Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Of Paul's Assertion, that He Had Not Been Sent to Baptize. |
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP
Paul’s Assertion, that He Had Not Been Sent to
But they roll back an objection from
that apostle himself, in that he said, “For Christ sent me
not to baptize;”8685
as if by this
argument baptism were done away! For if so, why did he
baptize Gaius, and Crispus, and the house of Stephanas?8686
However, even if Christ had not sent
him to baptize, yet He had given other apostles the
precept to baptize. But these words were written to the Corinthians in
regard of the circumstances of that particular time; seeing that
schisms and dissensions were agitated among them, while one attributes
everything to Paul, another to Apollos.8687
For which reason the “peace-making”8688
apostle, for fear he should seem to claim all gifts for himself,
says that he had been sent “not to baptize, but to preach.”
For preaching is the prior thing, baptizing the posterior.
Therefore the preaching came first: but I think baptizing withal
was lawful to him to whom preaching was.
E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH