Let us see: The Pharisee who invited our Lord to dine with him, "marvelled that he had not washed (ẞаrtion, baptized) before dinner." Luke xi. 38. "And when the Pharisees come from market, except they wash, (Barrio vrai, baptize) they eat not." Mark, viii. 4. Now was it customary for the Jews generally, as well as the Pharisees, to plunge the whole body under water every day before dinner? No; the preceding verse expressly tells us that the baptism which was customary was the washing of the hands. It was our Lord's neglect of this custom which moved the astonishment of the Pharisee. But, say the Baptists, although they did not plunge the whole body under water, they wholly immersed the hands: I am not sure of that; see 2 Kings, iii. 11. "Jehoshaphat said, Is there not here a prophet of the Lord, that we may enquire of the Lord by him? And one of the King of Israel's servants answered and said, Here is Elisha the son of Shaphat, which poured water on the hands of Elijah." This refers to the custom of servants washing their master's hands, and implies neither more nor less than that Elisha was Elijah's servant or attendant. The custom alluded to must have been a general and well known one: otherwise it would not have implied what it was designed to denote, viz. the relation of a servant. But the Baptists will say, The custom may have been changed before the time of our Lord: I answer it may not. If they assert the change without proof, it will be sufficient for me to deny it without proof. Until evidence of the change be produced, here is an instance of baptism by pouring. In Sir R. Ker Porter's Travels he tells us that the custom prevails in Persia to this day. He was at an entertainment given by the prime minister. “A silver-plated jug,” says he, "with a long spout, accompanied by a basin of the same metal, was carried round to every guest, by an attendant, who poured water from the jug on our right hands, which we held in succession over the basin."* 66 In Hebrews, ix. 10, we are told that the Jewish service consisted in “ meats, and drinks, and divers washings (Barriouot, baptisms) and carnal ordiances." The washings here refer to the various ablutions among the Jews; and these were generally performed by sprinkling. Two of these divers baptisms are mentioned in verses 12 and 13. The first was "by the blood of goats and calves;" and this was administered, as the Baptists themselves know as well as we do, by sprinkling. The second was by the ashes of an heifer SPRINKLING the unclean." * Travels in Georgia, Persia, &c. Vol. i. pp. 238, 239. Let the reader now turn to 1 Cor. x. 2, "And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud, and in the sea." This passage is important, inasmuch as it furnishes us with a compendious answer to all the objections of the Baptists as to the subjects, as to their qualifications, and as to the mode. First, as to the subjects, they were all baptized, men, women, and children; Secondly, they were baptized "unto Moses;" that is, unto the doctrine, and precepts, and ceremonies, which Moses was going to give them : they were baptized, not after they were taught and instructed, but before they were taught, and that they might be taught: and, Thirdly, they were not plunged over head and ears in the waters of the cloud and of the sea, but they were baptized by the copious dew and rain and water, which SPRINKLED them: they certainly were not plunged in the cloud, and as for the sea, we are told expressly that they "went into the midst of the sea, upon the dry ground; and the waters were a wall unto them or their right hand and on their left." Exod. xiv. 22. Exod. xiv. 22. That they were sprinkled by the spray or mist, which was caused by the great agitation of the waters by "the strong east wind," is natural and credible; but that they were immersed in the waters is distinctly denied by the sacred historian. To mul tiply examples upon this point would be to trifle with the subject, and with the patience of the reader. I will therefore conclude with one remark, in the justice of which I am satisfied that every candid person will coincide with me. The practice or custom of a whole people is the best expositor of the meaning of their words. Now we know that the Jews, among whom our Lord lived, from whom he chose his Apostles and first Disciples, and to whom he expressly confined for a time the preaching of his blessed Gospel, understood baptism to signify pouring and sprinkling, if not to the exclusion of, yet certainly as well as, immersing; because they expressed their pourings and sprinkling, as we have seen, by the word Baptisms. In his commission to his Apostles, our Lord, who certainly knew the ideas which they would attach to the word, has not given any new, or specific, meaning to it; and, therefore, we must infer that they would understand it in that sense to which they had been accustomed. If the Baptists can prove to us that the Jews used to baptize by immersion, this will only prove that there were three kinds of baptism amongst them, viz. by sprinkling, by pouring, and by immersion; and since our Blessed Lord has not determined which we are always to use, we are at liberty to administer the rite in any |