sense of the church at Jerusalem, that they should; and Peter was an elder of that church. Again, compelling is a word that imports something more than commanding. He added, that Paul also circumcised Timothy, Acts, xvi. 3.

B. K. owned, That Paul did circumcise him, but afterward taught, and testified the contrary; Behold, I Paul, say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing," Gal. iv. 2.

R. C. replied, That Paul also brought the believers to the one baptism, saying, "There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism," Eph. iv. 5.

B. K. asserted, that the one baptism, Eph. iv. 5, was the baptism of water, and nothing else. R. C. put him upon proving that assertion.

B. K. made several essays to prove it, sometimes by one medium, and sometimes by another; but all his arguments were inconclusive, for he still left out the proposition that was to be proved.

R. C. told him, That he had formerly pretended to some skill in logic, as appeared by books of his in print, and therefore admired to see him at such a loss in his undertaking.

B. K. attempted again by new mediums to prove the proposition in question, but his syllogisms still failed, either in matter, or form.

R. C. seeing him at a loss, made him a friendly offer to assist him in forming his argument.

B. K. refused his assistance and said, He would take his own liberty, and not be confined to argue syllogistically. Whereupon he endeavoured to draw an argument from Matt. xxviii. to prove the one baptism, Eph. iv. was the baptism of water, and nothing else; but was so confused, and immethodical, that he could make nothing of it. Then

he launched into a long and zealous harangue about Christ the Mediator, and the power committed unto him of the Father, &c.

R. C. thereupon told him, That he had forgot himself, and was turned from proving to preaching; and therefore desired him to return to the point in question, and to prove, without digressing, if he could, the proposition before mentioned.

R. C. waited some considerable time for his proof, but could obtain none.

B. K. then asserted, That there were never any people professing Christianity, since the apostles' time, but what practised water-baptism, and the outward supper, in some sort or other, till the Quakers appeared.

R. C. told him, That there were a people called Cathari, or Puritans, about the middle of the third century, that did not either practice water-baptism, nor celebrate the outward supper, and were therefore stigmatized for heretics, as the Quakers are by some now. (They held sinless perfection in this life, and abstained from all manner of oaths. See Littleton's Dictionary, on the word Cathari.)

R. C. added, That several of the Independent persuasion in England, are against water-baptism, as also some Seekers and Philadelphians.

C. M. asked B. K. By what authority the disciples of Christ baptized before the commission was given, Matt. xxviii.

B. K. said, They then baptized, as John did, into Christ that was to come, die, rise again, &c. Afterwards they baptized into Christ as come, dead, risen, and ascended.

Note. This answer respects the object, and not the authority, and so no answer to the question. Besides, it makes no essential

difference between John's baptism and Christ's, but only circumstantial; but there is an essential difference between the two baptisms, John's baptism being with water, and not with the Spirit, Christ's with the Spirit, and not with water.

C. M. asked B. K. What need there was of water-baptism, to those that had that of the Spirit, water being but an outward thing or shadow, and not the inward substance?

B. K. waved the question, and said, Water-baptism was but the shell or shadow, and not the substance. He also said, that persons ought to be really regenerated before water-baptism, and might be so without it.

C. M. then urged the non-necessity of waterbaptism, under the gospel dispensation, alleging that the gospel had no shells or shadows, the kernel or substance being come.

B. K. replied, That water-baptism was a part of the gospel dispensation notwithstanding, and necessary by virtue of the commission, Matt. xxviii.

R. C. thereupon told him, The commission had been spoken to already, and that it was proved, that the Spirit's baptism, and not water, was there intended.

C. M. said, The commission was, “Teach all nations, baptizing them into the name," that is, into the power and virtue" of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ;" and not in the name, as our translation hath it: as though the bare names, consisting of so many letters and syllables were only intended.

B. K. granted it was, into the name, in the Greek, as he had been informed; but thought the English translation, in the name, was well enough. And being asked the sense of that expression, he

said it imported two things, which he explained; first, by an officer's doing, or executing his office, in the name of the king; secondly, by virtue of the king's power and authority.

Note. This distinction makes baptism only an external act of office-power, which makes no internal change in the subject, man or woman, but leaves them as they were before. But the baptism of Christ, or of the Spirit, makes an inward or real change in the subject: "As many as are baptized into Christ, put on Christ," Gal. iii. 27. The old man is put off, and the new man is put on, Eph. iv. 22, 24. Being buried with Christ in baptism, and risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, Col. ii. 12. So that that is Christ's baptism, which baptizeth into Christ, Rom. vi. 3. "Now if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature," 2 Cor. v. 17. But water-baptism doth not baptize into Christ, doth not make a new creature, and therefore is not the baptism of Christ.

B. K. insisted much upon the commission, affirming it was water there intended, and nothing else.

R. C. replied, That his affirmation in this case, was no proof; and argued, that it was not water-baptism, but the Spirit's, because the Spirit, or Holy Ghost was there expressed, but water was not; and that if B. K. would but impartially compare Matt. xxviii. 19, with Acts, i. 5, he might see plainly it was the baptism of the Spirit; because Christ, in Acts, i. 5, not only makes a distinction between water and the Spirit's baptism, but expressly assigns water to John's baptism, and gives us plainly to understand the Spirit's baptism to be his :-" John truly baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost, not many days hence."

B K. replied, It was nonsense to talk of baptizing into the name, or power of the Spirit, with the Spirit; and that it was Christ's prerogative to

baptize with the Spirit, and no man could possisibly do it.

R. C. rejoined, It might be nonsense to him who was so zealous for a baptism without the Spirit, but they that were spiritually baptized, knew and experienced the contrary and as to his asserting the impossibility of man's baptizing with the Spirit, it was distinguished between baptizing with it efficiently, and instrumentally; Christ as the sole efficient, and the apostles and ministers, as his instruments.

B. K. said, The administrators of water-baptism, were more than instruments, for they were the sole agents.

Note. If this be true, then first Christ's agency is wholly excluded, and B. K. and his brethren, act in that administration, by an underivative and self-dependent power; that is, in their own name and authority. Secondly, It follows from hence, that the persons whom they baptize with or in the water, are so purely passive, as to have no agency at all, of their own, during the administration; both these, how absurd soever they be, are the inevitable consequences of that assertion.

When C. M. said, That the gospel dispensation had no shells or shadows,

B. K. answered, It had; for the apostle called baptism a figure, 1 Pet. iii. 21: "The like figure whereunto, even baptism doth also now save us;" it being a lively figure and representation of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, and ours with him and said it was a very clear text for water-baptism.

R. C. Made an offer to reply, but B. K. interrupting him, and running to other matter, he was put by for that time, and therefore afterward penned down what he would have said, namely,

The text is not truly translated; for the word