lar mode, I prefume a fingle cafk of water would have been fufficient for all he ever baptized!-and in whatever place people had lived, there could have been no want of water fufficient to baptize. In order to evade the force of this argument, many things have been faid. One time we are told, that Jordan was fo fhallow that there was not a fufficient depth of water to immerfe, or bury a perfon in; again, that the large quantity of water was neceffary, for the people and their beasts to drink; again, when John baptized in Enon because there was much water there, we are told that (udatta polla*) many waters, means many little fprings, not fufficient to immerse in. Now as to the first of thefe, no perfon who is acquainted with that ancient geographical account drawn by the pen of infpiration, can poffibly believe it. If any are at a lofs, let them obferve, that it was only fordable at particular places, as appears by Ehud, Gideon and the Gileadites taking thofe paffages. And alfo David's croffing it with his family in a ferry-boat. As to the fecond obfervation, if there was much water, it was neceffary to "fupply the multitudes that came to John's baptifm, for drink for themselves, and their horfes and camels ;"§ if John's preaching had been fuch, that it had broken up the city of Jerufalem, and collected all the people from the region round about, and they had all gathered to him in one day, yet ftill it would not be true, that they needed a river half as large as Jordan to have fupplied them all with drink; unless they had drank like like Job's behemoth I do not remember ever to have heard, that when any large gathering of people has been propofed, either for a military review, or for the facred purpose of an ordination, that they have once mentioned the propriety of having it near fome large river or fountain of water, in order to accommodate the people and their horses for drink; and yet it is highly probable, that upon fome fuch occafion, there have been as many together as ever at one time collected round the ancient Baptift. * John iii. 23. + Judges iii. 28. vii. 24. xii. 6. 15-18. § Clark's defence of infant baptifin, p. 436. + 2 Sam. xi Job xl. The fact appears to be this, that John's miniftry con tinued for a confiderable time, and that the people from time to time went out to hear him, and often we may fuppofe he had crowded affemblies. It is faid he preached in the wilderness of Judea, but he baptized in Jordan. Having thus mentioned the places chofen by John, we shall next take notice of the place where Philip baptized the Eunuch, which you fuppofe to be a matter of neceffity rather than choice; be that as it may, the account informs us,-they came unto a certain water; fuppofed by fome to be a fountain in a town called Bethfora, or a river called Eleutherus, which in that road must be paffed over.' Jerom defcribes the town of Bethforon, and mentions the fountain in it, in which he faith," the Acts of the apoftles relate, that the Eunuch of queen Candace was baptized here by Philip.+ Borchardus is of opinion, that it was "Nehel Efcol, that is, The brook of the cluster, from whence the spies carried the grapes. To the left of this valley, for the fpace of a mile, runs a river, in which Philip baptized the Eunuch of queen Candace, not far from Sicelech."+ Thus we have traced John and his candidates, and Philip and the Eunuch, to the water fide; we are now prepared to confider the confequent action. It is faid of John, that the people who went out to him, were baptized of him IN Jordan.-And Jefus, when he was bap. tized, went up ftraightway OUT OF THE WATER. It is added by Mark-And it came to pass in thofe days, that Jefus came from Galilee, and was baptized of John IN Jordan, and fraightway COMING UP OUT OF THE WAter. It is faid of Philip and the Eunuch, they went down both INTO THE WATER, both Philip and the Eunuch and he baptized him ; and when they were come up out of the water, he went on his way rejoicing. Poole's Contin. in loc. + De locis Hebraicis, fol. 89. 6. Defcript. terræ Sanct. c. 9. in Dr. Gill in loc. § Matt. iii. 6. 16. Mark i. 9, Now, Sir, can any perfon compare thefe accounts for a moment, and not fee the manifeft agreement in the action of John and Philip. Let the rite be performed in what mode foever, it is evident it was the fame in the people whom John baptized, and in the Saviour, and in the Eunuch. You obferve in this laft inftance, there is no account of any particular mode whatever.' I must take the liberty here again to diffent from you; for, I conclude it is a very particular account of the mode of plunging. Were you to be informed by a perfon of your acquaintance, that he faw a minister who was a ftranger to him, go down into the water with a candidate, and that he baptized him, and that they came up out of the water, I am perfuaded, without hesitation, you would conclude that they were Baptifts; and the account here given would decide the point in your mind, and perhaps in any other perfon's, in what mode the ordinance was adminiftered. Again, if instead of faying they went down both into the water, it had been faid that the candidate afcended, or was carried up the pulpit ftairs, (which is now the custom in many places) it would afford a strong presumption in favour of affufion. You obferve the instance abovementioned is the only one, recorded in fcripture, of going to a river, pond, pool, or brook, to baptize with Chriftian baptifm.' Sir, you will please alfo to observe, that this is the only inftance recorded, after the death of the Saviour, in which the act of baptizing is described; and here it evidently defcribes immerfion. But you fay, If we admit, according to our tranflation, that they both of them went down into the water, this is no evidence that either of them were plunged all under water. You will not fuppofe, that this text is a proof that Philip went all under water. But why not? If going into the water proves immersion, it proves that both were immerfed; for they went down both into the water.' To fome of your readers, this criticism does not appear in the most logical light; for no perfon ever fuppofed, that for Philip and the Eunuch to go into the water up to the knees or loins would be to immerse either; but when they had got into the water, there was evidently fomething done to one, that was not done to the other; i. e. Philip baptized or immerfed the Eunuch; but he did not baptize Philip. Therefore, for the fake of immerfing the Eunuch, they went both into the water, as that could not be confiftently performed without. In this light their going into the water will appear rational; but in every other view, totally inconfiftent. Had the object been only to fprinkle the Eunuch, this could have been performed at the water fide, without going down into it; yea, probably it might have been done decently in the chariot; for it is most reasonable to fuppofe, that a perfon of his diftinction and equipage would not travel that desert country, without fome veffels to obtain and convey water, when he came to it; unless he meant to serve himself in the way that Gideon's men did. Upon the whole, does it not appear to be the most eafy and natural conftruction of the paffage, to fuppofe the baptifm of the Eunuch to be an immerfion? I might here, if neceffary, produce a cloud of witneffes from Pædobaptift expofitors, full to my purpose ; but I omit them for the prefent. And although I would not addrefs you in that full ftrain of affurance, which the great apoftle did king Agrippa, yet I may modeftly inquire, Believeft thou not these things thyself? yea, I doubt not but -thou believeft. You take notice of this as a fingle instance, in which Christian baptifm has the appearance of immersion. But, Sir, would you think it reafonable, that in every inftance where it is faid that perfons were baptized, that all the circumstances relating to the act, should be particularly defcribed? Surely you could not. You might as reasonably fuppofe, that where circumcifion is mentioned, and the act not formally defcribed, that it was performed upon a different part, or in a different way from what the inftitution pointed out, as, that baptifm was administered in a different mode from the fpeci- mens given of it. It may be profitable here to reflect upon the subject a smoment, and put a few circumftances together, which may afford fome light in the prefent cafe. When John, that bright morning ftar, appeared, to give knowledge of falvation, he came to prepare the way, and proclaim the approach of the Sun of righteoufnefs. In order to this, he came preaching repentance for the remiffion of fins, and baptizing with (or in) water. The manner in which John baptized is fo particularly described, that very few Chriftians, of any denomination, have doubted its being by immersion. This was the beginning of the inftitution; therefore it was proper to defcribe it. The act was performed in Jordan. But, as the Baptift had informed the people, that there would one come after him mightier than he, who fhould baptize with the Holy Ghoft and fire: therefore, to avoid the danger of a mistake which might poffibly be made from this, in fuppofing that Chrift, when he came, would introduce a different mode of baptifm from what John practifed, we are exprefsly told, not only that he was baptized by John, but that it was adminiftered in the fame way to him, as to the people. He, alfo, was baptized in Jordan, and came up ftraightway out of it. After Jefus had paffed in triumph through the dark domains of death, he came to his difciples vefted with all power in heaven and earth, and, enlarging their commiffion, fent them to preach to Gentiles, as well as Jews; with an exprefs command, to baptize in the name of the triune God. Now, left we fhould look for fome alteration in the mode of baptifm, it is again exemplified, and here we fee it to be the fame as before ; Philip and the candidate go down into the water, he is baptized, and they come up again out of it. we fee the baptifm administered by John, in the beginning of the Chriftian difpenfation, before Christ began his perfonal miniftry; and that administered to Chrift himself; and that administered after he gave the great commiffion, as to the mode, were uniformly the fame, Thus From this, we think it rational to conclude, that thofe inftances of baptifm mentioned in the New Tef *The prepofition en might perhaps be better rendered in, as it is Matt. xii. 41. and many other places. I |