Sacraments although it be but for a day this is lookt upon as a sufficient warrant to make such a person fit for the work and thus the practice thereof shall run in the vein of Discipleship one baptising the other which is expresly against the very nature of the Ordinance and all Scripture examples and presidents Look upon John the Baptist a Prophet a man sent by God the Disciples of Christ all by himself called and Commissioned and so they were to administer baptism in a way of Office to the end of the world and not onely the Apostles but their successors also Pastors Teachers Which are as well given to the Church as the Apostles Prophers Evangelists Eph. 4.11 and do and shall continue so long as the Commission remains till the worlds end had it been given equally alike to all the Church Disciples he would not have singled out persons in Office so Philip an Evangelist called by a voice from Heaven Ananias called by a vision from God Act 9. Obj. But Baptism is an Ordinance that belongs to the Church and it is in their power to give the keys as they shall judge fit Answ The Church can do nothing against the truth but for the truth nothing without the rule If granted that all the males have their votes yet the administration of the keys lies in the Office or Angels power for administration of the Seals Rev. 21.12 Ezek. 44.5 11. Thirdly Consider yet further how shall we know who is enabled to bring down God to the soul and the soul up to God Conversion is an act of Grace and not in the Creatures power and though a Minister may be truly called to the work by God and man yet we know the word may not work for many years but like seed may lie hid in the ground yet must not this man baptize any by this rule though converted by others because the success of his own labour lies hid so as that he is not able to say he hath been instrumental in that kind to the souls of his hearers In pag. 7. He strikes down our Ministry at a blow and indeed opposeth diametrically what before he affirmed That though a Minister do preach so as to convert and bring down God to the soul yet if he be ignorant of this practice of dippping which he calls the true way of dispensing the Ordinance and a fundamental he is no justifiable Minister that in stead of dipping shall sprinkle carnal ignorant Children By which we may see that the foundation of a true Ministry in his sense lies more in the water then in conversion For he denies any true Gospel Ministry but those of his own stamp So that when the Apostle Paul affiâ—ms the truth of his Ministry was evidenced by that Seal the seal of my Apostleship are ye in the Lord 1 Cor. 9.2 This Author would have it run The seal of a justifiable Minister are ye in the water and thus he destroys not onely the present Ministry of Christ in this world but also that of the Apostles themselves For as I shall afterwards prove they were all strangers to this practice of dipping their manner being by pouring water on the subject If Jesus Christ shall then justifie our present Ministry in sealing their labors it is too bold an act for a man of such a feeble practice to condemn them Thus the Reader may see his result on both hands when the Argument is brought against our practice then no man is a lustifiable Minister except he know how to plunge and doth so practice when he comes to shew what a lawful administrator is in his sense then he that can bring down the soul to God so that we may from hence see what a Babel Ministry this man of contradictions would set up in the world If I should here ask the Author of this new Baptism under what Ministry he was converted no doubt but his answer would be very favourable to those whom he here opposeth Remember then your third Doctrine That 't is the disposition of such that have the beginning of saving light to desire more and that from them whom God hath spoken to their souls by Or else you may question whether you have any light at all But because 't is to speak a word for the truth in opposing error let me therefore return him Talion Law 1. He that takes the Covenant of Grace for a Covenant of Works can be no Gospel Minister because ignorant of the Gospel in the fundamentals thereof 2. He that affirms a Believer at one time may be under two Covenants of Works and Grace he is no Minister of the Gospel 3. He that denies the extent of the Covenant of Grace to be as large and compleat under the Gospel as it was under the Law can be no Minister of the Gospel 4. He that is not lawfully Ordained to the work of the Ministry he can be no lawfull Minister because like the false Prophets he runs before sent 5. He that shall by his Doctrine and Practice put greater burthen and yoaks upon the necks of Christians then ever the false Teachers did by Circumcision Acts the 15. he is no warrantable Minister But such a one is this Author of the Doctrine of Baptisms ergo The Minor I shall make appear through this whole discourse given in as an Answer to his Book Lastly as to that contempt and reproach which he casts upon the seed of Believers who are Abrahams children calliâ—g them carnal ignorant as though they were uncapable of any good Let him that rails know that he that casts off Abrahams seed when infants as not fit matter for worship doth keep them out as an unclean thing And so though God hath separated them to a holy use they are made unholy and kept off as execrable and so accursed Which the Lord no doubt foresaw when he gave Abraham that promise Gen. 12. I will curse him that curseth thee I say this this word of the Lord will at last reach such and pull them down if their â—est were built as high as the stars of heaven Therefore hear and fear and do no more so wickedly all ye that hope for the blessing of Abrahams Covenant CHAP. III. His second Essential relating to the manner of Baptisme by Dipping answered THe second Essential he so calls in this Doctrine of Baptismes is the manner thereof by Dipping not sprinkling To prove which though he say the word is rendred to Dip Dous Drown or Plunge in this he speaketh with a hood-wink'd understanding and must shake hands with the Roman Tribe that acts from an implicite faith believing as learned men tels him though yet he can hardly afford them a good word or charitable censure As for the place he brings 2 Kings 5.14 where the Prophet bids Naaman go wash in Jordan seven times and he dipt himself Answer Though washing is sometimes by dipping yet not alwaies yea but seldom A man may properly be
fault with them hee saith behold the day is come when I will make a new Covenant with the house of Israel and verse 13. In that he saith a new Covenant he hath made the first old now that which waxeth old is ready to vanish away By which tearms old and new first and second better and worse he would needs understand two Covenantâ— one of works the other of Grace Answ In this 8 Chap. the Apostle comes to apply what he had treated of before in the former Chap. verse 1 now of the things which we have spoken this is the summe â—n the former Chapter the Apostle had been speaking of the Levitical Priesthood and Law i. e. the Law of Ordinances and therefore verse 18. he tells us the Commandement going before i. e. before Christ came was disannull'd because of the weakness and unprofitableness of it and gives the reason in verse 19. because the Law i. e. the Law of ceremonies made nothing perfect in comparison but the bringing in of a better hope did by which we draw nigh to God by which he means the Gospel-Ordinances of worship called better because opposed to the Ceremonies of the Law which therefore are implyed to be wrote And that by this better hope is meant Gospel-Ordinances is evident because the Apostle useth it as an Argument to the Church of the Hebrews to perswade them to hold fast their profession which they were revolâ—ing from â—elling them If they should cast of the Ordinances of worship they could not then draw nigh to God because they would then cast off also the High-Priesthood of Christ so ch 3.6 Whose house are we if we held fast the rejoycing of the hope to the end And ver 14. We are made partakers of Christ if we hold fast the confidence to the end He here calls that the confidence which before he called the Hope and Confidence and ch 10.35 Cast not away therefore your Confidence As if he had said If you cast away the Ordinances of worship you stand no longer related to Christ as his house nor have you any hope or ground of hope to draw nigh to God So ch 7.19 the Law made nothing perfect but the bringing in of a better hope did by which we draw nigh to God So that the Ordinances of drawing â—igh to God under the Gospel are called a better hope as they stand opposed to â—he Ordinances of worship under the Law which albeit they did approach to God in them yet they were kept thereby at a greater diâ—â—ance ch 9.6 7 8 9. So Again let us review this chapter further because the cleering up of chap. 8. depends upon it And these Scriptures being fully answered we shall not have much to do with the rest we have already seen hat the O diâ—ances of the Gospel are opposed to those of the Law And hat this is so see v. 11. If perfection was by the Levitical Priesthood For under it the people received the Law what need was there of another Priesthood to rise after the order of Melchizedek What law â—as this the people received ver 12. 'T is such a law as was changed â—pâ—n the change of the Priesthood which cannot be meant of the Moral Law for this is still the sâ—me and not changed but the Law of the Altar which in ver 16. is called a carnal commandment which in ver 18. is disanulled by reason of the weakness of it and ver 19 for the Law made nothing perfect and the reason is given ch 9 9. Because iâ— was a figure for the time present in which were offered gifts and Sacrifices that could not make him that did it perfect And ch 10.1 The Law bring but a shadow of good things to come can never with those Sacrifices which they continually offered make the comers there to perfect for then they would not have ceased and in ver 8. when he speaks of Christ coming to be offered he draws this result from the premisses he takes away the first that he may establish the second Now in this 8 chapter he draws towards a conclusion and in the first verse of the things which we have spoken this is the sum he had before spoken of the Law of Ordinances and weakness thereof and therefore in this 7. v. of c. 8. he calls it the first Covenant for if the first Covenant had been faultless Why wherein was it faulty The Apostle had before told them it was faulty because it was weak and unprofitable and had it not been so that law of Ordinances would have made the worshippers perfect And then no place would have been sought for the second Covenant So then by the first Covenant 't is cleer is meant the Ordinances of the Ceremonial worship and therefore finding fault with them he speaks in the plural number them Ordinances not Covenants ver 8. unless Mr Patient will make two Covenants of works then he saith behold the day is come when I will make a new Covenant referring to Jer 31 3â— with the house of Israel i. e. new lâ—was of worship Not according to the Covenant I made with their Fathers c. And verse last in that he saith a new covenant he hath made the first old c. And therefore whereas Mr P. tells us that God gave Israel a Covenant of works to enjoy Canaan by It is most absurd as by their following particulars further apâ—ears 1. Had those typical Ordinances been a Covenant of Works given at Mount Sinai to Israel then it had not been put in the hand of a Mediator For where God gives a people a Mediator is supposed he intends them Grace thereby When Adam was put into a Covenant of Works he was left to stand or fall by himself without help since that no Covenant of Works was ever made Gal. 4. Moses is called the Mediator of the first Testament Now a Will or a Testament is an act of Grace purely 2. Had it been a Covenant of Works by which they were to possess Canaan there had not been one man that ever had entred into that rest For it was impossible for them to fulfil it because the power of doing so as to answer a Covenant of works was lost in the fall 3. What favour had this been to Abraham Isaac and so to all the seed of Promise to have such a flourishing promise to possess such a fruitful Land by a Covenant of Works when many of the Nations of the world did possess a more fruitful Country and were never put to such labour and toyle such difficulties and dangers that Israel were put to 4. 'T is against the Nature of a Covenant of Grace which God made with Abraham first to put him into a Covenant of Grace for spirituals and then twenty four yeers after should put him into a Covenant of Works for Temporals So that either believers must fall from Grace or else stand under two Covenants at one time 5. Had it been a
God did so much priviledge them above others was that all his might believe but yet some did not implying that some did i. e. many of them were justifyed Tâ—erefore ch 4. 9. he draws tâ—wards a result cometh this blessedness then upon the Circumcision onely or upon the uncircumcision also how was it then reckoned i. e. If Abraham was justifyed in uncircumcision then the righteousness of Faith comes not upon the Circumcision onely and ver 12. To them who are not of the Circumcision onely and ver 16. Not to that seed onely which is of the Law And then the Apostle concludes ver 23. that it was not written for Abrahams sake alone that righteousness was imputed to him but for us also i. e. Rom. and all other Gentiles if they believe to whom Abraham is as well a Father as to the Jews So that this triumphant place gives not the least continuance to his opinion either that Circumcision was a covenant of works or that it stands in direct opposition to saith or that God gave a covenant of works to Abraham to seal a covenant of Grace as he consequentially affirms p. 53. Therefore such an interpretation as he hath given of this place is most unsound The like answer is to be given to that place Phâ—l 3.2 3 4. which he brings in pag. 55. as an Appendix to this second Argument the Philippians were also revolting to seek after Justification by the works of the Law the teachers of which Doctrine the Apostle calls dogs and evil-workers And if any had cause to boast of the law of Works he had more yet to him it was but dung and dogs meat all his priviledges of being a Jew a Pharisee Circumcised one that concerning the Law was blameless All this saith Paul I can boast of but what is this as to matter of justification which is by faith alone in Christ The like plain answer also is and may he given to that other place Gal. 3.3 which Church also were back sliding into the same error and therefore he calls them fools and tells them they were bewitched ch 5.1 And if they would be seeking Justification by works they should find they were mistaken For as many as sought to be justifyed by the works of the Law were under the curse And that no man by the works of the Law was ever justifyed is evident because the just shall live by Faith ver 10 11. And therefore he sends them also to Abrahams covenant For to Abraham and his seed were the promises made And ver 18. he shews them the ill-consequence that would follow if they thought to be justifyed by works For then the inheritance must be by works that is the inheritance of Abrahams promises both for the Land of Canaan and all other spiritual blessings If it were by the Law then it is no more of promises But God gave them to Abraham by promise And not by a covenant of works remember that Mr P. upon this again comes with the old Objection Wherefore then serveth the Law If a man may not be justifyed and saved by the works of the Law to what end and purpose then was it given The answer is it was added because of transgression that is to make sin look like sin and thereby to ingage Gods people then to walk close in the duties thereof and in ver 21. The Apostle directly confutes Mr. Patients Doctrine Is the Law then against the Promises or in opposition to the Promises God forbid By all which it appears that the Law was no covenant of Works nor is Circumcision or any part of the Law opposed to Faith as he would make us beheve but this was the great mistake of many in Primitive Churches by false teachers means And so of all Israel as it is also of Mr P. that the Law was given to the Church of the Jews as a covenant of works which God never intended to any such end or purpose CHAP. IX The next thing we come to is the several Arguments he brings in p. 53. to prove Circumcision onely a seal to Abraham answered I. FIrst because the righteousness of Faith which it sealed Abraham had it before the seal was given but his posterity could not be said to believe at eight days old Therefore it was a seal to him and not to them A. The seal was not annext to Abrahams Faith as Abrahams but to Gods covenant made with Abraham therefore it is called the seal of the righteousness of Faith So that what it sealed to Abraham was as he was an heir of the same Promises with Isaac and Jacob Heb. 11.9 therefore what it sealed to him as an heir it sealed to Isaac and Jacob and so to all believers as co-heirs of the same inheritance Heb. 6.17 2. If it was a seal of Abrahams Faith onely then it must be either as it was a weak faith or strong faith 1 It could not be the first because Abrahams faith is by the Apostle said not to be weak Rom. 4.19 20. 2. If it had been given as a badge of honor to Abrahams Faith as I have seen it affirmed in a piece or C. B. as a strong faith then it should have been given to Adam and Noah who had as strong faiths as Abraham and less Gospel-light then Abraham had to work it 3. There was no necessity to have Abrahams justification sealed more then Adams Seths Noahs or any of his predecessors especially if it be considered what M. P. himself grants that he was justifyed twenty four years before this seal was given therefore 4. Had it not been a seal to Isaac as well as to Abraham and so not onely a seal of Abrahams faith it might have been given upon the birth of Ishmael and Abraham need not have staid for a son of promise for it would have sealed as much then to Abraham as it did after if it was not the covenant-seal 5. Had it not been a seal to Isaac and so a part of the covenant then Isaacs not being circumcised had been no breach of the covenant directly against that place Gen. 17.10 For a seal the Apostle calls it and a sign God calls it So that had it onely been a seal of Abrahams Faith the covenant had not come sealed to Isaac because the seal reacht onely the Faith of Abraham and when he dyed the seal was broken off Therefore 6. It is a cleer truth that as the blessings of the covenant were made to Abraham by Promise and to his seed so Gods main drift being to make those covenant-blessings sure to all the heirs of Promise Heb. 6.17 he therefore deals as a man that would be believed First he promiseâ— secondly he swears to confirm that Promise Thirdly he seals what he hath promised So the seal becomes the covenant-seal as the oath is the Covenants oath and what God promised to Abraham he promised to his seed and what he confirmed by oath to Abraham he confirmed to his
unmoveable again CHAP. XIII The sixth and seventh Fundamentals maintained P. pag. 80 81 83. THis opinion destroys the doctrine and foundation of Gospel-Churches The matter thereof which is Saints by calling spiritual worshippers Ioh. 4.23 lively stones 1 Pet. 2.5 persons redeemed from a vain conversation 1 Pet. 1.18 brought out of darkness into his marvellous light 1 Pet. 2.9 Now this opinion brings in a whole Nation to be a Church all born of their body their seeds seed in their generations This is a setting up the partition wall again betwixt the natural branches and those that are wild by nature 2 The manner of gathering is destroyed and the Lords baptism neglected and a counterfeit baptism set up in the room thereof A. Though this head would require a larger answer yet I shall contract as briefly as I can therefore 1 As to the matter of a Gospel Church it is believers and their seed which I thus prove the Church of Christ is his kingdom in the world to which the tenders of Gospel-Grace and mercy belongs it is therefore called the Gospel of the kingdom Mat. 13.19 before toucht upon It was so before the coming of Christ and it is so since If Grace therefore once took in children to be subjects of this kingdom who then casts them out not Grace for that is unchangeable and therby they were taken in T is the Argument of Paul If God justifies who shall condemn Rom. 8.31 34. If God be for them who shall be against them If grace makes them holy by separating them to a holy use who shall make them unclean and cut them off And that the same bowels of Grace and tender affection remains in Christ to little babes is cleer under the Gospel for of such is the kingdom he doth not say of such was the kingdom For that indeed would have been quickly made use of as a plea against us But of such is the kingdom As if he had said My Kingdome is made up of the same materials as the Kingdomes of the World are not onely of men and women but of children also of such is the kingdome would it not be ridiculous to say there may be a kingdom without children and that this is a metaphorical allusion to the kingdoms of the world is cleer not onely from the words or phrase there us'd but also from other Texts The kingdoms of the world shall become the kingdoms of Christ And Abrahams covenant tells us how it should be namely by multiplying of Abrahams seed in all Nations so as that power at last shall naturally divolve into their hands as it is worthily observed by an eminent Minister of these times Mr Carter upon Abrahams covenant 2. Consider the foundation of this kingdom was laid in Abraham and his seed For though God had his worship before in families from the beginning upon the first promise of Christ yet it came not to a kingdom-worship till the promise was inlarged of multiplying the seed as the stars of heaven And so Isaac was taken in as a subject with his Father though but an Infant-subject and that covenant which took in them was the kingdoms covenant and the seal of the covenant was the seal of the kingdom which reaches as well Infant-subjects as their Parents If then the foundation of the kingdom were parents and children then the building upon that foundation must be also parents and children because it is not a new but a continued kingdom Mat. 21.43 This being duly weighed it will also reach to that other relation the Church stands in to Christ of being his house And so takes in the place quoted 1. Pet. 2.5 And ye as living stones are built up a spiritual house c. Look what materials therefore were laid into the foundation of Gods spiritual house of the same is it carryed up till the top-stone be laid with shoutings Grace Grace And that Gods house under the Law was a spiritual huuse and their worshippers spiritual worshippers is câ—eer because Israel were a sepa ated people from all Nations and were also to be separated amongst themselves from all moral and typical uncleanness either in persons or things in order to a spiritual injoyment of God in his worship they being then as we now to offer up spiritual sacrifices to God holy and acceptable Se 2 Cor. 6.16 18. câ—mpared with Lev. 26.22 Isa 52.11 Ezek. 37.27 ch 44.7 And the having children in that spiritual house did not at all diminish from the worship to make it the less spiritual Isa 56.7 the allusion of the spiritual house under the Gospel is drawn from the nature of Gods spiritual house under the Law My house shall be called the house of prayer of all Nations It was not so called from the walls and stones of the Temple though that also in a sense might be so called but from Israels meeting there who was the prayiâ—g people that God had then in the world and the children were also carryed up to be presented before the Lord Exod. 13.2 Levit. 12.2 6. Luke 2.22 23 24 27. Therefore what ranks or degrees of people there were in the house of prayer then the same was also the house of prayer under the Gospel in all Nations to consist of namely of men women and children therefore the Apostle calls the Church the houshold of faith in which are taken in believers seed this doth also answer that place Joh. 4. spiritual worshippers for such they were under the Law and yet their children also were included The word is there used in opposition to this or that place which they lookt upon themselves bound up to though Christ was come as also in opposition to their manner of worship which was then more carnal Heb. 9.10 Truth was also opposed to the Idol worship of the Samaritans but nothing at all can be gathered to take away the right of children or that imports children not to be fit matter for a Church kingdom or house of God especially considering it was the same covenant of Grace then that took them in as it is now and if it be an immutable covenant to believers and their seed as no sound Christian can deny then are believers seed still in the covenant And thus also children may be truely called Saints and sanctifyed persons holy because set apart to a holy use in the service of God 3 Whereas therefore he saith this opinion brings in a whole Nation of believers it is his mistake for till God brings them in the opinion and practice doth not for it is but the incorporating of the families of believers into Congregational Societies and Churches unless there be so many families as fill a Nation and then I think without offence they may be called a Nation of believers and for ought I can see not improperly a National-Church neither are we hound by Israels practice of Circumcising to their succeeding generations who had a command for it though I believe they were
done when we consider not the diffeâ—ence aâ—d nature of the Auditors to cleer which let us come to some instances suppose a Church be truely constituted of which a great part may be hypocrites such as were Judas Magus Ananias and Saphira Hymeneus Alexander Phyletus mentioned in the Scriptures all which were never true believers These all these or any of these becoming true Converts and such as truely repent of their wicked Hypocrisie is â—his a Doctrine fit to be applyed to them without doubt such a practice would quickly overturn the Authors dipt Societies If he be true to the principles of this Doctrine as by himself it is applyed or else his words do imply that such Doctrines of Faith and Repentance is to be preacht onely to such as are without the Church as if those that â—ere within had no need thereof when as we know they are Doctrines of the Gospel which is the kingdoms Gospel and belongs to such as are within as well as without the kingdom were I a Minister and should come amongst master Patients people and preach this Doctrine and apply it as he doth would he not think it very much knockt out of joynt in the application to tell them it is the duty of all who really repent and believe to be baptized doubtless there is no rational Christian but would so judge If therefore it holds in one it must hold also in the other for it is not persons being hypocrites or carnal that nullifies their baptism no though the Administrator and manner also be circumstantially corrupted and defective what if John had baptized onely by pouring out water which he did as shall be after proved when he should have plunged and dipt them as this Author doth The Ordinance had not been thereby null and void for want of that circumstance So on the other hand should this Doctor of dipping convert a Heathen or Jew and plunge him when he should have onely poured the water on him after the Primitive practice yet the baptism stands in force still yea though the Author so dipping be no true real but a pretended Minister as Ziphora's circumcising stood in force though she were a defective Administrator and this is the general sense of Protestant Authors that those Children or persons that receive Popish baptism by their Priests after they are really converted to the Faith of Christ ought not again to be baptized and yet we see they are as ignorant as heathens by what therefore is said it is apparent the forementioned Doctrine is not to be extended to all alike and though it be an undoubted truth amongst such as preach to the heathens in New-England or to such amongst our selves as are yet unbaptized yet it is not therefore a sutable Doctrine to such as have been before baptized either there or elsewhere And yet we see with what fury and heighth of Confidence this theam is prosecuted throughout all his book T is a like Argument with this When Christ sent his Ministers to preach and baptize their Commission was to go into all the World Therefore he that is a true Minister of the Word and Baptism must be an Itinerary preacher Augustus Caesar a Tyrant taxt his people therefore it is lawful for all Magistrates to tax their subjects which last hath been a Doctrine so raised by the Author in my hearing CHAP. II. Relating to the Administrator answered HAving examined the Doctrine and foundation let us come to survey the building to see what work is made there he goes to open and explain what is meant by baptism and so leads us to a new Text which indeed usually leads the Van Argument but is here brought in as a prop to uphold the Doctrine before raised Mat. 28.18 From which two places he hath ingaged to run through the whole Controversie of Baptism in four Essentials by him so called 1. The Minister 2. The Form 3. The Name into which 4. The Subject All which being laid down as so many Essentials if any one be wanting the baptism in his sense is made null and void we are therefore come to examine these several heads and first the Minister or Administrator p. 6. preaching Disciples go ye therefore but when he afterwards comes to explain his meaning who they are he speaks thus That Disciple that can bring down God to the soul and the soul up to God is a lawful Minister of baptism I shall therefore a little search into this unheard of qualification according to the place by him quoted first the persons spoken of had an immediate Commission from Christ Go ye therefore Secondly The persons sent were Apostles men in Office men of Gifts for the work Go teach all Nations baptising such they were that baptized in a way of office power and authority And because these therefore every man that undertakes to preach by a Gift either occasionally or intentively not having any Commission or Call thereto may baptize is this any lawful deduction or rather is it not the way to destroy the Ministry by this rule if there be twenty in the Church of which this Author is a labourer or Minister that can preach or talk rather as well as himself they shall therefore take his power of administring these Seals out of his hands When as both he and they are bound to desist from any such actions until they are duly and solemnly admitted into an office that capacities them for the work And the contrary is condemned by the Apostle 1 Cor. 12. Are all Apostles are all Prophets are all Pastors and Teachers c. And therefore God hath set every member in the Church to be useful to the body in his due place as are the members of the natural body and not one to intrude upon the other Consider further Secondly If that be all the qualification required for the administration of Sacraments before mentioned then may a woman be a lawful administrator for though the title of preaching Disciples reaches onely to the Males yet that kind of explanation will reach females What if such a one as Priscilla who was a Disciple should amongst many of her own Sex be an instrument to convert some to the Faith I hope it cannot be denyed but she brings down God to the soul is it therefore lawful for her to baptize there must therefore such a restriction be put upon the words as confines them to persons in office or else we are like to come to a strange kind of Reformation at last But indeed this kind of qualification though the full current of the words are rough and harsh yet may it well suit with their practice for though they lay much weight upon the thing it self called the Ordinance yet are they very loose in this which he calls an Essential namely the Administrator for if the Pastor or Officer be absent or sick but usually they have neither if the people do but desire such a brother to baptize and give the
inward or how else should there be any communion of Saints on earth Thus Hagars son though by nature born under a covenant of works was a Church member And he could call Abraham father as Isaac could though not under such a spiritual consideration for still the in-works of Adoption Sonship Justification and Sanctification have run by promâ—se in a close hidden and spiritual way woâ—king upon and changing the heart And though Isaac Jacob and the rest of the line were all born in sin as well as Ishmael and Esau yet the Promise takes time to work and brings in the Elect of God some later some sooner yea let us bring down this again to a parallel and compare it to the practice of M. P. Sure I am he cannot say that all he and others with him plunged upon their profession of faith are the real Adopted sons of God or realâ—y holy or really justifyed or sanctifyed that is spiritually But this they may say they are visibly such and some may be such also spiritually but who they be is unknown to man and yet all were alike by nature born in sin and children of wrath 2. And thus all those Scriptures Ephes 2.2 by nature children of wrath Rom. 3.9 none righteous no not one are answered This was also the equal condition of Paul David and the rest born and conceived in sin and yet as Abrahams seed they were interessed in the covenant then as believers and their seed are now We may then see how his heap of chaff cast upon the truth begins already to be blown away II. P. The second fundamental which he proclaims to the world that our practice overturns is stability in a covenant of eternal life for if all Israel were born in the covenant of Grace then all should be saved but there were but a remnant of Israel saved all the rest damned Isa 10.22 23. Rom. 9.22 And if so born they must needs fall away from Grace A. As stability in Grace is a glorious truth so neither doth this touch it For it onely makes the outward part of the covenant instable That is a falling away from their visible being in the covenant for as hath been said a man may be in the covenant yet not in the Grace of the covenant Thus Israel and all those Gospel hypocrites mentioned fell away but the election still remained so the branches that were in Christ Joh. 15. that bare not fruit were cut off and withered and thus all those Texts that speak of a falling away are to be understood The like now though many Apostates fall from the ways of God yet the covenant remains stable and the same for ever III. P. The third foundation he pretends to be shaken is the necessity of conversion and regeneration which is a Doctrine eminently confirmed by Christ in the Gospel for which he brings several Texts of Scripture but to hold a covenant of life to run upon the carnal seed of believers opposeth this for then when Christ said Except a man be born again â—e cannot enter into the kingdom of God Israel might answer that 's not true we have an interest in the covenant of Grace already and except ye believe that I am he ye shall dye in your sins they might say again that 's not true for we know another way â—o heaven then by believing and 1 Joh. 5. He that hath not the Son hath not life This error replyes there be thousands interessed in life without having Christ by carnal generation Thus far he with much more of the like stuffe with which he fills three pages together A. Neither doth it at all intrench upon this Doctrine as falsly suggested therefore to cleer this we are to consider first the ground of this mistake of his from whence it riseth as any man may easily see namely that the Doctrine of Conversion Repentance and Regeneration is to be preacht onely to such as are without the Church and Kingdom of Christ for his argument runs as taking it for granted that such as are the subjects of the kingdom are such in reality when as by the former distinctions it is most apparent that some are such visibly onely and some really 2. Therefore consider the Doctrines mentioned are part of that Gospel which is the kingdoms Gospel as Christ calls it and hath been ever preacht to the subjects of the kingdom so it was to Israel of old and though believers and their seed were taken into the covenant already proved to be of grace yet this Doctrine of the new birth was preacht to them which is abundantly cleer from Christs words to Nicodemus Joh. 3. a place by himself quoted Art thou a Doctor in Israel and knowest not what the doctrine of the new birth means implying That he shewed himself very ignorant when he knew not that which was preacht amongst Israel adding this also That the Ordinance of Circumcision so frequently used was but a Type of the Circumcision upon the heart yea the whole tenor of the old-Testament runs in such terms that cleerly shew their blessedness lies in repenting and turning to God in pardon of sin in setting their delight in the Laws of the Lord trusting in God and setting their hope in God the book of Psalms is full of it So also in those primitive Churches planted by the Apostles themselves who in admission of members had a better insight to the truth of grace upon the heart then any since and yet this Doctrine they preacht to the Church 2 Cor. 5.17 Rom. 2.29 ch 6.11.8.10 Gal. 5.19 Eph. 4.23 therefore such as think the Doctrines of Repentance New-birth c. should be preacht to the world onely may hence see their mistakes amongst which number Mr P. is one I shall still draw down the parallel to his practice which I judge to be a good way to convinâ—e our dissenting friends of their error can he think that all that runs in the same ra e with him I mean into the water that they have no need of preaching Repentance or the new-birth amongst them surely if that be his judgment he discovers more ignorance and weakness then ever Nicodemus did Therefore 3. Let us glean up his Scriptures The reproof that John gave the Pharisees was not for pleading a title to Abrahams covenant as his seed for it is evident he baptâ—zed upon that accompt for had not the Pharisees claimed the Ordinances as Abrahams seed because the rest did so the reproof given them had been little better then non-sense but he checks them for their wickedness in not walking as became Abrahams children So also Joh. 8.32 The like also Luke 16. a place M. P. much delights to name thinking it makes for his opinion because Dives in hell owned Abraham as a Father and Abraham owned him as a son but yet for all that saith Mr. Patient he was damned A. There is none denyes but Abraham had more children damned then saved yet nevertheless such as
before the Gospel-administration must be a new covenant of works And so what M. P. doth though onely a pretender to Gospel-rule in wading into mill-pools and Rivers must be as indeed it is a branch of such a covenant of Works Therefore not of Grace P. pag. 87 88. The reason why God made choice of Abrahams family and not Lots or any of the rest of the godly families in the world it was not because Abraham was any more a believer or his Family for then Lot and his family and the rest had been taken into the covenant of Circumcision because they did believe as well as Abraham For this is a sure rule If God gives a promise or command to a person as a believer then whosoever believes that command and promise belongs to them and for this he brings the example of Joshua I will not leave thee which the Apostle applyes to the Church Heb. 13.5 now the covenant made with Abraham was therefore to shew the world that Christ must come out of his flesh c. A. Though I grant that Abraham was not pitcht upon as a believer barely yet had he not been a believer he could not have been the father of the faithful 2 If that had been all to point out to the world from whence they might expect the Messias then Cirâ—umcision might as well have been given to Seth Enos or Shem c. and so have distinguisht the whole race yea God must afterwards have given some distinct sign to Judah because all Jacobs twelve sons were circumcised So that the world would be at as great a loss to know in which of al these twelve the line was to run Therefore if we do but look into the grounds of the Promises we shall finde there were many other main and choice ends as namely By the multiplying of believers as the stars of heaven who also are called the seed they might thereby become blessings to families and Nations For as Jesus Christ was the great blessing so every believer was also to be a little blessing According to the promise I will bless thee and thou shalt be a blessing and by this means God makes use of believers to be as his leaven to leaven the whole lump so that in this way Christs kingdom shall at last spread through the earth 2 To make Abraham a publike Father to the believing Gentiles and their seed since the coming of Christ as he was to the Jews and their seed before Christ came 3 To seal the possession of Canaan to him and the heirs of Promise as a type of heaven and to give them possession of that Land in a way of conquest Gen. 22.17 Luke 1.73 4 To shew the immutability of his counsel and purpose to the Gentiles Heirs with him of the same promises that so we in Gospel days might have ground of consolation in all straits and extremities that the heirs under the Gospel might meet with because they also have a wilderness to go through Rev. 12.6 and Canaanites to subdue and conquer Gen. 9.27 And a like rest with that of Canaan to possess Heb. 4.1 Therefore Abraham is held out as a publike Father to look at thereby to see and behold Gods variety of dealings with him and with his seed after him either in war or peace prosperity or adversity hereby to strengthen Faith in the like case that so as David saith one deep may call out to another at the noise of Gods water-spouts when the billows overflow These and all these and more then these were the ends for which God made choice of Abraham to give the Promises unto with the oath and seal all which do substantially continue to this day being by Christ handed over to the Gentiles with the old seal taken off which as Lord of all he had power to do and a new seal added in the room thereof to the same covenant which amounts to no more then the taking off a seal of red wax from a covenant and putting a seal of white wax in the place thereof yet the covenant still remains II. To that which he saith that if a command or promise be given to a believer as a believer it then as a sure rule belongs to every one that is a believer A. That 's no true rule therefore not a sure rule because a promise that suits to one mans condition as a believer doth not therefore suit with every believers condition neither doth the end of God in giving one believer a Promise reach to the same end in all believers unless so circumstantiated as for instance God gave Abraham Circumcision as a believer And his end was to make Abraham a publike Father yet this did not therefore reach to all believers For he did not intend to make any more publike fathe s then one the like we may say of that instance he gives of Joshua The command and Promise given to him was as a Captain General and believer and so it could not reach to all believers upon those terms for though he was commanded to be of a good courage c. and fight and he should not be forsaken yet that command doth not reach to all believers because we see many believers have fallen in the wars and their enemies have been the conquerors yea such a command would then reach to women because they are believers And the reason why that promise was applyed to the believing Hebrews is because one promise hath several aspects And so suits to several conditions it being as a sprig of the whole bundle that suits all conditions So the several cures that Christ wrought upon persons as believers and some in a way of promise doth not therefo e instate all believers in such a promise that they shall so be cured when the holy Ghost tells us the prayer of faith shall save the sick doth this give al believers an interest into the direct intent of that promise there is therefore much Christian prudence to be observed in chusing and applying promises to pick out such as are suitable to a believers condition The Reader may therefore see how sadly confident and ignorant this man is who yet is lookt upon as the Nicodemus of that party P. pag. 86. For many pages he goes on to shew that the whole line by promise mentioned in Luke 3. it was onely an external election into a covenant of works and Cain Ham Ishmael Esau were therefore outwardly rejected from that covenant A. It hath been already proved that all the line by promise are more then externally elected yea so to affirm is strongly to suppose that some of that elect line might be damned because thousands so elected are never saved and some of those so rejected might go to heaven though t is expresly against the scriptures the naming of which methinks should be a sufficient confutation As to the six sons of Keturah which he speaks of in page 90 which were Abrahams seed and sent away into
branches which reaches into Gospel-days since the exhibition of Christ to the worlds end For which cause Abraham is called the Father of believers under the Gospel which could not be that we should be Abrahams children If the blessing of Abrahams covenant reacht onely to Christ as pointing at him for so we must have been Christs children not Abrahams 4 Then the Apostle knew not what he said Gal. 3.14 when he tels the Church That Abrahams blessing is come upon the Gentiles through Christ For if it were onely meant of Christ then it would lose the title of Abrahams blessing But though Christ be come yet the blessing is Abrahams blessing still yea Christ is come that he may conveigh the blessing from the Jews to us as heirs with them and not distinct from them and what blessing it should be called Abrahams which Christ should hand over to us if not the blessings of the covenant in all the veins thereof is not to be understood Therefore 5 As the promise oath and seal were joyned together to make the blessings of Abraham sure so were they all conveyed to us intirely to shew the immutability of his counsel and purpose to us as it did to the Jews Heb. 6.18 that so the heirs of Abrahams promise under the Gospel might have strong consolation And upon this account it was the Apostle in Rom. 4. bids them cast an eye back upon Abraham their father to see how he was justifyed which had it not been so they would have been sent to Christ as a pattern not to Abraham He should have been called their father not Abraham so when he tells the Galatians ch 4.28 in order to rectifie their judgements in the like mistake of Justâ—fication now ye brethren as Isaac was are the children of the promise It had been to no purpose unless Isaacs promise had remained for they could not be children of that which was not From all which we see into what mistakes he is got and how sadly bewildered with his own notions upon what sl ght promises he draws so high conclusions to make his ware vendible For notwithstanding any thing he hath spoken as Abrahams blessings and covenant do not cease though Christ be come so neither do we deny by this opinion of ours that Christ is come or do we expect another Christ to come as he suggests It therefore appears the covenant of grace is of such extent that it takes in thousands into the visible part thereof that shall never be saved so that still the objection which he saith is answered remains in full force and vertue that the priviledges are not straitned more then they were under the Law therefore as children were then in covenant and received the seal so are they still in covenant and the Gospel seal is their due and cannot be denyed them P. Pag 94. The new covenant was confirmed of God in Christ onely Gal. 3.17 therefore it cannot belong unto any souls out of Christ 1 Cor 11.25 This cup is the new Testament in my blood If the New Testament be in Christs blood then what hath any carnal unbelieving wretch to do with this Testament that hath not faith in his blood A. These Texts makes full against him For that place Gal. 3.17 tells us that Abrahams covenant which was 430 yeers before the Law was confirmed in Christs blood Therefore the Law coming after could not make the Promises of God of none effect If then Abrahams covenant in which children were included were confirmed in that blood this new covenant being the same with Abrahams as himself confesseth and confirmed by the same blood Infants are still within the same covenant For the covenant is in Christ Yea and Amen to all the persons included in the covenant As there is a double being in the covenant internal and external so a double being in Christ Joh. 15.3 4 which being well distinguisht will cleer all such doubts Some of the seed are onely in Christ externally as Ishmael Esau and others Internally also as Isaac Jacob and so in the covenant whether Adult or Infants the like to be said to 1 Cor. 11.25 That cup is the New Testament or a seal of the New-Testament to all that are within that Testament As Christs blood typically sealed the first Testament to Abraham and his seed so Christs blood seals the New-Testament to believers and their seed of which that cup is the Sacramental remembrance the like also to Mat. 3 17. my son in whom I am well pleased i. e. as God was well pleased with Abraham his seed by promise that were in the covenant co firmed by Christs blood so is he now well pleased with believers and their seed by promise in the same covenant confirmed by Christs blood The same answer is to be given to all the rest of those places by him quoted with which he fills many pages to prove that none can be in the covenant of Grace except he be first in Christ P. In pag. 95. He condoles the sadness of these times That when the means of grace and knowledge of the Gospel is so plentifully held forth yet we must be forc'd to bestow such pains to prove that men cannot be in a state of salvation and acceptation before God in a covenant of Grace without union with Christ by Faith A. Alas poor man he would fain be pittyed for the pains he takes but who is it that puts him to it but his own erring spirit which makes him afraid of his own shadow Is there any of us that affirms so wickedly that acceptation is to be had in God without union with Christ If not he deals the more deceitfully to suggest such things as if our Ministry did it Therefore 2 Whereas he saith the means of Grace hath been plâ—ntifully held forth It seems it is not by his opposites the publike Ministers For how can such hold forth the means of Grace that shall affirm such an acceptation is to be had without such an union which he affirms to be the principles of those that plead for infant-baptism but blessed be God If you have no better warrant to justifie your irregular and unnatural practice withal and condemn ours then such calumnies the experience of these days speaks aloud who it is that have held forth the means of Grace and glorious light of the Gospel It is evident enough from the budding and fructility of Aarons rod of whom it may be said they preach with Authority and not as the Scribes for their rods are dry and barren because they preach not conversion but subversion I shall touch upon a Scripture or two more leaving the rest for the Reader to answer in his own thoughts For indeed not one of them proves any thing he asserts Joh. 14.6 Mat. 7.14 He that hath Christ hath life he that hath not Christ hath not life we say the same but he that hath not Christ spiritually may have a visible right to the
within Abrahams covenant for we cannot imagine that all the Apostles baptized were really called for the Sorcerer before mentioned doth sufficiently confute it therefore still he mistakes the question which is thus whether all that are called are really justifyed 2 Neither can it be reasonably thought that there were no hypocrites amongst those three thousand mentioned and that they were all so called as he speaks of but the Apostles intention was to let them know by what way they might get in to Abrahams covenant again from which both they and their seed were cut off Therefore Repent and be baptized for the remission of sin and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost For the promise is to you and your children c. That is remission of sins and the gift of the Spirit comes still in the way of Abrahams Covenant as it did before Gal. 3.14 Therefore if you will get into the way of the Spirits working you must repent and be baptized he doth not say that all baptized do really repent for upon the ground Mr. Patient goes none should be admitted to baptism but such as really Repent and are really called and really justifyed when as yet he forgets his own ignorance That he is not able to discern thâ—m Thus we have sifted all his cavils brought against this Text as not to countenance Infant-Baptism And upon the whole we finde it to be a tender of Abrahams Covenant in all the blessings of it even to children of visible believers either Jews or Gentiles Therefore the seal of that Covenant is their due Right and Priviledge P. The next Text is 1 Cor. 7.14 which he saith we abuse to make it speak for Infant-holiness Else were your children unclean but now they are holy God takes persons into Covenant two ways either by an external typical Covenant of Works as he did Israel and so a people may be said to be holy by separation as the carnal Jew being separated from the world and thus the vessels of the Temple were holy and the Priest were holy 2 Secondly A new-Covenant holiness when God writes his Laws in the heart and sanctifies their Nature and there is no other kinde of holiness that relates to the new Covenant but this Hypocrites may have this in appearance but the Elect onely have it in truth therefore it is impossible that a believers carnal seed should be so holy by Birth And no other sanctification the Scripture speaks of belonging to the new Covenant The other was abolisht by the death of Christ A. Whereas he knows no other holiness belonging to the New Covenant but real holiness it is rather an Argument of his ignorance then any confirmation of the truth of what he saith for that New-Covenant had such a holiness of separation belonging to it from Adam to Christ And it is the sâ—me that we have onely the holy things are changed yet so as that whatever Ordinance God hath given his Church now is holy Israel as separated from the world was a holy people so is the Church of God now Act. 10 13 28. 2 Cor. 6.17 Therefore the Apostle writing to the Churches as separated people calls them Saints or holy ones at Rome Corinth Galatia c. Not that they were all holy by an internal work of sanctifâ—cation for the Romans had many that were fallen to Judaism and Corinth had many profane persons amongst them yet as they were a Chuâ—ch they all carry the denomination of holy ones so that the Church stands upon the same terms of separation now as then from the world Therefore the casting out of the incestuous person was as one polluted and unclean which is opposed to such a holiness as makes a person fit for Church-Communion Thus also it was with Israel when there was either a Moral or Typical uncleanness they were cast out as not fit for Communion thus the bread and wine in tâ—e Lords Supper and water in baptism are holy by vertue of separation or institution thus the function of the Ministery is holy or else every man might preach baptize and administer the Supper alike And notwithstanding ceremonies are abolisht yet a holiness of separation by vertue of divine institution remains still or else the word of God were no more holy then another Book Nor the Gospel-Sabboth more holy then another day thus are the Infants of a believer holy else were your children unclean but now they are holy yea let me add that it is impossible that any man can be found in the faith and amongst the rest Mr Patient for one either to Scripture Sabboths or Gospel-Ordinances except they grant a holiness of separation both in persons and things P. The words are grounded from Ezra 9. and Deut. 7. It being an express Law for a Jew not to marry with a stranger therefore they were to put away their strange wives because not lawfully marryed and the children that were born of them were to be lookt upon as illegitimate The Church upon this writing to the Apostle to be resolved whether such of them aâ— had unbelieving yoak-fellows might dwell together and whether it was not unclean or unlawful To this he ansâ—ers Let them dwell together bâ—cause now there being no Law against it the marriage was therefore justifyable and the unbelieving wife is sanctifyed to the believing husband that is set apart by the Law of marriage to him onely else were your children bastards but now they are lawfully born A. There is no such thing mentioned in either place that their children were Bastards Then had Moses son by Zipporah the Egyptian been a Bastard yea the contrary is evident because the Scripture calls them wives And is it not a wilde expression to call her whore that Gods word calls a wife And would it not be as strange to think that so many Priests and Levites should be whoremasters which yet must be if such an interpretation were true as Mr. Patient gives But therefore the ground of putting away their strange wives was because Israel was a separated people and so not to have any affinity with strangers And though it was Israels sin to many a stranger yet it was not their sin to match with an Israelite which had it been whoredom the very light of nature would have condemned it besides this scruple did not lye betwixt Jew and Gentile For this was a Gentile Church a people converted from heathenism to profess Christ They had therfore no ground to think that the marriage they had before conversion was unlawful And had the taking in of the believer into communion with the Church made the unbeliever a whore or a whoremaster and the children bastards or had any such ground of scruple been given it had been enough to have frightened the heathens from being Christians It cannot be therefore that any dis-satisfaction shâ—uld rise in their spirits from those Texts by him quoted considering also the nature of the phrase the wife should
p. 116. This Text Ro. 11. doth fully make against any fleshly coveâ—ant or fleshly line of believers because from ver 20 to 24 the Gentiles come to be Abrahams spiritual seed and so branches onely by faith in Christ the fat Olive And if the Gentiles are graffed in contrary to nature then it cuts off all Gentile-seed who came in by nature And though the Jews were cut off for unbelief yet this opinion doth ingraff the carnal seed of the Gentiles into the midst of that unbelief A. That by natural branches is to be understood the Jews and their children and by branches wild by nature the Gentiles and their children hath been already proved See the answer to pag. 82. And that the cutting off and graffing in related to Parents and children hath been also cleered To which I refer the Reader onely adding Jer. 31.1 Isai 65.23 therefore to interpret by natural branches only adult believers and by branches wild by natu e the Infants of believers is to restrain and eclipse the intent of the Holy Ghost in the place cited and supposeth strongly that all such adult believers are really ingraffed into Christ When as Christ himself tells us there may be some branches in him cut off and withered Joh. 15.2 4 5 6. And that Infants are all damned because all wild by nature 2 Where he tells us of ingraffing into the midst of their unbelief is â—â—lse for we ingraffe into that stock Abr. from which they were cut â—ff for unbelief And if what he asserts in this were true then those believing Jews and their children which were not cut off remain in the midst of their unbelief that were cut off And thus we may sâ—e a man in his nakedness and yet without shame I see I must pass over many of his absurdities and reiterations because they come so fast upon me In pag. 118 he again runs retrograde P. If any hold believers and their seed within the covenant of grace it is a denying of Christ to be come in the flesh and therefore he must needs be a high Antichrist Rep. This hath been already answered and his vain confidence so to affirm hath been manifested that it is apparent if the Reader will but take pains to view the answer to his 93 page it is no denying of Christ to be come in the flesh to maintain Infants right to the Covenant of Grace yea it is a strong Argument to prove Christ is come because the blessing of Abraham is by Christ handed over to the Gentiles Gal. 3.14 which could not have been if Christ had not been exhibited in flesh because the wall of partition could not have been broken down therefore M. P. lies under self-condemnation because to deny the blessing of Abrahams Covenant to be handed over to the Gentiles and their seed is to deny Christ exhibited as that place of Paul proved Gal. 3.14 so that M. P. proves himself an Antichrist Let no man therefore dislike the truth for this Bears skin which this Author of dipping hath cast upon it For it is the devils policy now Antichrist is falling to cry down all Gospel-truths for Antichristian that so they may fall also but mauger all the malice of hell the interest of Children in the Covenant of Grace made with Abraham shall stand and triumph as a glorious truth of the Gospel when Antichrist and his children all petty Antichrists shall tumble together P. Pag. 118. He quotes 2 Cor. 5.16 Henceforth we know no man after the flesh yea though we have known Christ after the flesh yet henceforth we know him so no more which he explains thus men were known and approved as priviledged persons in Gods Church after the flesh but henceforth we know no man no not Christ himself as interessed in the covenant of Abraham he being a Minister of a better covenant then that of Circumcision grounded upon better promises c. therefore we know no man after the flesh no not Christ himself A. As all other places of Scripture hitherto brought have been abused by false explications and applications so is the intent and meaning of this Text much wrong'd and clouded I shall therefore briefly cleer it The Apostle is telling the Church of Corinth that the Jew had no more benefit by the death of Christ then the Gentile for both Jew and Gentile were all under sin and were therefore all dead If one dyed for all then were all dead It seems many of them thought that because Christ came from the Jews therefore he did bear more love to them then the Gentiles and so it was good being a Jew To which Paul answers True if we that are Jews should judge after the flesh according to our natural affection to our own Nation then we should say so too but the love of Christ constrains us to judge otherwise that is he did not look upon the benefit of this or that Nation peculiarly but this Christ had in his eye Jew and Gentile were all dead and upon this account did Christ die For if one dyed for all then were all dead as if he had said Christ did not intend this Jew should be more priviledged then that Gentile though himself were a Jew therefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh That is we do not now look upon the Jew to have any more priviledge then the Gentiles yea though we have known Christ after the flesh that is though we have known him to be a Jew and to receive the seal of their priviledges only yet henceforth we know him so no more that is we have no more priviledge now by Christs coming from us then the Gentiles nor hath Christ any more income of priviledges from us then he hath from the Gentiles ours is alike from him and his is alike from us and no difference And that this is the true intent of the words see v. 17 18 19 20. Old things are past away i. e. old priviledges that we claimed in Christ before others they are all now conveyed over to the world and therefore he hath committed to us the Gospel of reconciliation to wit that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself i. e. It was onely our Nation that was reconciled before Parents and children called his sons spouse off-spring heirs the blessings of the covenant were ours onely But now all this is tendered to the world Therefore we as Embassadors in Christs stead beseech you to be reconciled And thus you have this innocent Text which hath been turned against Abrahams seed though it harbors not a harsh syllable to babes wrested out of the paw of the Lyon 2 Let us view the second part Christ himself should not be minded as at all interessed in Abrahams Covenant he being now a Minister of a better Covenant c. A. It hath been already fully proved That Abrahams Covenant in all parts thereof was a full and compleat covenant of Grâ—ce and not of Works Therefore M.
P. to say Christ should not be minded or known in that Covenant is as much as to say that Jesus Christ is not to be minded as Mediator for there is no other Covenant that he is Mediator of but that and if this be not a bird of prey that flyes in the Region of blasphemy Let God Almighty and his people judge Thus we may see what work ignorant men will make in preaching that have onely a little Conscience a great deal of Confidence and a great Concordance This place also notwithstanding any thing he hath said doth vote for the ingraffing of believing Gentiles and their seed into the covenant made with Abraham from which the believing Jews and their seed were cast out therefore Job 38.2 who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge CHAP. XVII 1 Cor. 10.1 2 3. with many other Texts cleered from his corrupt interpretation P. Pag. 120. THe next Scripture he faceth as intending to relieve it out of our hands is 1 Cor. 10.1 2 3. Moreover brethren I would not have you ignorant how that all our Fathers were under the cloud and were all baptized to Moses in the cloud and in the sea and did all eat of the same spiritual meat and did all drink of the same spiritual drink For they drank of that rock that followed them and that rock was Christ This is another Scripture made use of to prove a covenant of salvation to run in the flesh Rep. This Text was never pleaded to prove a covenant of life in the flesh for as we never affirmed such doctrines so is this Text impertinent for such a purpose but this we say that this Scripture is by us brought to prove the manner of baptising not to be by dipping so that we see he hath mistaken the door like a blind man groping in the dark therefore I shall wave much like stuff that follows upon it P. Pag. 120. 121. Israel was baptized to Moses a typical Mediator not to Christ which is a main passage to be noted and the covenant that Mose was Mediator of was a covenant of works and then he shews how the Law did type out in that administration our deliverance from sin death hell the devil and what resemblance it had of these things c. A. Though Israel was not baptized into Christ exhibited yet as Moses was a type of Christ so they were baptized into Christ Act. 3.22 2. The Apostle holds forth Israels Baptism as a Sacrament and brings it in with the Manna and the Rock which was Sacramentally Christ And compares these two to the Sacraments of the Church of Corinth who did eat the same spiritual meat and drink the same spiritual drink So that Christ was as truly held forth in Israels Baptism Sacramentally as in the Church of Corinths baptism and as much in the Rock and Manna amongst Israel as in the bread and wine in the Supper amongst the Church of Corinth 3 The Apostle by telling the Church of Corinth of Israels S craments and deliverances they injoyed from God they were all baptized and did all eat compares them with this Gospel-Church as an equal parallel to let them know that as they had equal priviledges so the same since in a Gospel-Church would bring down the same judgements as it did already begin to work for their unworthy receiving the Supper Now their priviledges being compared as equal and yet Israel being all baptized Sacramentally into Christ men women and children doth cleerly import that the infant-seed of that Church to whom this example is brought were also baptized into Christ or else the parallel could never hold so that what was done in baptising Israel â—o Moses as a typical Mediator was but a prefiguration of what should be done to Gods people Israel i. e. men women and children under Christ the true Mediator therefore this which he lays down mainly to be observed that Israel was not baptized to Christ is observed to be untrue And as for the manner of baptising either by sprinkling or powring forth water it is as fully held forth in this Text as before proved as that they used wine in the Supper But of this he speaks but little though indeed it is the main thing for which this Text is so often cond P. As to that where he tells us Moses was a typical Mediator of a covenant of works A. Then is Christ a Mediator of a covenant of works and then he contradicts what he affirmed in pap 127 where making Abrahams covenant to be of works he tells us that Christ was not now to be considered or eyed as a person interessed in that but a better covenant And how a covenant of works can stand with a Mediator or a Mediator with such a covenant is to me a paradox and not to be known I am sure on this side the water P. Those Teachers mentioned in Act. 15. that would impose a yoak upon the disciples necks were much like to those now who plead for Infant-baptism For they had no warrant for what they did A. He appears mistaken for our Ministers now neither plead for Circumcision nor Justification by works which was the main rock those primitive Churches by reason of the false teachers were like to split upon yea it is a thing note worthy that in all those primitive revolts from the truth the false Teachers did usher them in by preaching up Circumcision after the Law of Moses by which means they made rents and divisions in all Churches so that had not Infants been Church-members that were strongly riveted in their Parents affections it could have been no taking Argument to Parental-members to fall back to Judaism or any probable ground of hopes to incourage the false Teachers in their works for upon the strain of Anabaptists they might have done as they pleased with their children Circumcise or Paganize them for they were not to be of the visible Church til they were adult believers and so converted to the Faith by the word preacht And the very Text it self doth imply that children in the Primitive times were called Disciples or else how should it be called a putting a yoak upon the necks of the Disciples after the manner of Moses It was the childrens necks that bore the yoak Zipporah knew it right well so that it is apparent what he saith of our Ministery in comparing them to those false Teachers is but his usual way of reproaches in which he shakes hands with those false Teachers mentioned whose main work hath ever been to smite the shepheards that the sheep may be scattered and to extinguish their light that so their glow-worm shining may be seen in the dark But I hope the light of these times with the barking of the wolves now abroad will sufficiently discover them to be beasts of prey though they go mantled in sheeps cloathing P. p. 124. This being premised that Moses was a Typical Mediator and their baptism and the
Rock and Manna a type of Christ from hence the sense of the Text is drawn plain That as the spiritual disciple or Israelite is baptized into Christ so the temporal Israelite was baptized to Moses in the cloud and sea and they are called spiritual meat and drink by a figure A. He hath no way to put off his false doctrines but by turning all Scriptures into allegorical notions for what exposition he hath here given is as much besides the Text and as unlikely to be true as for me to say the man in the Moon is like M. P. for let us but consider that those Sacraments were spiritual to Israel as Gods Church as the Sacraments of the Gospel were spiritual to the Church of Corinth Now the Apostle in drawing the parallel doth not speak of a spiritual Church in a carnal Church or a spiritual Israelite and a carnal Israelite thereby making onely some to be baptized to Moses but tells as plainly they were all baptized to Moses Whereas this whimsical notion would make us believe there were some of Israel not baptized to Moses and when Paul saith they did all eat the same spiritual meat and did all drink the same spiritual drink M. P. tells us directly contrary You see then with what evidence of truth he speaks when the Authority of an Apostle must vail before him and though he saith the Sacraments are spiritual by a figure yet if he were askt by what figure he must either give a Parrots answer or say nothing albeit he shews his ignorance to be medling and his confidence I am unwilling to call it worse to notionallize the Sacraments themselves as if they were not a spiritual meat and a spiritual drink to the Church of God By which we see rather then he will have any dependance upon the Law he will run beyond the Gospel P. p. 127. Those typical signes and figures then which typed out Christ to come did properly belong to the typical seed the body of Israel that typed out the spiritual seed to come in Gospel-Ordinances instituted since Christ came which are for confirm ng that he is come and these belong only to the spiritual seed in whom Christ is come already dwelling in their hearts by Faith A. Here is such a pack of distinctâ—ons that were not I believe heard of in past ages It seems the spiritual Israel had no need of Ordinances for they did not properly belong to them but to the carnal lump and why then should Abel Noah Abraham and all the seed by promise be sacrificers why then should David cry out after those water brooks and even envy at the happiness of those birds who had their nests neer the Altar 2 If the body of Israel did type out the spiritual seed to come under the Gospel then whom did the spiritual seed of Israel type out either no body or by opposition the carnal Gospellers for the spiritual Israel were types though yet the carnal Israel or the body of Israel it will be hard to prove them types especially in that nature unless they were types of the Roman Apostasie 3 If temporal Israel did then type out the spiritual Israel now then their Apostasie backslidings divorce and casting off must type out the divorce apostasie backslidings and casting off the spiritual seed 4 If the carnal seed in those typical Ordinances did type out none but spiritual seed to be admitted to Gospel-Ordinances then all that are now Church-members must needs be spiritual and so there are no hypocrites now in the Church Let the world judge whether this is not wretched stuffe which yet is the natural consequence of thiâ— unnatural distinction P. 128. It was not necessary that all that were Circumcised should believe and repent and so be first made Disciples but Baptism is a confirmation of our Regeneration and our New-birth and Union with Christ by Faith And therefore belongs to them only that are regenerated and born again of water and the Spirit so the Lords Supper Let a man examine himself c. A. It was necessary that Abraham should be a believer before Israel could be circumcised For had not Abraham believed there had been no such seal given to his family as is already proved 2 To let pass his Tautologies as the least of his offence If baptism belongs onely to such as are regenerated why was Judas Demas Magus and those Act. 20.29 30. baptized or how shall it be known who is new-born or can it confirm Grace where there is none what confirmation was it of the New-birth to Judas and the rest surely his words must admit of a large charity to think that all that are dipt have truth of Grace confirmed in them thereby P. Pag. 130. The carnal Israelite was as capable to perform every Ceremonial Law without Faith as truely as the Believers A. A man had need of a belief of the biggest size also to credit this for the true performance of those typical Sacrifices was not barely in the work done but when the worshippers had an eye to Christ which the true believer then ever had For the main ing edient to make that worship truly performed was Faith then as it is now and he might with as much truth say that he that is formal in Gospel-duties either in prayer hearing receiving doth as truely perform them as he that is a true believer It is to me a most unsavory expression and such loose stuffe that surely if there be any close-walking Friends to the truth they cannot but reprove such loose doctrines P. Ibid. There is no less then a profession of Faith required in the Church of England before baptism and therefore this doth justifie what we hold and condemn what they practice A. He begins now to flye low to seek to streng hen his feeble practice by the Liturgy and Canon of the Church of England who before doth seemingly rejoyce that he is converted both from their doctrines and practice but what if they do hold that profession of Faith and Repentance should precede baptism so do we all And as Faith was to Abraham and is to us the condition by which all our seed is taken into covenant with the Parent so baptism seals the covenant and upon this ground Peter moved his hearers to be baptized he backeth the motion not barely from their own interest in the promise as personal believers but upon the joynt interest of their children with them upon their Parental believing Act. 2.38 39. Repent and be baptized For the promise is to you and your children implying that the covenants sealed should run as largely as the covevenant As it was to the grand covenant Parent of all the heirs of promise i. e. Abraham Thus all Noahs children were bapâ—ized in that typical baptism with their believing parents in the Ark 1 Pet. 1 3 21. Gen. 7.1 which was upon the same covenant-account that Abraham and his seed were circumcised and that a parental covenanting
way it genders to bondage and makes you fruitful to hell so leaves you under the curse of God v. 24 25. look upon Jerusasalem and her children that is upon all those amongst them that lived under the works of the Law and were mistaken as you are Are they not all in bondage and doth not Gods wrath lye upon them at this day ver 25. Then again look the other way See to Jerusalem which is above the Church in heaven or the Church that hath her conversation in heaven she is free she got heaven by faith and was justifyed by faith and not by works she is our mother ver 26 so before was not Abraham our Father justifyed by faith And here Is not the Church our mother got to heaven by faith And what shall we think to be justifyed by our works No saith Paul it is a mistake for the desolate i. e. the Gentile-Church shall have more children then the warryed wife i. e. the Jewish Church therefore let the Gentiles rejoyce rather and be thankful that God hath made them more fruitful then to fall back to a covenant of works and then again he brings in Isaac Look to him For as he was we are children of promise As if he had said we are to look to Abrahams covenant and how the promise was made with him and his seed The present condition of this Church resembles that family though he had many children yet there was but one Isaac to whom the covenant was conveyed therefore away with this Justification by works cast it out it will not make you heirs so then brethren we are not children of the bond-woman but of the free Thus you have briefly the natural meaning of the places after all those unheard of parallels and confused constructions wherewith it hath been intangled to make it speak for a knocking of that little nail of Infants out of that sure place of Gods house The next Scripture that falls in to be considered is Act. 13 45 46. when the Jews saw the multitude they were filled with envy and spake against those things that were spoken then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold and said it was necessary the word of God should be first spoken to you but seeing you put it away and judge your selves unworthy of everlasting life Lo we turn to the Gentiles for so hath the Lord commanded us P. From this Text it is cleer that when Christ the true seed was persecuted by the Jews and the Gospel rejected all those children of the covenant of works were cast forth of Gods Church the Apostles hâ—ving left them A. Though Paul and Barnabas had left the Jews yet Peter James and John who were the Apostles of the circumcision Gal. 2.7 8 9. had not left them but continued therefore this proves nothing at all for the discovenanting of children 2 Suppose they had been wholly left by the Apostles and so were all in bondage with their children as that 's the drift of his words then their rejecting the Gospel which caused the Apostles to leave them was the ground of theirs and their childrens falling into bondage The Apostles bringing that Gospel to the Gentiles supposeth that upon the imbracing of that Gospel they and their children were freed from such a bondage or take it in his own phrase though the covenant of works and her children were cast out of the Church yet the covenant of Grace and her children are still remaining in Gods Church P. Therefore whereas M. P. tells us in pag. 145. that the forementioned Objection is answered and that we have no ground in Gods word for Infant-baptism A. He hath not given the least shew of an Answer to the Objection but it still stands in force as is by this manifest and notwithstanding all his vain distinctions workings and counterworkings of Scriptures to make them speak a word of comfort to his practice doctrine and opinion and of confutation to us they still cry out in the behalf of childrens right to the seal as those little ones did who met Christ with branches of Palm-trees Blessed is he that cometh to us in the name of the Lord Hosanna in the highest Reader we are run through the main body of all his Arguments and Scriptures what remains behind is very little onely heats of spirit against such as will not follow him to the Rivers side and so like those blind men Christ speaks of follow a blind guide till they both tumble into the water But because the temper of his spirit shall be seen I shall therefore briefly touch upon the remainder as it comes to hand CHAP. XX. Contains the Answer to many Scriptures by him abused to the end Pag. 145. HE quotes Ezek. 14.2 3 4 5. The word of the Lord came to me saying Son of man these men have set up their Idols in their hearts and put the stumbling block of their iniquity before their faces should I be inquired of by these c P. In which place you see when souls set up an Idol in their hearts God doth answer them according to that Idol Therefore such as defend Infant-baptism from a covenant of Grace in the flesh they defend and maintain a dangerous error and consequently it must be rotten and false A. Well argued Sir is it not who is it that hath set up an Idol in his heart what all the Churches of Christ throughout the world Surely were not your heart swell'd with pride though yet pretending a voluntary humility to catch souls into your snares you durst not speâ—k such condemning words to abuse the way and Word of God P. Pag. 146 He gives another result childrens baptism hath no ground from the word of God either command or example but only a consequence so that it is meerly a tradition of mens setting up in the room and place of the commands of God to wit baptism of believers and thus they make void the commands of God Mar. 7 7 and thâ—s is the very sin of those that plead for Infant-baptism when Gods word sâ—ith Repent and be baptized and arise why tarryest thou be baptized These and many more are made void by christening of children and thus poor souls are nurst up in ignorance c. A. It had been far better to have overturned our pract ce by dint of Aâ—gument Scripture and Reason and to have left cut all such superfluity of naughtiness which tendâ— onely to reviling these Texts have been already answered and our practice hath appeared to be warranted from the covenant of Grace and the pleasing consent of Scriptures which is undenyab e to any man that is not partinacious in his errors it is an Ordinance that the Churches of Christ stand possest of and doth he think to perswade good men from their Religion Râ—ason and Conscience by telling us it is a teaching for Doctrines the Traditions of men He must therefore come to a new result and tell us when the Tradition began
judge how they cross the doctrines of the Gospel in baptising visible graceless Christless children A. This appeal is made to you that fear the Lord you see what his four last words speak visible graceless Christless children but why visible was Isaac so when an Infant who was the seed of promise and doth not Paul tell us as he was we are children of the promise If as he was then as the seed of covenanting believers as he was Gal. 4.28 see the censorious spirit of this man who is not ashamed to say believers seed are visibly graceless when as Paul tells us they are to be reputed holy 1 Cor. 7. Which way saith the false Prophet went the Spirit of the Lord from me to you when he strikes Micaiah on the cheek If the Apostle tells us that children are holy Mr. Patient will be sure to flye in his face and say they are graceless Christless children However you to whom the appeal is made receive it and when you have done make your complaint to God and be not frighted from owning those which God owns the King is bound to maintain the cause of his subjects And such are Infants For of such is the kingdom And God will in due time plead the quarrel of his covenant against all their opposers it will be seen in this generation P. p. 153. He comes to lay down an Objection of such as would have no baptism at all which though it doth not so properly relate to us that maintain it yet A. I shall give the Reader this hint whatsoever he saith for dipping of believers it hath been already answered And therefore let me advise you to be so far either from casting off the Ordinance or imbracing a false Ordinance that you keep close to that good old way of baptising the family-Infants of Jesus Christ and for the better strengthening of such whose weakness may not be able to oppose Satans depths as that good woman once said she could dye for Christ but was not able enough to dispute for him Besides what is before laid down consider Mat. 21.43 The kingdom of God shall be taken from you and given to another nation bringing forth the fruits thereof The kingdom of God there mentioned was the Church of the Jews who had the laws and the Ordinances of worship amongst them in which kingdom were included as subjects men women and children by vertue of Gods covenant made with Abraham the father of all Church-incorporated-believers both Jews and Gentiles then and now Now saith Christ this kingdom of God should be taken from the Jews and given to the Gentiles from whence then we may easily gather that if Gods kingdom now given to the Gentiles be the same for substance with that which was taken away from the Jews then must the Infants of Church-believers be also subjects of this kingdom as they were then and the reason is undenyable because it is implyed in the words of Christ Not to be another but the same kingdom for had the Jews been fruitful subjects the kingdom had still remained with them and not been removed A second place to be considered is that of Paul Heb. 3.5.6 And Moses verily was faithful in his house as a servant But Christ as a son over his own house whose house are we The Apostles intent was to draw a parallel betwixt the family of God then and now in both which families Christ was the son And the first house was as well Christs house as the second Mat. 21.13 Isa 56.7 compared the inference is this that as the family of Christ in the first Gospel-house to Israel did consist partly of children so doth the family of Christ in this second Gospel-house consist of the same for it would be unreasonable to think that Christ had changed the family and so cut off children now such thoughts represent him to be less faithful then Moses who was but a servant Obj. But what command have you for your practice these are natural inferences but nothing should be practised without a command A. If this Objection be admitted then as before the Sabboth is null because there is not a cleer New-Testament command to keep it and yet should it not be observed the Ordinances of the Gospel must fall For what Ordinances can be practised if there be not a time appointed by Christ that shall bind all Christians which yet must be found out from Scriptures compared the old-Testament and new being laid together and not severed with the constant practice of all Christian Churches from the primitive time so that they may as well make the Sabboth-day Antichristian because it wants such an institution as Infant-baptism for they are inseparable twins 2 But the Scriptures do hold forth a command from Mat. 28.19 Go and disciple all Nations baptizing c. It hath been before cleered that this command reaches children to which I refer the Reader in answer to his four Essentials But the sadness of our times is that men have such itching ears that notwithstanding the Scriptures speak and the spirit speaks and Gods Ministers speak yet they will not hear 3 We that are children under the Gospel have also a Gospel-father to look at For when the father of a family receives rules to walk by and to order his children it is reasonable that they should submit Now the bond of the covenant was given as the standing rule of the house to Abraham as the Church-Father of all covenanting believers both Jews and Gentiles Rom 4.11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18. Gal. 4.28 And therefore if he had a command to in-church his seed whilst Infants Gen. 17 9 10. and to give them the token of the covenant in their generations then look what token or seal God shall affix to his covenant either of circumcision then or baptism now it is and ought to be obliging to all his seed to a thousand generations Psal 105.8 till Christ shall remove it and had not the example of Abraham as a father been binding to the seed the Apostle would not have turned the Christian Churches of the Gentiles to look upon Abraham thereby to rectifie their mistakes in doctrines of faith Ro. 4 1 2 3 4 9 10 11 12 23 24. c. 11 16 2â— Gal. 3.6 7 8 9 so that it is apaâ—ent that what command was given to Abraham as a father in the sense beforementioned is in force to all his children that Objection therefore is null Having laid down these things to be duly weighed I shall pass over many pages which he hath written to such as are against all baptism and shall gâ—ve him a meeting in tother side P. Pag. 160. But some will say they are not drawn forth by a divine power to embrace it though convinc'd to which M. P. answers that where God gives grace there he doth give a power to submit to all his ways and so to this of plunging A. T is an undoubted truth that as God gives
grace he gives power yet Gods grace doth not lead man to destroy nature therefore when he comes to apply he abuses the Scripture it hath been before proved that dipping is not the way of Scripture-baptism Consider 1 Cor. 10.1 2. and compare it with the history was Israel plunged in the Red-Sea the opposers dare not say it if they have any Conscience And yet Paul tells us they were baptized and David in the place before quoted tells us how the clouds poured forth water the like appears from Act. 1.3 ch 2.17 with Joel 2. compared t is cleer that baptism was by pouring out water to intrude such a destructive practice is therefore against the Apostolical interpretation of the word and against the very light of divine or humane reason for shall we think that he that bids us put on as the beloved of God bowels of mercy and tenderness should be so hard a master to command us in the most sharpest seasons to be duckt yea an action that cannot be done in many Countries for shame harden not your hearts against truth any longer and be of a more tender hearted spirit to poor deluded Christians and do you that fear the Lord remember that you do not abuse your power God hath given to such licencious practice that would ruine the very foundations of the Gospel P. p. 164. Doth acknowledge there may be good people not of his opinion yet they are not to be lookt upon as a Church unless they will be dipt A. He hath before called us such as offer up our children to devils and can he have so much charity to judge such good people these are but terms of insinuations to gain the more upon such good people to bring them into his strain of discipleship He brings us again the example of Cornelius Lydia the Jaylor and then tells us the Church of Samaria was gathered by faith and dipping and to practice o herwise is contrary to Christ and the Apostles All which is before proved false and there is not a word in the Scriptures that saith as M. P. doth that the Church mentioned was gathered by dipping yea so to practice and apply it as he doth is to adulterate and so destroy the Ordinance Away therefore with such stâ—ffe t is abominable it is likely is it not that Peter could stand a whole day in a River to plunge 3000 souls or that Lydia should be duckt before she went home or that the Jaylor should be plunged in a deep River at midnight were Jesus Christ preacht to the Turks or Pagans upon these terms by some of those dippers or to the Jews upon their imbracing the faith it is the way to harden their hearts against the truth P. p. 172 173. He perswades Christians it is a sin to neglect plunging and if they have truely repented they will be drawn to practice all the commands of God and this amongst the rest or else they cannot be admitted as persons that have repented at all A. We may here see the mystery of iniquity in its workings It must Lord it in the Conscience or else it cannot stand thus did those Circumcision-preachers Act. 15. there was no salvation without it as here there is no repentance trâ—e without dipping it is a sin to neglect it Christians look to your Consciences keep out such false-teachers who bring upon you greater burdens then Circumcision ever was Christs house will have no such washings and if you once let them into your Conscience possession will be soon lost P. p. 174. But some will say they were baptized in their infancy and shall such be kept out that are good people To which he answers that though many are good yet they live in a sin though it be a sin of ignorance to them for otherwise they could not be Christians But however the Church knows it to be a sin therefore they ought to be kept out and if any such be in that baptize their children they ought to be cast out A. The Reader may still see his censorious spirit wherein he flyes in the face of all the Ministers of Christ wounding their credit and esteem in the hearts of Christians For whosoever doth knowingly oppose their dipping and not ignorantly cannot be gracious so that either the Ministery must be ignorant or graceless And that their Church knows it to be a sin and therefore ought to keep out and cast out such as practice it A. I hope you shall have no cause to threaten such with casting out and if you speak in the name of all the Anabaptists when you say the Church knows it to be a sin I must then needs say they are as ignorant as your self though it is hard so to be P. In p. 176. he useth another way to make us yield up to his practice and answers an Objection that some do make that though it be an Ordinance yet many do rest in it and therefore its better not to practice it he grants that many do rest in them yet he would admonish all those that fear God to be conformable so was Paul Gal. 1.16 so was Peter when Christ bids him let down his net so was Abraham in sacrificing his son he disputed not and therefore he would have Christians suck in this as a maxim never to dispute a command and so he concludes his whole with Phil. 2 12 Do all things without murmurings and disputings A. We are now drawing to an end in all which we may see how many ways and wiles the Tempter hath to get within us he useth his weapons every way and comes so high now that it is a sin against Conscience to dispute it and it must be suckt down as a maxim which I could easily grant if it could be proved that either the subject or manner were commanded as it is by him practised But he that so sucks it in had as good suck down Ratsbane The instances brought are of such who had a cleer command for what they did from Christ himself hold forth therein nothing relating to dipping In fine we may say of his whole book it is nothing else but a lump of error and bitter revilings against the ways of God and Ministery of his word wherein he hath dealt like those unfaithful spyes that went to view the Land of promise who by the ill reports he makes disturbs the multitude and sets them a murmuring against Gods Joshuas that so his people may either retreat back to Egypt or run into Babylon His charge against us appears to be false the truth is cleered from the contempt and reproach cast upon it Reader I shall therefore commit thee to the grace keeping of our L. Jesus Christ And as for such who turn aside to their wicked ways the Lord shall lead them forth with the workers of iniquity But peace shall be upon Israel Psal 125.5 FINIS