§. IV.
Proof 4.Fourthly, That the one Baptism of Christ is not a Washing with Water, appears from 1 Pet. iii. 21. The like Figure[114] whereunto even Baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the Filth of the Flesh, but the Answer of a good Conscience towards God) by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. So plain a Definition of Baptism is not in all the Bible; and therefore, seeing it is so plain, it may well be preferred to all the coined Definitions of the School-men. The plainest Definition of the Baptism of Christ in all the Bible.The Apostle tells us, first negatively, what it is not, viz. Not a putting away of the Filth of the Flesh: Then surely it is not a Washing with Water, since that is so. Secondly, He tells us affirmatively what it is, viz. The Answer of a good Conscience towards God, by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ; where he affirmatively defines it to be the Answer (or Confession, as the Syriack Version hath it) of a good Conscience. Now this Answer cannot be but where the Spirit of God hath purified the Soul, and the Fire of his Judgment hath burned up the unrighteous Nature; and those in whom this Work is wrought may be truly said to be baptized with the Baptism of Christ, i. e. of the Spirit and of Fire. Whatever Way then we take this Definition of the Apostle of Christ’s Baptism, it confirmeth our Sentence: For if we take the first or negative Part, viz. That it is not a putting away of the Filth of the Flesh, then it will follow that Water-baptism is not it, because that is a putting away of the Filth of the Flesh. Water-baptism shut out from the Baptism of Christ.If we take the second and affirmative Definition, to wit, That it is the Answer or Confession of a good Conscience, &c. then Water-baptism is not it; since, as our Adversaries will not deny, Water-baptism doth not always imply it, neither is it any necessary Consequence thereof. Moreover, the Apostle in this Place doth seem especially to guard against those that might esteem Water-baptism the true Baptism of Christ; because (lest by the Comparison induced by him in the preceding Verse, betwixt the Souls that were saved in Noah’s Ark, and us that are now saved by Baptism; lest, I say, any should have thence hastily concluded, that because the Former were saved by Water, this Place must needs be taken to speak of Water-baptism) to prevent such a Mistake, he plainly affirms, that it is not that, but another Thing. He saith not that it is the Water, or the putting away of the Filth of the Flesh, as accompanied with the Answer of a good Conscience, whereof the one, viz. Water, is the sacramental Element, administered by the Minister; and the other, the Grace or Thing signified, conferred by Christ; but plainly, That it is not the putting away, &c. than which there can be nothing more manifest to Men unprejudicate and judicious. Moreover Peter calls this here which saves [Greek: antitypon: αντιτυπον], the Anti-type, or the Thing figured; whereas it is usually translated, as if the like Figure did now save us; thereby insinuating that as they were saved by Water in the Ark, so are we now by Water-baptism. But this Interpretation crosseth his Sense, he presently after declaring the contrary, as hath above been observed; and likewise it would contradict the Opinion of all our Opposers. The Protestants denying Water-baptism its absolute Necessity to Men’s Salvation; although the Papists say, None can be saved without it, yet grant Exceptions.For Protestants deny it to be absolutely necessary to Salvation; and though Papists say, none are saved without it, yet in this they admit an Exception, as of Martyrs, &c. and they will not say that all that have it are saved by Water-baptism; which they ought to say, if they will understand by Baptism (by which the Apostle saith we are saved) Water-baptism. For seeing we are saved by this Baptism, as all those that were in the Ark were saved by Water, it would then follow, that all those that have this Baptism are saved by it. Now this Consequence would be false, if it were understood of Water-baptism; because many, by the Confession of all, are baptized with Water that are not saved; but this Consequence holds most true, if it be understood as we do, of the Baptism of the Spirit; since none can have this Answer of a good Conscience, and, abiding in it, not be saved by it.
[114] Or, as it should be translated, Whose Model Baptism does also now save us.
Proof 5.Fifthly, That the one Baptism of Christ is not a Washing with Water, as it hath been proved by the Definition of the one Baptism, so it is also manifest from the necessary Fruits and Effects of it, which are three Times particularly expressed by the Apostle Paul; The Effects and Fruits of the Baptism of Christ.as first, Rom. vi. 3, 4. where he saith, That so many of them as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his Death, buried with him by Baptism into Death, that they should walk in Newness of Life. Secondly, to the Galatians iii. 27. he saith positively, For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ. And thirdly, to the Colossians ii. 12. he saith, That they were buried with him in Baptism, and risen with him through the Faith of the Operation of God. It is to be observed here, that the Apostle speaks generally, without any exclusive Term, but comprehensive of all. He saith not, Some of you that were baptized into Christ, have put on Christ, but as many of you; which is as much as if he had said, Every one of you that hath been baptized into Christ, hath put on Christ. Whereby it is evident that this is not meant of Water-baptism, but of the Baptism of the Spirit; Which Effects Water-baptism wants.because else it would follow, that whosoever had been baptized with Water-baptism had put on Christ, and were risen with him, which all acknowledge to be most absurd. Now supposing all the visible Members of the Churches of Rome, Galatia, and Colosse had been outwardly baptized with Water (I do not say they were, but our Adversaries will not only readily grant it, but also contend for it) suppose, I say, the Case so, they will not say they had all put on Christ, since divers Expressions in these Epistles to them shew the contrary. So that the Apostle cannot mean Baptism with Water; and yet that he meaneth the Baptism of Christ, i. e. of the Spirit, cannot be denied; or that the Baptism wherewith these were baptized (of whom the Apostle here testifies that they had put on Christ) was the one Baptism, I think none will call in Question. Now admit, as our Adversaries contend, that many in these Churches who had been baptized with Water had not put on Christ, it will follow, that notwithstanding that Water-baptism, they were not baptized into Christ, or with the Baptism of Christ, seeing as many of them as were baptized into Christ had put on Christ, &c. From all which I thus argue:
Arg. 1.If the Baptism with Water were the one Baptism, i. e. the Baptism of Christ, as many as were baptized with Water would have put on Christ:
But the Last is false: Therefore also the First.
And again:
Arg. 2.Since as many as are baptized into Christ, i. e. with the one Baptism, which is the Baptism of Christ, have put on Christ, then Water-baptism is not the one Baptism, viz. the Baptism of Christ:
But the First is true: Therefore also the Last.