pretends then to be they must be under the greatest Enchantment that ever Mortals were for such multitudes to follow them as he speaks of For none but such who had first abandoned Scripture and Reason with all the Notions that serious Christians ever had about Religion could ever fall in with such Notorious and Nonsensical Practices as he talks of To conclude saith he What shall we say to the Anabaptists that dip and re-baptize themselves The first Anabaptist in Germany did so and one Smith an English Man that was a Member of Mr. Ainsworth's Congregation did so because they had none to do it for them there being no Anabaptists before them Answ If his Story about Fact be no truer than his reason he gives for it I am sure 't is all false and a meer slander But let us consider the matter distinctly 1. Who baptized John the Baptist who was the first Baptizer Did he baptize himself or was he baptized by another If he was not baptized at all then an unbaptized Person did in the beginning of this Ordinance baptize multitudes If he was baptized it must be by himself or some unbaptized Person so that if such a thing were done it were not such a grievous Crime as he pretends But to proceed If this be true that there were none in England before Smith what was the Reason that Mr. Harrison should tells us a story so contradictory to this in page the 3d. of his 2d part That two Ships laden with Anabaptists escaped to England where they have nested ever since endeavouring to propagate Anabaptism Now observe This story is told by him as acted presently upon the business of Munster c. Now if this Man was in Holland in Mr. Ainsworth's time I am sure there was many Churches of Baptists in that Countrey and that they had been before they were a state as the Lords of Holland have testified in their Approbation of that famous Book Entituled The Bloody Theater and in their Lordships Letter therein to the Lords of Switzerland c. And if Smith lived in England then certainly some one of those two Ship Loads of Anabaptists he talks of or their Successors were in being so that he needed not to have baptized himself for want of an Administrator I must therefore return him this for answer that such an improbable self-contradicting Story is not to be credited As to what he saith against the Honourable Collonel Danvers I do affirm that neither Mr. Baxter whose hand was not only against every Man that stood in his way altho' never so worthy of whom the Learned and Judicious Dr. Owen whose Books Mr. Baxter was not worthy to carry after him who had been Vice-Chancellor of Oxford and lived and dyed a Zealous and Honest Independant yet this most Courteous and Civil Gentleman could not escape the virulency of Mr. Baxter's Pen as you may see in Vindiciae Anti-Baxterianae lately published with divers others whom he hath also abused But as hath long been observed of that Man there was in his writings no consistence but Baxter wrote against Richard and Richard against Baxter and therefore what he hath said against Collonel Danvers is not to be valued of a Rush for those Testimonies he hath given will stand good to the shame and reproach of all the Baxterians in the World But I will not trouble my self to answer a Man that will never be answered but refer him to the Collonel's own answer to Mr. Baxter at the end of his History of Christianity where he hath fully confuted all Mr. Baxter's ridiculous and caufeless Clamours CHAP. VII Being an Answer to those Errors which Mr. H. saith we are guilty of THere are six things which Mr. Harrison charges upon us as condemned Heresies and Errors which are as follows 1. The Anabaptists are very Erroneous in the Doctrine of Original Sin 2. That Christ dyed alike for all Men and that all Persons in the World are by the death of Christ put into a capacity of Salvation 3. That God affords all Men universal and sufficient Grace and consequently a power of Free-Will to be saved if they will 4. That a Person truly justified and sanctified and so a Branch in Christ united to him may yet fall away and be eternally damned 5. They disown all Ministers Christians and Churches of Christ to be any Ministers Churches or Christians at all but only such as are gathered in their way that is by Dipping 6. Their employing many weak ignorant Men to preach that have Pride and Confidence enough to think themselves fit to teach others who have yet more need to be taught themselves the very first Principles of Religion As to his first Charge That we are very Erroneous in the Doctrine of Original Sin and that we plainly deny Original Sin and for evidence quotes the Confession of Faith published almost forty years ago and reprinted Anno 1691. and refers us to Articles the 2d and 10th I shall set down the whole Articles that the Reader may see we do own Original Sin notwithstanding his Clamour to the contrary Article 2d That God in the beginning made Man upright and put him into a state and condition of Glory without the least mixture of misery from which he by transgression fell and so came into a miserable and mortal Estate subject unto the first Death Gen. 1.31 Eccles 7.29 Gen. 2.17 and 3.17 18 19. Article 10th That all Children dying in Infancy having not actually transgressed against the Law of God in their Persons are only subject to the first death which comes upon them by the sin of the first Adam and not that any one of them dying in that estate shall suffer for Adam's sin eternal punishment in Hell which is the second death for to such belongs the Kingdom of Heaven 1 Cor. 15.22 Mat. 19.14 Not daring to conclude with that uncharitable Opinion of others who tho' they plead much for the bringing of Children into the Visible Church here on Earth by Baptism yet nevertheless by their Doctrine that Christ dyed but for some shut a great part of them out of the Kingdom of Heaven for ever The great Quarrel he hath against this is because we will not allow their scriptureless and uncharitable Notion that Infants of a span long are yelling in Hell and that God made poor little innocent Babes on purpose to damn them as some of the Calvinists affirm Now the reason why we reject this Doctrine is because it 's no where so written in the Holy Scriptures But we own Original Sin as truly and fully as any Calvinist whatsoever But we must be falsly accused only because we reject his blind and ignorant Notion about it and will not send little sucking Babes to Hell by whole-sale as he doth The good Women that are his Hearers can't choose but be mightily comforted with this News from the Pulpit and Press and think it worth all the Money they or their Husbands give him for
he had known how and then it should have run thus All such as are by Nature Children of Wrath are liable to the Condemnation of Hell All Infants are by Nature Children of Wrath Ergo All Infants are liable to the Condemnation of Hell which is the thing I suppose he meant And then I deny his minor Proposition and let him prove it if he can As for his Text he brings for probation thereof I deny that Infants are either expressed or intended therein For the design of the Apostle in that place is to set before them what a miserable condition they had been in before Conversion by their own personal transgressions viz. Dead in trespasses and sins who in times past walked according to the course of this world according to the prince of the power of the Air the Spirit that now worketh in the Children of Disobedience Among whom also we all had our Conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh fulfiling the desires of the flesh and of the mind and were by nature i. e. by the corrupt and fleshly Inclinations that were within us Children of wrath even as others Meaning thereby other Gentiles who were still in an unregenerate Estate wallowing in their Iniquities So that as Infants are not here exprest neither can they be intended as being free from all personal transgressions and not capable to transact those Evils there spoken of I shall now offer some Reasons why I do not believe that any Infants dying in their Infancy shall be tormented for ever in Hell-fire 1. Because there is no such thing exprest either in the Threatning or Sentence Gen. 2.17 Gen. 3.17 18 19. as I have already shewed 2. Because God himself hath disclaimed such an Opinion as Erroneous and declared the contrary Ezek. 18.2 3 4 20. 1. Hear what the first Founder of your Sect from whence you have your denomination viz. John Calvin saith upon this Subject speaking of all others besides the Elect so many Nations of Men together with their Infants were involved without remedy in eternal punishment by the fall of Adam for no imaginable reason but that so it seemed good in the sight of God Calvin's Instit l. 3. cap. 23. Sect. 7. 2. Hear what God saith in the fore-mentioned place The soul that sinneth shall dye the Son shall not bear the iniquity of the Father this must intend eternal punishment for as to temporal punishment Children do often suffer for their Fathers faults and we all suffer for the fault of Adam both temporal Miseries and Death it self But whereas these People of Israel had such a blind Notion as that of Mr. H. That the Fathers had eaten sowre grapes and the Childrens Teeth were set on edge God tells them As I live saith the Lord God ye shall not have occasion any more to use this Proverb in Israel for the Son shall not bear the Fathers iniquity the soul that sinneth it shall dye 3. Because the Lord who best knew hath declared that Infants belong to the Kingdom of Heaven Mat. 19.14 4. I will add to these the Opinion of the Learned Poole that he would rather believe that all Infants dying in their Infancy were elected than conclude that any of them were damned and his reason was because as no man knew the contrary so they ought not to affirm what they did not know But I suppose Mr. Poole must be a blasphemous Heretick in Mr. H's Opinion as well as the poor Anabaptists But it 's our mercy he is not to be our Judge in the Great Day The 2d Heresie or Error this man of might charges us with is 2. That Christ dyed alike for all men and that all Persons in the World c. This doth necessarily divide it self into two General Parts 1. That Christ dyed alike for all men 2. That all Persons in the World are by the Death of Christ put into a Capacity of Salvation I shall answer to both of them distinctly 1. That Christ dyed for all men I do with the Pen-men of the Holy Scripture affirm and that it 's a great and fundamental Truth this appears from these following positive assertions 1 Tim. 2.6 He gave himself a ransom for all 2 Cor. 5.14 15. He dyed for all Heb. 2.9 He tasted death for every man 1 Tim. 4.10 Who is the Saviour of all men 1 John 2.2 He is a propitiation for our sins and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world So that to deny this is to deny the very express words of Scripture And therefore Mr. Harrison being aware of this hath owned it to be true in some sence but not content with this he puts in the word alike thinking to puzzle us with that and lays down some Arguments to prove he did not dye for all alike and thinks we are obliged to prove it I answer It 's an Unscriptural term a man of Straw of his own setting up for in all our Confessions of Faith that I remember to have been published there is not the word alike to be found in any of them As for that last he refers to printed 1691. the words are these Article 3. That Christ freely gave himself a ransom for all tasting death for every man a propitiation for our sins and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole World So that the word alike is not by them inserted And it being a term of Art of his own Coyning I return it to the mint from whence it came The Question therefore betwixt us is this not whether Christ dyed for all men for that he owns but whether all persons in the World are by the death of Christ put into a capacity of Salvation This he denyes and we affirm Article 4. Of the aforesaid Confession of the Baptists they have these express words No man shall eternally suffer in Hell that is the second death for want of Christ that dyed for them but as the Scripture saith for denying the Lord that bought them 2 Pet. 2.1 or because they believe not in the Name of the only begotten Son of God John 3.18 Unbelief therefore being the cause why the just and righteous God will condemn the Children of Men it follows against all contradiction that all men at one time or other are put into such a capacity as that through the Grace of God they may be eternally saved 1. The Scriptures of Truth do affirm this in as plain words as a matter of this kind can well be exprest John 3.14 15 16 17. here is set down the design of God in the Gift of Christ for the World 1. Negatively that they should not perish that God sent not his Son to condemn the World 2. Affirmatively That whosoever believeth in him should have eternal life and everlasting life and that the World through him might be saved And in 1 Tim. 2.4 speaking of God our Saviour he saith who will have all men to be
And not as now perpetuating Controversies and of widening and imbittering them No Debates saith one have been managed with that bitterness no Questions debated with that virulence as the Theological When will Divlnes be ashamed of sacrificing of their Charity to their Passions that is to the sensual and brutal part of our Natures The Tartars manage their Wars with less Cruelty than the Clergy For saith he there is neither Measure nor End of our Reproaches and Infamations I beseech you Sir consider these things and if you are not satisfied about the Controversie depending if you please to acquaint me with any particular doubt about it so you do it in the spirit of Meekness I shall endeavour to give you all reasonable satisfaction For in short the best Expedient I can think of to promote Knowledge is that we argue all our Religious Controversies with that Spirit of Charity and Tenderness and of deference towards our Opposites which the Gospel we preach to others more especially obiiges us to Then may we expect a Blessing from the Lord in such Pious and Charltable Procedures I shall add no more but subscribe my self as in Duty bound A Sincere Lover of your Soul W. R. A VINDICATION OF THE Baptized Churches BEfore an Artificer can build a new House in the room of an old one that is fallen down he must first clear away all the Rubbish that he may lay a new Foundation That Rubbish of Railery and Abusive Language with which I perceive Mr. Michael Harrison hath lined his Mouth in his Pulpit and has stuffed his Book in print for he tells us in his Epistle to his first Book that he was first put upon preaching upon that Subject and afterwards consented to the printing of it I intend to remove before I speak any thing to his Book CHAP. I. IN the Epistle of his first Book he charges us with Erroneous Doctrines that we are like pricking Briars and wounding Thorns Those wild and Erroneous Doctrines broached by the Anabaptists have been a perpetual Vexation and Trouble The confident repeated Challenges the restless Insinuations of the Anabaptists Their various Attempts to ensnare and draw away my Hearers to their own way They are a sort of restless People with great Indignation spurning at Infant-Baptism They tempt you to be cruel to the Children of your own Bowels setting them among Pagans and Infidels They are the Enemy of Infants The Doctrine of the Anabaptists makes all Infants to be of the visible Kingdom of Satan and leaves us no well-grounded Hope of the Salvation of any dying in Infancy and is therefore to be justly abhorred as false Doctrine Then it seems by his Doctrine that Baptism doth it self regenerate Infants in his Understanding and translate them out of the Kingdom of the Devil into the Kingdom of Christ This is plain downright Popery and abhorred by the Protestants as false Doctrine But he goes on with his Railery for want of Argument What barbarous usage is this to poor Infants the Anabaptists perversely thrust them away from Christ and from his Church set them among Pagans and Infidels who are of the visible Kingdom of the Devil But in the same page he tells us That the Anabaptists do not assert the damnation of all Infants dying in Infancy but on the direct contrary they assert the certain Salvation of all Infants Why then doth he charge it upon them Poor Man I pity him for his Ignorance in Divinity We have many Inferionr Mechanicks in our City of Londou that blessed be God understand the mind and meaning of the Spirit of God in the Holy Scriptures better than he And there is another unhappiness attends the poor man he hath so lately changed his Religion from Episcopacy to Presbytery that he is not well instructed in the Presbyterian Doctrines but began to write too soon before he knew what they held or what himself was talking of I am ashamed to think that a man should print himself a Minister of the Gospel and should know so little of the Gospel Church-state if all his Knowledge be suitable to what he writes in his two Books But he proceeds Erroneous Doctrine Weak Anabaptists Their Children are ignorantly and bruitishly brought up live and dye Pagans It 's a false and dangerous Doctrine They wilfully shut their Eyes They do it with much scorn and contempt They are guilty of a plain breach of the sixth Commandment Thou shalt not kill Dipping Persons in water is a most heinous Sin is a plain breach of the sixth Commandment Thou shalt not kill Observe what Tautologies the poor man is guilty of Dipping in cold water tends to the taking away of Life many have contracted such Distempers that have hastened their Deaths thereby therefore the so doing is a great sin But the contrary to this is true that divers have recovered of their Diseases upon their being baptized Ergo. Mr. Michael Harrison's assertion is a great untruth great malice and a great sin And herein he imitates the Devil who was a Lyar from the beginning and is the false accuser of the Brethren If this Charge be true that we are guilty of Murder why hath not he or some of his horrid lying Authors accused us to the Magistrate that Justice might have been executed upon us as murderers But I am confident he doth not believe himself but writes directly against his Knowledge and Conscience I never had to do with such a scurrilous foul mouthed Author in Divinity in all my life and I am heartily sorry he hath so foolishly offered me this occasion for it 's very contrary to my Genius to render railing for railing All this Rubbish is in his first Book of a Groat price But in his 2d Book as he begins with a known untruth in the Frontispiece Infant-Baptism God's Ordinance when he knows it is not so much as mentioned in all the Holy Scripture so he exceeds all bounds in his railing and abusive Language in this 2d part For in the Title Page you have these Words Anabaptists plea of Antiquity a meer untruth A Rebuke of their several Erroneous Opinions An Answer to several Scandalous and Erroneous Papers put out by the Anabaptists c. In his Epistle the Anabaptists have been exeeeding troublesome to all our Reformers Hardned the Churches Enemies hindred the Reformation Bitter Enemies to the Work of God Have most maliciously charged me with preaching Popish Doctrine Malicious Slander Betrayed their Weakness and Ignorance Are a People strangely alienated from the Spirit of the Gospel They have an Hatred and Opposuition to all Christian Churches and look on all others to be Pagans Then he falls upon abusing Mr. Collins who hath together with that faithful and eminently learned Minister of Christ Mr. Claridge sufficiently answered his first Book Which Answer he saith is so weak it scarcely deserves any reply And saith He is a weak unthinking man foul and unchristian Carriage and then he quotes one Mence for
So that the main design of the Apostle among other Mercies of God bestowed upon that People is to commemorate that great and wonderful deliverance at the Red Sea and then to shew us what an ungrateful People they were thus to sin against him and to cause him for their sins to destroy them in the Wilderness And if this be the Scope of the place as I believe it is that so we might be warned by their fall to avoid falling into Apostacy against God as they did and had our translators so rendred the word as it imports in our English Tongue no Man would ever have dreamt of an Ordinance of Baptism from this Text. If notwithstanding all that I have said upon the Text Mr. H. will still insist upon it that it was a Baptism and that by sprinkling I shall oppose thereto the Dutch Translators to shew him their Opinion to the contrary who being Presbyterians their words may possibly have the greater force upon his Understanding They read it thus Ende alle in Mosen gedoopt Zin And they were all dipt unto Moses So that you may see the Learned Men in Holland of his own perswasion do directly contradict what he saith I will only offer one Consideration more and so pass it viz. That by the same Argument that in the word all their Infants were included their Cattle were included also for they all passed under the Cloud and thro' the Sea as well as their Little Ones for it is written Exod 10.26 Our Cattle also shall go with us there shall not a hoof be lest behind And altho' the Papists are for baptizing of Bells I hope Mr. H. will not be also for baptizing of Cattle even the Beasts of the field But let him avoid the consequence if he can in case it be not restrained to the Fathers as in the Text. The next thing Mr. H. insists upon is That there are three sorts of Baptism that of Water that of the Spirit and that of Afflictions to which I concede And whereas he saith it 's expressed by one Greek Word I do also agree but that those three as he saith are but one Baptism that I deny He is the first that I ever knew affirm it But pray Sir consider what you say Is Water the Spirit and Fire Is Affliction the Spirit or Water Affliction or Fire Water Take it which way you will I believe you will find it attended with difficulties Indeed Sir it 's one of the most intricate Metaphors that you have yet sported your self with in your whole Book and if you understand it no better than I do you might have forbore to acquaint the World with the conceited fineness of the thought But Sir I suppose I may have the same liberty to give you my thoughts as you had to impart yours The Text you have brought to prove that these three Baptisms are but one and exprest by one word is Eph. 4.5 One Lord one Faith one Baptism How this proves that those three Baptisms are but one Baptism I see not Sir you are very unhappy in one thing to lay down Assertions and when you come to prove it you urge such Texts that do not conclude the thing in Question but altho' this doth not prove three to be one and so afford us a new sort of Trinity I will not be so ungentile as not to give you my thoughts upon the Text before I pass it There is a threefold Baptism spoken of in the New Testament viz. That of Water that of Affliction and that of the Spirit and yet the Apostle here speaks after this manner one Baptism as there is one Lord one God c. Now my thoughts are these That it is Water-baptism only that is here intended And my Reason is this because to speak properly there is no other real baptism for the other two are figurative and metaphorical But besides The Apostle is there speaking of those Believers as incorporated into one body and as having been called into one hope of their calling having Christ for their one Lord and one Faith to unite them to this one Lord and one Baptism to make them visible Members of this one body the Church which Mr. H. owns to be an initiating Ordinance and God as their one common Father to supply all their wants and that these Persons that were members of this Church were baptized with water upon believing you may see Acts 19. beginning And this seems to me the most probable sense of those words One Baptism Now that it is a real Baptism is evident For as the word signifies to dip plunge or overwhelm them in the water and as it signifies the Burial and Resurrection of Christ so in respect of the thing done it 's a real act for that every person who is truly baptized as I have shewed above is plunged into the water and also raised up again out of the water the thing is really performed But that of Affliction is only metaphorical alluding to this of water as likewise also that of the Spirit and of Fire But perhaps Mr. H. may imagine that to be the Baptism of Affliction which is not and therefore let us hear what he saith about it As to the Baptism of Affliction saith he some soffer more some less some suffer lighter crosses as Mocks c. some loss of goods and liberty others Death when he hath said this he then delivers his Opinion about it in these words Now he that suffers least for Christ in a Christian manner doth as truly partake of the Baptism of Afflictions as he that suffers most Now suppose I deny this as I must how doth he prove it why he quotes no Text here but in the foregoing page Mark 10.39 Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of and with the baptism that I am baptized withall shall ye be baptized That this is the Baptism of Affliction I own We must now enquire what this hath a principal respect unto for there is something more than common intended in these words In Luke 12.50 our Saviour saith I have a Baptism to be baptized withall and how am I strained till it be accomplished Now this can be no other than that Death and bitter Agony he was to undergo for our sins that he might bring us to Glory And by his prediction to his Disciples in Mark 10.39 he foretold their deaths also for his sake Now as a Person that is baptized in water is overwhelmed therewith even so that bitter Agony our Lord endured in the Garden and upon the Cross when his Soul was exceeding sorrowful even unto death before wicked men had so much as laid their hands upon him it pleased the Lord so to bruise him and put him to grief that his sweat was as it were drops or clotters of blood falling down to the ground And when he was upon the Cross how did he cry out by reason of that sorrow that overwhelm'd his Soul
preaching to hear him tell them Beloved If your Children dye in their Infancy unless they are elected I can assure you they shall go to Hell and be punished there to all Eternity for that they could never help God hath so ordered it by his Secret Decree unknown to me and all the World Do you think God ever sent him of this Message Especially when he tells you in his Book he knows not who belongs to the Election of Grace Now Mr. H. might have been truly inform'd of this matter if he had minded what Mr. Collins told him in page 35. of his Book in answer to Mr. Mence and him That one of the first Arguments of the Church of Rome for Infant-Baptism is which I suppose is Mr. Harrison's also if he knows what he is talking of that it washes away Original Sin We can saith Mr. H. Collins tell you of a better way of washing away Original Sin namely by the imputation of Christ's Righteousness to Infants dying in Infancy Add to this what Mr. Claridge saith in his Epistle to the same Book And here I would inform all the Readers of Mr. Mence's Book that whereas he charges Mr. Collins for maintaining Infant-damning Doctrine it is altogether a mistake for Mr. Collins is rather inclined to think That all dying Infants are saved by the imputed Righteousness of Christ Notwithstanding all this and much more that hath been said before upon this Subject he still goes on in his confident way of writing and saith he will prove That all by Birth or Nature are by the sin of Adam liable to the condemnation of Hell by plain Scripture He is a bold man at asserting but he commonly fails in his Proof Let us now examine those Scriptures he alledges for probation of this confident assertion Gen. 2.17 In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye Now this was the threatning but in Gen. 3.17 18 19. we have the Sentence denounced against Adam by God himself which serves to explain the former threatning to be only the first Death with its Concomitants Cursed is the ground for thy sake in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy Life Thorns also and Thistles shall it bring forth to thee and thou shalt eat the Herb of the field In the sweat of thy Face shalt thou eat bread till thou return unto the ground for out of it wast thou taken for dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return Here you see that what is called Death in the threatning is called returning to the Ground and unto Dust in the Sentence but not one word of punishment in Hell so much as intimated therein As for the other Texts he mentions they are no proofs of what he brings them for and therefore I shall pass them and proceed to his three Arguments Argu. 1. If Children need Regeneration and a Second Birth before they can go to Heaven then they are liable to Eternal as well as Temporal Death But Children do need Regeneration therefore c. John 3.3 5. Except a man be born again c. Now it 's plain Nicodemus understood our Saviour in this sence by his answer viz. not of Children newly born but of adult Persons for he saith How can a man be born when he is old But to answer directly to his Argument I deny his Minor and say they do not need Regeneration and a second Birth in the Sence there intended before they can go to Heaven and if they did they were in a bad Case indeed for they are not capable either of Repentance or Faith both which are comprehended in those words Except a Man be born again Thus you see when he should have brought a Text to have proved Infants must be born again this only proves that a Person of grown years a Man must be born again Let him not imagine that I feign an Interpretation of my own for Mr. Firmin a great Pedo-baptist saith They must be regenerate they must have Faith c. They who are regenerated have Faith and Repentance all saved Infants are regenerated therefore they have Faith and Repentance they must be born of Water and of the Spirit according to John 3.6 else there is no Heaven for them Now that God does cleanse dying Infants from all Impurity and fits them for Heaven I readily grant But this Regeneration they talk of from this Text and apply to Infants I positively deny And certain I am if he had read those Quotations upon that Argument given by Mr. Claridge he might have been sensible of this his Error before he had wrote this his 2d part Whether Infants have Faith or no is a Question saith Dr. Taylor to be disputed by Persons that care not how much they say and how little they prove which is the very case of Mr. Harrison when he hath denyed them to have either personal and actual or habitual Faith he concludes thus This strange Invention is absolutely without Art without Scripture Reason or Authority but the men are to be excused unless there were a better And again we desire saith he no more advantage in the World against such men than that they are constrained to answer without Revelation against Reason Common-sence and all the Experience in the World Dr. Taylor 's Liberty of Prophecy page 240 242. Mr. H's 2d Argum. is this If Infants are not liable to the damnation of Hell for Adam's sin then they may be saved without Christ by vertue of the Covenant of Works But c. This is a strange Assertion What can Infants be saved by Works that are wholly uncapable to Perform any this is meer trifling But I shall deny the Consequence of his Major For If Infants by virtue of Adam's sin must return to the dust and cannot raise themselves to life again but must have remained in that state for ever unless Christ had come in the flesh dyed and rose again and by vertue of his Resurrection raised them again by his mighty Power then it had been impossible for them to have been saved So that it 's a Non-sequitor for altho' they are not condemned to eternal Punishment in Hell yet there is a necessity for them to be saved by Christ if ever they get to Heaven But besides this they stand in need of Christ to purifie their Natures from Original Corruption as I have shewed above His 3d. Argu. is this Such as are by Nature Children of Wrath are liable to the Condemnation of Hell but all are so therefore Infants Eph. 2.1 2 3. Answ In this he hath dealt very unfairly and neither like a Gentleman nor a Scholar for his Argument is not in due form For 1. Infants are no where expressed but in the Conclusion 2. He hath put the word all into the Minor tho' he hath not told us what all he means And in the major it 's only such as are c. I suppose he would have framed a Categorical Syilogism if