deliver the message, Jesus himself met them, and repeated the order, go tell my brethren, that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me. In the forty days between his resurrection and ascension he had many interviews with his disciples, in which he instructed them in the things pertaining to the kingdom of God. Baptism was one of these things, and of this he chose to speak in the most public manner on the mountain in Galilee to above five hundred brethren at once. It is not very material to determine whether this were the third, the eighth, or the last appearance of Christ to his disciples, in which he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, and spoke to them of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God (3). To the assembly on the mountain, Jesus came, and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world (4). It is a glorious example of that benevolence with which Jesus used the vast powers committed to his trust. The authenticity of this passage is allowed by all Christians, but they differ very much in expounding it; and three classes of expositors deserve attention; the first enlarge, the second diminish, the third supersede the meaning of the passage. Without entering into verbal criticisms, upon which the christian religion doth not stand, for it is supported by facts true and demonstrative, and not by hypothetical reasonings confined only to a few learned men, it is observable, that one class of expositors so expound the text as to give it a much wider extent than Jesus intended, for they make it an authority from him to baptize infants, though they are not mentioned, and though there is not in the whole New Testament either precept or precedent for the practice. The order runs, teach all nations, baptizing them. The thing speaks for itself, the style is popular, the sense plain, and it must (3) Acts i. 3. (4) Matt. xxviii. 18, &c. mean either baptize whole nations, or such of all nations as receive your instructions, and desire to be baptized. The first is too gross to be admitted, because it cannot be effected without force, and the grossness of the one instantly turns the mind to the other, the plain and true sense. In the principles of the kingdom of Christ there is neither fraud nor force, nor is it suitable to the dignity of the Lord Jesus to take one man by conviction, and his ten children by surprise. The practice of the apostles, who understood the words, no doubt, is the best exposition of the language. Did they baptize any whole nation, or city, or village? yet they described the baptism of individuals in a style similar to that of the words in question. The following is an example. Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them, and such as believed Philip, preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, were baptized, both men and women (5). The history of this is thus described by Luke. The apostles which were at Jerusa lem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, not the whole country called Samaria, not the whole city of the same name, not Simon and his adherents, inhabitants of the city, but such only as believed Philip, had received the word of God, and were baptized. The same Philip baptized the eunuch, but not his servants; for Christianity is a personal, not a family, or national affair (6). Some families were baptized, but it was only when each person of each family was a believer, and not always then. Crispus (7), the chief ruler of the synagogue at Corinth, believed on the Lord with all his house, yet Paul baptized none but Crispus; for there might be very good reasons for the other believers in his family to defer their baptism (8). The Jailer at Philippi believed in God with all his house, therefore he was baptized, and all his straightway (9). The household of Lydia were brethren who were comforted by the apostles (1). The family of Stephanas of Corinth, which Paul baptized, were the first fruits of Achaia, and addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints, that is, to assist the deacons in relieving the poor (2). The second class so understand the transaction as to narrow the subject. To them it seems that Jesus addressed himself only to the apostles, and thence they argue, that none but apostles and apostolical men, their successors, have any right to administer baptism. This exposition is clogged with insuperable difficulties, and it is asked, is it a true fact that during the lives of the apostles none but they baptized? In the case just mentioned, Philip the deacon baptized the Samaritans, and Peter and John only went down to confer the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit (3). There was no apostle at Damascus when Paul was baptized, and a certain disciple at Damascus named Ananias baptized him (4), or, as he expresses it, buried him by baptism into death. While Paul was at Corinth many of the Corinthians hearing, believing, and were baptized, but he baptized none of them except Crispus and Gaius, and the family of Stephanas. Aquila, who was a resident, and Silas and Timothy, who were travellers, most likely baptized the rest (5). When Peter went to open the kingdom of heaven at Cæsarea to proselyted Gentiles, he did not baptize them himself, but he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord, which was done it should seem by Jews of Joppa who accompanied him, and who are called brethren of the circumcision who believed (6). Of this, as of the former case, the description is in general terms : the apostles and brethren that were in Judea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God, though only a few proselytes of one city had received it (7). It is inquired further, who are the successors of the apostles? Is it true that Jesus instituted a priesthood, or any order of men to succeed the apostles? After the defeat of that numerous, learned, and wealthy church, called catholick, further attempts to prove what they have contended for are extremely rash and entirely hopeless, and go on a principle wholly disallowed in pure Christianity, the necessity of a standing priesthood. The apostle Paul gave a rule to the Corinthians applicable to baptizing as well as to teaching. Ye may all proph (2) 1 Cor. i. 16. xvi. 15. (4) Acts ix. 18. -. -Rom. vi. 4. (6) Acts x. 5-23. (3) Acts viii. 15. esy one by one, that all may learn and all may be comforted, and the right of every Christian to enlarge the kingdom of Christ by teaching and baptizing others, is perfectly in unison with the whole spirit and temper of Christianity. The conduct of Jesus was uniform, he first called twelve, afterwards seventy, and, when he extended his commission to the whole world, he appointed above five hundred, and in them all Christians to the end of the world; nor is it imaginable that he uttered any prohibition against such as should increase his holy empire by instruction and baptism; for baptism is not an initiation into any particular society, which may have possessions, and in a participation of which justice requires the consent of the owners, but it is simply an admission to a profession of Christianity, to which wisely no temporal advantages of any kind ever were annexed by Jesus Christ. The third class so expound the words as to supersede the institution. They affirm that the words to the end of the world, should be rendered to the end of the age, which is either the age of the Jewish polity, and so the period expired at the destruction of Jerusalem, or the age of the apostles, and so it expired with the last apostle. Baptism therefore was only a temporary institute, and it ought not to be administered to all Christians now. To such Pagans as embrace Christianity it may be proper, but to the children of Christians it is not so. It is said on the contrary. There is no mention of any such cessation in any part of the New Testament, and to be wise above what is written is a most dangerous precedent, it would go further than is intended. ----There is nothing in baptism injurious to piety and virtue, or inconsistent with any improvement which a good man ought to promote. ----The abolition of baptism is not in agreement with the perfection of the economy, which being finished admits of no emendation. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away. in me. If my words abide in you, ye shall be my disciples. ...There was no connection between the lives of the apostles and baptism, for during their lives they were not the only administrators of it. ----There was no more connection between baptism and the destruction of Jerusalem, than between baptism and the de Abide struction of any other city. ----The notion leaves the most obedient Christians in a difficult case without a guide, by not fixing a precise time for leaving off to baptize. It is most natural to suppose, Jesus dated by his own economy, and appointed baptism to continue to the end of the age, that is, the end of the christian economy, the new age, in distinction from the Mosaical state of things. ----Christians of early ages did not understand that baptism was to be laid aside, for all parties continued to baptize beyond every period to which the words have been supposed to refer. Christians are exhorted to hold fast their profession of faith, having their bodies washed with pure water. It is allowed the end of the age does sometimes signify the end of the world, and some substantial reasons should be given why it does not stand for the end of the world here. This notion is chiefly founded on the supposition, that christian baptism was a continuation of a Jewish ceremony, proselyte-baptism, which is not a true fact. The words of Christ are not properly a law given to all Christians, but a direction to the Christians then present, and applicable to future ages, as a precedent. Jesus had foretold the destruction of Jerusalem, that the Jews should be led away captive into all nations, that his disciples should be hated of all nations, and that the gospel should be published among all nations, but he had not informed his disciples that they were to baptize all nations, and incorporate Gentiles with Jews into one body. Now he advises them to submit patiently to the wise providence of God, and to improve the event of their dispersion to the benevolent purposes of instructing all mankind, and participating with themselves in the general benefits of the Christian religion. The event discovered the wisdom and goodness of the charge, and the example is worthy of imitation by all Christians of all ages, even to the end of the world. In addition to the arguments from scripture, which each party hath advanced against the other, to confirm their own sense of the words of Christ, teach all nations, baptizing them, and the rest, many reasons have been taken from other topicks, as history, the interests of |