Matthew 28:19

Go ye therefore, and teach Greek, μαθητευσατε, disciple, or make disciples of, or, as Dr. Doddridge renders it, proselyte all nations. This includes the whole design of Christ's commission. Baptizing and teaching are the two great branches of that general design: and these were to be determined by the circumstances of things; which made it necessary, in baptizing adult Jews or heathen, to teach them before they were baptized; in disciplining their children, to baptize them before they were taught, as the Jewish children in all ages were first circumcised, and after taught to do all God had commanded them. It must be observed, that the word rendered teaching, in the next verse, (namely, διδασκοντες,) though in our translation confounded with the word used in this verse, yet is a word of a very different sense: and properly implies instructing, which the word used in this verse does not necessarily imply, but, as has been observed, merely to proselyte, or make disciples. The argument, therefore, that some draw from this verse, as if our Lord enjoined all to be taught before they were to be baptized, is without foundation. Our Lord's words, taken together, in both verses, distinctly enjoin three things, and that in the following order, μαθητευειν, βαρτιζειν, διδασκειν, that is, to proselyte men to Christ, to baptize, and to teach them. It is true, however, that adult persons, before they can be made Christ's disciples, or be proselyted, must be instructed and brought to believe the great essential truths of Christianity, and even to profess their faith in them. But the case is different with infants, who may be admitted to baptism, as the children of the Jews were to the rite of circumcision, and be instructed afterward. And, as Dr. Doddridge justly observes, if Christ had sent out these missionaries to propagate Judaism in the world, he might have used the same, or similar language: “Go and proselyte all nations, circumcising them in the name of the God of Israel, and teaching them to observe all that Moses commanded.” The whole tenor of the succeeding books of the New Testament shows, that Christ designed, by this commission, that the gospel should be preached to all mankind without exception; not only to the Jews, but to the idolatrous Gentiles: but the prejudices of the apostles led them, at first, to mistake the sense of it, and to imagine that it referred only to their going to preach the gospel to the Jews among all nations, or to those who should be willing to become Jews.

Baptizing them in the name of the Father, &c. Concerning the general nature of baptism, see note on Matthew 3:6. But we are here instructed respecting the appropriation of this institution to the Christian dispensation, in its most complete form. The apostles, and their successors in the ministry of the word, are ordered to baptize those whom they made Christ's disciples, εις το ονομα, into the name, (not names,) of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost Words which have been considered, in all ages of the Christian Church, as a most decisive proof of the doctrine of the Trinity; implying not only the proper personality and Deity of the Father, but also those of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. For it would be absurd to suppose that either a mere creature, or a mere quality, or mode of existence of the Deity, should be joined with the Father in the one name into which all Christians are baptized. “To be baptized into the name of any one implies a professed dependance on him, and devoted subjection to him; to be baptized, therefore, into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, implies a professed dependance on these three divine persons, jointly and equally, and a devoting of ourselves to them as worshippers and servants. This is proper and obvious, upon the supposition of the mysterious unity of three coequal persons in the unity of the Godhead; but not to be accounted for upon any other principles.” Scott. “Our Lord,” says Mr. Fletcher, “enjoining us to be equally baptized in the name (equally consecrated to the service) of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaches us to honour the Son as we honour the Father, and to honour the Holy Ghost as we do the Son; and when the Socinians assert that the Son is a mere man, they indirectly tell us, that he is as improperly joined with the Father to be the great object of our faith in baptism, as a taper would improperly be joined with the sun to enlighten the universe. And when they represent the Holy Ghost as a mere power, and a power whereby we must not now hope to be influenced, they might as well tell us, that he is as unfit to have a place among the Three who bear record in heaven; as their power of motion, or the energy of their minds, would be absurdly mentioned as parties in a contract, where their names and persons are particularly specified. Thus, they take from us the two Comforters, with whom we are particularly blessed under the gospel. If we believe them, the one is a mere man, who cannot hear us; and the other is a mere property, or an unconscious energy, by which we shall be no way benefited, and as insensible to our faith as to our unbelief: and when our Lord bids all nations to be baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, (if the word Son do not mean the proper Son of God; if it mean only, the son of the carpenter, Joseph, and if the Holy Ghost be only the Father's energy, and an energy whereby we can neither be quickened nor comforted,) this gospel charter is far more extraordinary than would be the royal patents by which gentlemen are created lords, if they all began thus: Be it enacted, in the name, or by the supreme authority, of King George the Third, of Josiah the carpenter's son, and of the royal power or energy, that A.B., Esq., be numbered among the peers of the realm. Such is the wisdom displayed by philosophers, who call the divinity of the Son the leading corruption of Christianity, and who pretend to reform all the Reformed Churches!” See his Works, vol. 9. p. 26, octavo edit. Though perhaps, we ought not to assert that the use of these very words is essential to Christian baptism, yet surely, as Dr. Doddridge observes, “the expression must intimate the necessity of some distinct regard to each of the Sacred Three, which is always to be maintained in the administration of this ordinance; and consequently it must imply, that more was said to those of whose baptism we read in the Acts than is there recorded, before they were admitted to it. The Christian Church, in succeeding ages, has acted a wise and safe part in retaining these words; and they contain so strong an intimation that each of these persons is properly called God, and that worship is to be paid, and glory ascribed to each, that I cannot but hope they will be a means of maintaining the belief of the one, and the practice of the other, among the generality of Christians, to the end of the world.”