Brother Lipscomb, please explain through the Gospel Advocate why baptism and the Lord’s Supper were not done away, nailed to the cross, when Christ was crucified and also the meaning of spiritual baptism. There is a sect here teaching that this is all done away with, nailed to the cross, and that spiritual baptism is the only baptism; that no other has been taught since Christ was crucified.
The reason baptism and the Lord’s Supper were not taken out of the way and nailed to the cross is, they constituted no part of the law of Moses that was taken out of the way and nailed to the cross. While baptism was instituted by John, it was not given as the law of Christ to his church until after he was crucified. Just before he ascended to the throne of God, and in his last message to his disciples, after he had been crucified and raised from the dead, he told them: “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 always, even unto the end of the world.” The disciples were commanded to teach and baptize all nations after Jesus had come down from the cross. He could not nail an institution to the cross commanded after he had died on the cross. The Lord’s Supper was observed before the crucifixion, but it was done to commemorate his death on the cross. He could not have nailed to the cross and have taken out of the way an institution ordained to commemorate the cross. They both belong to the new institution which belonged after the cross and must continue until Jesus comes again. Paul (I Corinthians 11), long after the death and ascension of Christ, wrote to the Corinthians: “As often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till he come.” This is not to cease until he comes again. So your sect is teaching contrary to Jesus and Paul.
The baptism of the Holy Spirit was the overwhelming of the Spirit that came upon the disciples at Pentecost and again at the house of Cornelius. After the disciples had been with Jesus for three years as his followers, after they had wrought miracles and done works in his name, just before he left them he told them: “Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.” They had been his followers, had been preaching under his direction, had cast out devils, and done many wonderful works in his name. They were certainly his children; yet they had not been baptized with the Holy Spirit, but are told they shall be baptized “not many days hence.” They tarried at Jerusalem about ten days; then the Holy Spirit came from heaven, and they “began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.” This was the baptism of the Holy Spirit. At the house of Cornelius (Acts 10: 44), “while Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.” “They heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.” These had been baptized with the Holy Spirit. The result was, they could speak with tongues they had never learned.
Now, these are the only examples called “baptism of the Spirit” in the Bible. They both produced the same fruits. A man that claims to be baptized with the Spirit now ought to present the same fruit, or be pronounced a false pretender. In Acts 10, after they had been blessed with the Spirit, Peter says: “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.” The baptism Peter commanded was with water; it was long after the cross.
David Lipscomb
Questions Answered by Lipscomb and Sewell 