as baptism,
or neither. Self-examination and faith
are indeed required previous to partaking the Supper. But if the want of faith can be got over in
regard of baptism, so may it in regard of the Supper. If the Supper be the union of the members of
Christ, and the infant be not one of them, neither then is it to be immersed
into Christ, and exhibited as one of His members in baptism.
‘But what of 1 Cor. 7: 14?
Does not that prove that the infants of
families where one parent was a believer were baptized?’
Nay!
the very reverse!
If so, the heathen wife was not, as Paul assumes she was, on a level
with the baptized children. But see a
tract in which this question is fully gone into.*
[*
"Your children holy," or Were infants
baptized in Apostolic times?
Fletcher,
‘But does not Jesus in Matthew 18. charge
disciples to receive little children?
Does He not say there? – “Of such is the kingdom of heaven."'
No:
He does not! There is no word about the reception
of infants in Matthew 18. It is the reception of those men of faith who
resemble little children: verses 4, 5. It refers to "little ones who believe in" Christ: 6. And
where Jesus in the nineteenth chapter declares, that of persons resembling little
children the kingdom is composed; He does not baptize the infants
that were brought. Moreover
He is speaking of the future millennial kingdom of glory. All who wish to enter that,
must be men of peace, and not of strife and envying. "Whosoever shall
not receive the
We
come to the third point.
3. THE BAPTISM OF FAITH IS AN
ACT ASSURING SALVATION.
(1)
This is testified by well-known texts. "He that
believeth, and is baptized shall be saved:" Mark 16: 16. "The
like figure whereunto (to Noah's salvation in the ark) baptism doth now save us also.. not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the
answer of a good conscience toward God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:"
1 Peter 3: 21 ; Luke 1: 77 ; Rom. 10: 10; Acts 2:
21, 47 ; Titus 3: 5.
It
is strangely objected ‘That it is
unscriptural to affirm baptism to be the expression of a spiritual standing
already given.'
This
is an objection quite necessary to the argument of a sprinkler of infants. For
if the contrary be the case, Infant Baptism is unscriptural. But we have
already shown that all rightly baptized persons are saved.
Peter expressly affirms it. The essential requisite to baptism is "the answer of a good conscience." Where that
is found, conjoined with baptism, there is salvation. But are all infants
who are baptized (let us grant, for argument’s sake, sprinkling or pouring to
be baptism) saved? None will affirm it - none at least of those
with whom we have to do.
Abraham
is the father of all believers, of all the justified by faith. His justification was the pattern of ours. How was it then with him? He was first justified, then
he received circumcision as a sign and seal of the righteousness by faith which
he already possessed while uncircumcised: Rom. 4:
11.
Proceed we further to exhibit proofs that the baptism, owned by
Christ represents and assures to the believer his salvation.
(2.)
Let us take the work of Christ. Faith in that saves. The believer really dies with Christ by faith:
Rom. 7: 2. "You,
dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh bath He quickened (made
alive) together with Him, having forgiven you all
trespasses:" Col. 2: 13 ; Gal. 2: 16, 20. This previous standing given by faith is
shadowed forth visibly to all in the believer’s burial beneath the waters, and
his arising out of them. With Paul, the
burial in baptism with Christ is the proof of a previous death with Him.
(3.)
Regard salvation as the work of the Holy Spirit. Then he that believes in Jesus is already
begotten of God: John 1: 12, 13; 3: 3; 1 John 4: 1;
5: 1. He is begotten again to a living hope, who was dead in sins. He has new life.
Now
to the new invisible life God has annexed a new BIRTH.
The begotten of God are by His will to
be born out of water: John 3: 5. The old Adam is visibly buried as dead, the new man alive to God comes forth, in emblem, from
the womb of the waters. The visible
ceremony is God’s appointed testimony to the previous invisible reality. And this testimony, striking the heart through
the eye, has oft been blessed of God to convincing the unbeliever of his sin,
and leading him to faith in Christ and regeneration by the Spirit.
(4.)
Take the typical histories to which the Holy Ghost appeals: 1 Peter 4: 17-21. Our salvation is like that of Noah’s family in
the ark, which by God’s command the patriarch constructed, for the saving of
his house from the destroying flood. Our
ark now is the righteousness framed by Christ in His obedience and death. If that be denied, let us say then that Christ
is the ark. But the ark now is invisible. It is entered by faith alone. Whoever enters is saved. Entry into the ark is virtual salvation. But the believer’s passage through the waters
of baptism is the visible salvation which testifies of the previous virtual
one. He is buried under the waters of
death, and sunk under judgment. But he
comes out saved; visibly set beyond the floods of destruction. Like Noah on Ararat, he treads on a new world
- he stands under the favour of God.
(5.)
Or look at
The
cleansing of the man from sin is primarily effected by faith. This God hath done for him who believes: Acts 10: 15; 11: 9. The Most High purified the
Gentiles’ heart by faith, as well as the Jews’. 15.
But after faith came baptism, or the
visible and entire bathing of the whole man, emblematic of the previous
forgiveness of the disciple.
But
how does that hold in Gal. 3? "As many as
were baptized into Christ put on Christ" - not "witnessed
our having previously put Him on."
What
saith that Scripture? "For ye are all sons of God by faith in Christ Jesus."
How is that true of babes?
Are they all the children of God by
faith? Are they "in Christ?" Here, while baptism is partly passive, it is
seen to be, both before and after the immersion, active. And the reference in this verse (Gal. 3: 27) is to the change of dress required by
immersion. The baptized put off their
old and wet clothes to put on their new and dry ones. Now the old clothes put off represent the
habits of the old Adam; the new clothes put on represent the emblematic
clothing with Christ.
How
can infants be thus active? How can they
put on Christ of whom they have not heard? The clothing with Christ’s righteousness takes
place at once on faith. The clothing
after baptism is a visible clothing representative of the former.
(6)
Baptism represents also the believer’s consecration as priest. By the blood of Christ he becomes one of the
new priesthood. But his visible consecration is effected in baptism. His immersion was typified of old in Exodus 29: 4.
(7)
In like manner Christian baptism answers to the, law’s service over the healed
leper. He must first be healed. Then came the bathing of his whole body in
water, and he should be visibly clean: Lev. 14: 9.
The bath witnessed to his present
condition, as delivered from his plague. God’s reception of the man at once on his
invisible regeneration, precedes. Then follows baptism to
testify to man of God’s previous acceptance. God witnessed by the supernatural unction of
the Holy Ghost to His reception of Cornelius and his friends. After that how could man refuse to receive
them by baptism into the visible assembly of God? Acts 15: 7-9.
To sum up then. It has been shown
that baptism is an act (1) of faith, (2) of obedience,
and (3) of salvation. But on these grounds infants are excluded.
They possess not the essential requisite of faith; they cannot render the
obedience of faith; nor do they possess the blessed result - salvation. This ordinance of Christ as applied to them is
an acted lie. Baptism represents death
to Adam and life in Christ. The infant
is still dead in sins, and is not alive in Christ. Baptism figures the man’s death to sin, and
new life toward God. The babe is not
dead to sin, and has not been begotten of God. Baptism testifies that the person is saved. He is a son of Noah within the ark of
salvation, and has passed the waters of death and, judgment. That is false as it regards the infant of the
flesh. And so it runs throughout each
aspect of this ceremony of Christ.
The
question here discussed is most momentous to the cause of truth. Either the scheme of God
supposes faith to precede baptism, and then salvation and its
accompanying benefits are already possessed. Or faith is not required: all that is demanded
is a ceremony wrought upon a child of the flesh. Then it follows, that baptism is a magical
rite, which effects faith and salvation. For certain it is that the Scripture supposes
the baptized to be men of faith, already saved. "By grace ye
are saved." "For by grace are ye saved through faith"
Eph. 2: 5, 8. Which of these views is the truth if the
latter, the ceremonial religion of the priest and of
Does
not God love truth? Does not Christ call
for faithfulness in His stewards? Only
by connecting the sign with the thing signified can you keep up truth and
reality. The red flag hoisted on yonder
heath is the sign that the Rifles are practising, and that if you draw near,
you are within range and in danger. A
board of notice tells you so. Hoist the
flag, then, when the firing is going on, and the sign and the thing signified
agree. But what if the flag be run up
when there is no one on the ground? And
never hoisted, when the soldiers are in exercise? 0 then, here is just ground of complaint, and of the punishment too, of those who have
falsified the sign. If any
are killed because of it, the blame lies at their door.
First, ascertain the reality - then give the sign! The railway signal-man must first see the train in the
tunnel before his red flag gives notice of it. If he runs up the green flag when there is
danger, and the engineer hurls his express against the obstruction which he
could not see, the signal-man is impeached and punished. Baptizer of infants - you are that guilty
signal-man!
Of
what then is baptism the sign? Of the
receiver’s faith in a risen Christ! It
is a token that he is forgiven, cleansed from sin. Apply this to an unbeliever,
and you act an untruth! What does
baptism signify? That the receiver is
alive to God, regenerate by His Spirit. Apply
this to one spiritually dead, in the flesh and not in the spirit, and you
deceive! Baptism affirms,
that the receiver is a member of Christ. Apply this sign to one who is only a child of Adam,
and you sin.
You
do mischief to the world. You lead it,
and the sprinkled, when they grow up, to trust in sacraments. You corrupt the Church by
building dead stones among the living ones of God’s temple. The Lord awaken His
ministers to see this sin and flee from this unfaithfulness! "It is
required in stewards that a man be found faithful"
-------