ITH regard to the necessity of conversion or regeneration, and even in regard to the nature of the change so denoted, there is really, after all, but little diversity of opinion. The differences existing have relation chiefly to the mode in which the change is effected, this change itself being admitted to be both a necessary and a spiritual one. This is most emphatically declared by Christ himself, when he says that, "Except a man be born again he can not see the kingdom of God," and that "except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he can not enter into the kingdom of God." That the change here implied is a great one, and hence strikingly and justly represented as a 'renovation,' a 'new creation,' a passing "from darkness to light," "from the power of Satan unto God," "from death to life," etc., is not to be controverted. That it is a real, and not merely a figurative change, or a change of state, is likewise evident. It is, indeed, represented under the figure of a birth, and some might suppose the actual change [252] to be something quite indefinite and ideal, pictured forth as a birth merely from some fanciful resemblance. It should be remembered, however, that the figures employed by Christ, have a significance which extends often far beyond their use as illustrations. That Divine Word, now made flesh, was himself the Author of Nature. All things were made by him, and it was he who had established all existing processes and relations. An analogy employed by him, therefore, may have much more force and depth of meaning than is derived from mere resemblance. When he says to the disciples, "I am the true vine, ye are the branches," he uses not a rhetorical ornament, but expresses a profound truth. He who created the natural vine, and established the necessary relation between it and its branches, reveals a relation equally necessary between himself and his disciples. This is not the mere illustration but the revelation of a spiritual fact, which, so to speak, is even more real than the visible and outward semblance from which the analogy is derived, for it is Christ that is here the TRUE vine. Precisely so, when he describes the great change implied in conversion, or the entrance into the kingdom of God, as a birth, this is not a mere analogy, but the annunciation of a most momentous spiritual truth, of which the process of natural generation afforded the most appropriate and complete representation.

      That regeneration is most appropriately termed a being "born again of water and of the Spirit," is furthermore made most evident by the frequency [253] with which this representation is given of it in other parts of Scripture, and that, too, by different apostles, all concurring in the same view and with one accord, making use of the same analogy. That each one of them had the same conception of the change called regeneration, is clearly shown by the singular correspondence which exists between their various utterances on the subject, and also by the manner in which they refer to different parts of the same process. For it should be observed, that as natural birth or generation, in its full sense, is not an act, but a process--a series of acts--a progressive development terminating in the birth of a new being, so also is the spiritual birth or regeneration. There can be no greater error than to regard the "birth from above," as simply an act, and no greater absurdity than to suppose this act accomplished by a reception of the Spirit. To conceive regeneration as a simple act is to confound all analogy. To regard the reception of the Spirit as regeneration, is to suppose that which is not yet in being, to be capable of receiving that Spirit by which it is itself to be called into being! No one can be born of that which he receives, for the simple reason that he must be born, must be himself brought into existence, before he can receive any thing. Regeneration, therefore, and the gift of the Holy Spirit are matters wholly distinct, just as is natural birth, and the breathing of the air which first wakens up the dormant life of the infant.

      As, in the process of natural generation, we have various particulars, stages, and agencies, so also, in a [254] spiritual generation, or a regeneration, have we different steps and instrumentalities. These so strikingly correspond, that, as we have said, they are constantly employed and referred to, throughout the New Testament, as different parts of one and the same analogy. Christ first reveals the fact that a man must be born again before he can see the kingdom of God, and that he must be born of water and Spirit before he can enter into it. James informs us (perhaps thirty years later) that "God of his own will begat us by, or with, the word of truth." James i: 18. This "word of truth," the usual expression to denote the gospel, is again particularly mentioned by Peter, in specially referring to this process of regeneration. "See," said he, "that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently, being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever;" and to define still more accurately, he adds: "and this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you." 1 Peter i: 22-25. Paul, in his first letter to the Corinthians, furnishes a similar identification: "In Christ Jesus," says he, "I have begotten you through the gospel." 1 Cor. iv: 15. See, also, Philemon, verse 10. Not to refer to other passages, all in perfect harmony with these, we have here, very evidently, God represented as the begetter, and the word of truth, or gospel, as the incorruptible seed which gives origin to the child of God. John, accordingly, says: "Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ [equivalent to believing the gospel] is born [begotten] of God." It is the gospel, then, revealed, [255] confirmed, and preached by the Holy Spirit, which, received into the heart by faith, gives origin to a new being, possessed of a new life, and of a new nature; and which, thus begotten and quickened by the Spirit, is now to be born of water, as the appropriate symbol of purification, and the mode of entrance into the kingdom of heaven, established on the earth. That this birth of water occurs in baptism (immersion), is evident, since, in Christianity, there is no other use of water than in baptism; and Paul expressly connects it with regeneration, in saying, "he saved us by the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit;" the washing here spoken of, being admitted by all commentators worthy of respect to be baptism. The "renewing of the Holy Spirit," spoken of here, is not conversion. This "renewing" proceeds from that "gift of the Spirit" imparted subsequently to baptism, and by which the entire man is to be conformed to the image of Christ, as set forth in the preceding part of this treatise.

      It is manifest, therefore, that baptism, while it does not itself constitute regeneration in any case, is, nevertheless, necessarily associated with the completion of the process, so termed; and this, not only as the appropriate symbol of this completion, but also as a suitable token of that purification obtained through the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, which it represents. He whom, God has begotten by the word of truth, the gospel, comes forth from the baptismal water as from the womb, and is thus born into a new life, all sins being forgiven, or washed away, through faith [256] in the blood of Christ. Hence it is, that baptism is constantly associated in the Scriptures with conversion. "Christ loved the church," says Paul, Eph. v: 25, "and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word." Here, the reference to baptism and to the gospel is unmistakable. The "washing of water," here, is baptism, and this baptism is "by the word." The term rendered "word," here, is rhma (hrema), always used by Paul of words proceeding from God, and applying directly to the gospel heard and believed; through which reception of the gospel alone, the "washing of water" could become spiritually a "washing" or cleansing. Thus the proper connection and relation of things is every-where maintained. As before cited, Peter commanded believers to "repent and be baptized for the remission of sins." Ananias told the believing Paul to be baptized and wash away his sins; and, in the great commission given by Christ to the apostles, the same evident important connection is asserted, when he said, "He that believeth [the gospel], and is baptized, shall be saved." There is, first, the belief of the word of truth--the begetting; then the baptism, the symbolic birth from water, required to complete the process, both analogically and spiritually; baptism becoming by faith a spiritual symbol--an appropriate representation of the completion of that true inward change which constitutes regeneration.

      This change is denoted in Scripture m many different forms of speech, both literal, metaphorical, and analogical. It is a "believing," a "turning," as it [257] respects the sinner; an 'engrafting,' a 'planting,' a 'creating,' an 'enlightening,' as it relates to the work of the Spirit, etc.; but there is no representation of it which so fully and so fitly exhibits it, or is so frequently and so forcibly employed for this purpose, in regard both to the whole process and to the different parts of it, as that of a "regeneration," or a being "born again." It is to be noted, also, that this particular analogy connects itself most naturally with that new system of things then introduced, known first as the "kingdom of heaven," or "kingdom of God," respecting which Christ was speaking to Nicodemus when he first used the analogy. The subjects of a kingdom become such, usually, by being born into it. Hence the great appropriateness of such a representation in relation to the new kingdom now to be established on the earth. Into this kingdom, it was declared that no one could enter, except by being born again" born of water and Spirit." Here, "water" and "Spirit" were both announced as necessarily connected with this birth, and neither the one nor the other was, or is, to be dispensed with. This reference to being "born of water," it should be noted, was made by Christ at the beginning of his ministry, immediately after the baptism of a large part of the Jewish people in water, as well as of his own public baptism in water by John, when his mention of "water" in connection with religion, could not well be understood of any thing but baptism (immersion), in which alone a birth of, or from, water occurred. And that the reference is to this, and to [258] nothing else, is abundantly evident from the fact that Paul (Titus iii: 5) directly connects a "washing" or "bath" with regeneration; as well as from the admitted requirement of a baptism in water in all cases of conversion, as commanded in the Commission, and every-where exemplified in the Acts of Apostles as immediately and invariably following belief. Precisely as the birth succeeds the begetting in the arrangements of nature, so evermore does baptism, the birth of water, follow belief, the begetting by the word of truth, in the spiritual kingdom.

      Nor does this kingdom, in the slightest degree, compromise its spiritual character, in thus deriving from material nature, so expressive an emblem of one of its momentous facts. It remains in itself truly and essentially spiritual. In its own nature, it "cometh not with observation." It is not a kingdom of this world. Nevertheless, it addresses itself to men in the flesh. It places its claims before them, and they are invited and urged to enter into it. This they can not do by any natural process. They can not be born into this kingdom, as the Jews were born into the kingdom of Israel, according to the flesh. As respected the spiritual kingdom, the flesh profited nothing; a descent from Abraham profited nothing. The kingdom of heaven demanded a "birth from above," a Divine begetting, a spiritual quickening, a special and prescribed form of admission. Hence, it was, from a spiritual and unseen source alone, that the new life, and the new being to be revealed in it, could proceed. This kingdom could be perceived by [259] faith alone; it could be entered only by a spiritual birth. Whatever of a formal, external, or visible character it might adopt to represent, emblematically, spiritual facts to men in the flesh, these outward symbols could possess in themselves no efficiency, and could acquire no assimilation to the nature of that unseen kingdom which they but shadowed forth, and to which they could have even this emblematic relation through faith alone. It is from its spiritual nature, indeed, that Christianity employs, most sparingly, the visible and the tangible, in the inculcation or adumbration of its truths. The baptismal birth; the bread and the wine of the Lord's supper; the commemorative day of the resurrection, comprise its entire emblematic ritual; but no one of these temporal and material semblances can have in it any thing of truth, significance, or reality, except it be imparted by faith, and derived essentially "from above." For the sake of men in the flesh, and in condescension to the necessities of human nature, the seen may be employed as a medium of communication or of symbolic expression, but whatever appertains directly and absolutely to the kingdom of heaven, is necessarily unseen and eternal.

      This conception of the kingdom was very far from the one entertained by the Jews at the coming of Christ. From the "Assumption (analhyiV) of Moses," "Book of Jubilees," "Targums," and a variety of other Jewish writings, but especially from plain intimations in the Scriptures themselves, it is evident that, in the Messiah, the Jews expected a temporal [260] prince only, and had not thought but of an earthly monarch, under whom their nation would be delivered from subjection, and restored to its former worldly prosperity and glory. This expectation prevailed even with the disciples themselves, up to the time of the resurrection. They had no idea whatever of a suffering Messiah, so that even when Christ distinctly announced to them his approaching crucifixion, Peter "began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee." Matt. xvi: 22. Their expectation led them to inquire: "Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" and their worldly ambition prompted the petition of the sons of Zebedee: "Grant unto us that we may sit, one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left hand, in thy glory." Mark x: 37. Especially had the hearts of the Scribes and Pharisees become so "gross," and so filled with desires of worldly honor and advancement, that they willfully closed their eyes and their ears against instruction, and were consequently addressed by Christ in parables, the application of which was withheld from them, that they might remain in their chosen ignorance, disbelief and impenitence. It was in vain, that the miracles, and other evidences of the Divine mission of Christ, were placed before them; that the teachings of the law and the prophets were unfolded and fulfilled, and that their covetousness and unrighteousness were faithfully rebuked. With scarcely an exception, they had rendered themselves wholly inaccessible to spiritual instruction, and [261] utterly indifferent to the things of the heavenly kingdom.

      It is, hence, easy to comprehend both the occasion and the purport of Christ's language to Nicodemus, in relation to this kingdom. He declared to him, that no one could see it unless "born from above;" that the Spirit alone could impart the life which appertained to it, and that its subjects must, of necessity, remain unknown to all who judged according to sense. When, thus judging, the Jewish ruler wondered, and inquired, "How can a man be born when he is old?" his incredulity as to the possibility of the new birth was reproved, by directing his attention to the familiar fact that, even the wind, which manifested its presence by its effects, was, nevertheless, as inscrutable to him in respect to its source and its destiny, as was the person born of the Spirit. "The wind blows where it listeth," said the Great Teacher, "and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh and whither it goeth; so is every one that is born of the Spirit." The person born of the Spirit might, indeed, be recognized by his fruits, as the wind by its effects, but the unregenerate world could not know or comprehend the true source whence he emanated or the future unseen glory to which he was destined. The comparison here is not between the wind and the Spirit, as many incorrectly suppose; but between the wind and the person born of the Spirit. 'The wind,' said Christ, 'is free in its movements, and these you perceive by hearing, but you, Nicodemus, can not tell from [262] whence it proceeds or whither it is tending; so to you, likewise, is every one who is born of the Spirit.' Men, judging, like Nicodemus, according to sense, could form no conception of the birth from above. They could not discover that the believer was born of God, or that his destiny was eternal blessedness in the spiritual kingdom.¹

      The simple general truth here stated is reiterated again and again elsewhere. Christ himself made, in reference to his own case, a similar declaration to the Pharisees, John viii: 14: "Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go: but ye can not tell whence I come, and whither I go." Just as it was with the Pharisees, so was it with Nicodemus. He could not tell any thing of the origin or destiny of the person born from above. These things, however, were [263] perfectly understood by those who were born of the Spirit. "I know," said Christ, "whence I came, and whither I go." Again, says John: "Beloved, now are we the sons of God: and it doth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is." And again: "We know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness [under the wicked one]. And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true; and we are in him that is true, even in his son Jesus Christ." 1 John iii: 2; v: 19, 20. "The world," says he, on the other hand, "knoweth us not, because it knew him not." This failure to recognize Christ and those who were "born of the Spirit," was due to the same cause in all, and is clearly stated in Christ's declaration to the Pharisees. "Ye can not tell," said he, "whence I come and whither I go. Ye judge after the flesh." This was precisely the error of Nicodemus, who, though a teacher of Israel, had failed to penetrate through the Mosaic law and ritual to the spiritual lessons which these embodied. Unlike Jesus, he 'judged after the sight of his eyes,' and 'reproved after the hearing of his ears,' and was, hence, unable to receive the "things of the Spirit," or to form any conceptions of that unseen kingdom which was now announced. Christ's teachings in regard to it were to him 'hard sayings,' as they were to others, on a different occasion, whom he addressed in similar language: "Doth this offend you?" said he. "What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up [264] where he was before? It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." His words were, indeed, the life-giving words of the Spirit himself, revealing the means, Divinely appointed, through which alone men could enter the spiritual kingdom, become partakers of the bread of heaven, and thus attain to eternal life.

      In investigating the method of entering into this kingdom of heaven as announced by the Saviour to Nicodemus under the figure of a new birth, it is indeed, ever to be kept in view, that there is danger of carrying analogies too far. Relations and resemblances may, doubtless, be introduced and applications be made of them, which were not intended, and are not legitimately involved. The full force of this caution is cheerfully admitted, and the need of its careful observance fully recognized. It often happens, however, that a caution to avoid one extreme or error, is little else, in reality, than an encouragement to run into the opposite one; or that it is used as a quasi justification of the opposite one. Men are constantly disposed to run into errors, and it is not to be taken for granted that they are a whit more likely to go beyond, than they are to fall short of the true mark. If a caution, then, is needed not to carry analogies too far, it is equally necessary that men should be guarded against a failure to carry them far enough. It is dangerous to pass beyond the true line of interpretation, but is it not equally dangerous to fall short of it? The proper question is, [265] what is the exact truth in the case? And this exact truth can be attained in no other way than by receiving exactly what the Scripture says. When Christ says, "be born of water and Spirit," by what authority can any one presume to omit "water," or to endeavor so to explain it away that it will signify nothing, or be synonymous with Spirit, thus putting into the mouth of Christ an absurd tautology? When Paul connects baptism with regeneration in Titus iii: 5; or when Christ in the Commission connects belief with baptism, and both of them with salvation, who has the right to separate what God has thus joined together? It is amazing what sophistries and bold assertions have been employed, in subservience to certain human theories, to undervalue baptism, to deprive it of all the significance which the Scriptures attach to it, and sometimes even to expunge it altogether from the Christian Institution. The reason is, that the theory of "Spiritual operations," commonly taught, has no use for baptism. This theory makes the begetting every thing, and the symbolic birth nothing. It seeks to aggrandize one part of the analogy at the expense of another part of it, destroying altogether the consistency and the meaning of the whole. According to this theory, indeed, there is a begetting, not by the word of truth, but by the Spirit independently of all means. No birth, however, follows in any conceivable sense, either symbolic, analogical, literal, or spiritual. The whole process of regeneration is condensed into an "instantaneous work" on God's part, which, by a [266] special exercise of power, evidently direct and miraculous, is supposed to impart at the same instant, faith, justification, and the assurance of forgiveness. In the primitive gospel, the assurance of pardon was attached to the "birth of water," baptism; but in this theory, baptism is divested of this office, in order that it may be conferred upon that "instantaneous spiritual operation," which is supposed to constitute regeneration. At the same time, the feelings are constituted the standard; and the Divine testimony of the written word to the obedient believer, is supplanted by variable emotions and fanciful experiences, of which fallible mortals are themselves to judge!

      This modern theory of regeneration, then, evidently fails to carry out to its proper scriptural conclusion the analogy employed. It altogether dispenses with a part of it, under the plea that this is not essential or important. It has no 'birth of water,' no "washing" or "bath," in its "regeneration." Its regeneration is, therefore, not the regeneration of God's word, or of the gospel, which does possess both of these characteristics, and the advocates of this theory are justly liable to the charge of taking away from God's word what he has placed in it; an offense certainly quite as flagrant as that of adding to it. As to the relative importance of different parts of the process of regeneration, that is altogether a different question. That, in a certain point of view, the begetting--the cordial reception of the gospel, the incorruptible seed of the word of God into the [267] Heart--is first in importance as it is first in order, may be readily conceded, since without this, there can be no Spiritual results whatever. But it is not the province of man to set aside any part of the process, which God has clearly appointed in order to the introduction of his children into the kingdom of heaven. In the true view of regeneration which I have given, it is to be noted, that the analogy is not carried out, in the slightest degree, beyond the Scripture. Not one word is added. The word of God is quoted just as it reads. No attempt is made to go beyond its obvious meaning--a meaning abundantly sustained, not only by the "analogy of faith," but by the writings of the early Christian Church, as well as by the creeds and by the best commentators of modern religious parties.² [268]

      To be regenerated, then, in the Scripture sense, is to be "born of water and of the Spirit," as Christ declares. God's children are "begotten by the word of truth, as James informs us; or "born again" of the 'incorruptible seed of the word preached in the gospel,' as Peter tells us; in 'believing,' which, as John says, they are "begotten of God," receiving, finally, according to Paul, in baptism, that "washing of regeneration," by which the process is completed. In this view, there is no "baptismal regeneration," as some have falsely charged. Baptism is not regeneration, though it is so termed by Phavorinus, by Justin Martyr, and by many of the early Fathers,³ and is so [269] considered by the Episcopal Church, which is "evangelical." The true relation of baptism to regeneration can only be comprehended in properly carrying out the analogy furnished in the Scripture, and recognizing this birth of water as the consummation of the process--the formally bringing forth into the Church--into the kingdom of heaven on earth--that spiritual offspring previously "begotten of God." Upon this view, and upon no other, can it be readily explained how it came to pass that, in the early centuries of Christianity, baptism was itself called "regeneration," in the use of one of the most common figures of speech (synecdoche)--a putting a part for the whole. This usage, admitted by all to have existed as early as the second or third centuries, clearly indicates the important position then assigned to baptism. Had the modern doctrine then existed, that baptism has nothing to [270] do with regeneration, and that this is an "instantaneous work"performed by the Spirit, it would have been quite impossible that baptism should have ever been called "regeneration" by the early Christians. The fact that they did so term it, is a proof that the modern doctrine had not then been known or invented, and that, consequently, it is false. For whatever modification of apostolic doctrine may be admitted as having crept into the Church, or whatever undue importance may have been given to particular points, in the age immediately succeeding the apostles, it is impossible to believe that the practice of calling baptism "regeneration" could have come into existence at all, without having had a basis--a foundation, a germ or semblance of truth. As baptism then was, however incorrectly, called "regeneration" in the early church, it is a clear evidence that it had, previously, at least an important connection with regeneration; and while it was undoubtedly an error to call the mere "washing of regeneration," regeneration itself, it might be a question whether the ancients were more culpable in this than are the moderns in speaking of the "begetting" as the whole of regeneration, and in thus endeavoring to exalt this supposed "instantaneous work of the Spirit" to a similarly false position; even making it not only regeneration itself, but the assurance of justification and pardon, and the actual importation of the Holy Spirit!

      In opposition to all these errors, the Scriptures teach that baptism is the "washing" or bath "of regeneration;" that it is a being "born of water," and [271] that regeneration is not completed in the mere belief or reception of the truth. "As many as received him," says John, "to them gave he power [privilege] to become the Sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." Those who believed on him, then, were not yet the sons of God merely by virtue of having received the truth. After becoming believers, they had the power or privilege of becoming sons by being born of water, which to them was made by faith a spiritual act, and in which they were to be thus born, "not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, but of God." John i: 13.⁴ [272] Many of the Jews who, we are told, believed on Christ, would not thus publicly acknowledge him, and, hence, did not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Nor is it without good reason that baptism, from its nature and position, should be made to occupy so important a relation, for there could not be a more appropriate or expressive emblem of the great spiritual change, produced by faith in Jesus, than this institution, in which the individual, making a public and entire surrender of himself in body, soul, and spirit, is buried with Christ, and raised again to a new life, receiving therein the emblematic washing which represents the removal of guilt and the purification of the conscience--a translation from "the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of God's dear Son." On this account the ancient Christians called it also the "illumination." It is not at all surprising that a public act so expressive and important should come to be called "regeneration," and even to be considered by some, probably, as the entire process, of which it was only the legitimate termination.

      Apart, however, from the extremes both of ancient and modern days, and quite independent of the mistakes and errors which have incorporated themselves with the teaching of the Church in any age, the simple truth remains, as declared by Christ, that "Except [273] a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he can not enter into the kingdom of heaven." These words remain, and the truths they teach remain. Their meaning is the same now as when they were spoken, and is not affected by either the undue estimation of baptism by early Christians; or its unjust depreciation by the moderns. Vain human theories and schemes of religion may, for a time, prevail extensively and mislead the minds of men, but they must ultimately give place to the "word of truth which liveth and abideth forever." It is the true wisdom of all to come directly to "the law and to the testimony," for "if they walk not according to these, it is because there is no light in them." [274]

[OHS 252-274]