Here it may be a proper time to call attention to the fact that many seek to make nice distinctions between the baptism of John and what they call Christian baptism; that is, baptism in the name of Jesus after the death and resurrection of Messiah, by which members were admitted into the Kingdom of Christ. The controversy on this subject became particularly sharp in the sixteenth century. Zwingle and Calvin, on the one hand, maintained that the two baptisms were identical, and for the same purpose, only that John baptized in the name of the future Messiah, while the apostles baptized in the name of the Messiah already come; on the other hand, Luther, Melancthon and the Catholics maintained there was an essential difference. The latter adopted the views of Tertullian, who lived about the close of the second century and the beginning of the third. To the baptism of John, Tertullian ascribed the negative character of repentance, and to Christian baptism the positive impartation of a new life. This distinction, it is maintained, arises from the words of John himself; _viz_., "I indeed baptize you with _water_ unto repentance; but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, * * * he shall _baptize you with the Holy Ghost_ and with fire."[C] But this reason for any such distinction as that sought to be made is worthless when it is remembered that while Jesus did baptize with the Holy Ghost, and commissioned others to do so, still that baptism of the Spirit did not supplant water baptism for the remission of sins. It was simply an additional principle and ordinance to the doctrines taught by John; and Jesus continued to authorize water baptism before his crucifixion,[C] and commissioned his apostles to continue it after he departed from them.[D] The New Testament is replete with instances of water baptism standing in connection with though, as a rule, preceding the baptism of, the Holy Spirit.[E] Whereas, to make the words of John quoted a valid reason for supposing a difference between the baptism of John and water baptism after Jesus was resurrected, it would be necessary to prove that the baptism of the Spirit took the place of water baptism as administered by John, which is contrary to the facts in the case, as already noted. [Footnote C: Matt. iii: 11; see also Luke iii: 16, and John i: 25.] [Footnote D: John iii: 22, and iv: 1-3.] [Footnote E: Matt. xxviii: 19, and Mark xvi: 15,16.]