Trespasses forgiven Col. 2. 11 12 13. And will any Man says he yeâ— will Paul ascribe all this to those that did not so much as profess the things signified Will Baptism in the Judgment of a wise Man do all this for an Infidel or say I for an Inâ—â—nt that cannot make a Profession that he is a Christian pag. 31 32. He proceeds Arg. 23. The Baptized are in 〈…〉 called Men washed sanctified justified they are called Saints and Churches of Saints 1 Cor. 1 2. all Christians-are sanctified oâ—â—eâ— pag. 33. Now let me add the Minor But Infants baptized are not in Scripture called Men washed sanctified justified they are not called Saints Churches of Saints Christians nor sanctified ones Ergo Infanâ—s ought not to be baptized If any should say why did you not cite these Assertions of Mr. Bâ—â—tn's whilst he was living I answer More then twelve Years ago I did recite and print these Assertions and many other Arguments of his to the same Purpose â—o which he gave no Answer Arg. 24. If there is but â—ne way for all both Parents and Children to be adâ—iâ—â—â—d into the Gospel-Church to the End of the World and that it is upon the Profession of Faith to be baptized then both Parâ—â—â—s and Children must upon the Profession of their Faith be baptized and so admitted c. But there is but one way for all boâ—â— Paâ—eâ—â—â— and Children to be admitted into the Gospel-Church to the End of the World and that is upon the Profession of their Faith to be baptized Ergo. Arg. 25. That cannot be Christ's true Baptism wherein there is not 〈…〉 â—e â— lively Representation of the Death Burial and Resurrection of Jesus Christ together with our Death 〈◊〉 Sâ—â— and V 〈…〉 tion to a new Life But in the Baptizing or Sprinkling of an Infant there is not cannot be a lively Representation of Christ's Death Burial and Resurrection c. Ergo. Arg. 26. That pretended Baptism that tends to 〈…〉 the glorious 〈◊〉 and Design of Christ in his 〈…〉 of Gospel Baptism or cannot answer it is none of Christ's Baptism But the pretended Baptism of Infants â—enâ—â— to 〈…〉 the glorious end and design of Christ 〈…〉 of Gospel Baptism Ergo. The Mâ—â—â—â— will now 〈…〉 As to the M 〈…〉 all generally conâ—â—â—â— the End or Design of Christ i◠〈…〉 the Ordinance of Baptism was in a lively Figâ—â—e to represâ—â—â— his Death Burial and Resurrection with the Person 's Death unto Sin and his rising again to walk in newness of Life that is baptized as the Sacrament of the Supper was ordained to represent his Body was broke and his Blood was shed But that a liverly Figure of Christ's Death Burial and Resurrection appears in sprinkling a little Water on the Face I see not and as done to an Infant there can no Death to Sin and rising again to walk in newness of lâ—â—e be signified And therefore-Christ's Design and End therein is frustrated Arg. 27. If Baptism be Immersion as to the proper and genuine signification of the word Baptizo as also of those Typical and Metaphorical Baptisms and the spiritual Signification thereof then Sprinkling cannot be Christ's true Baptism But Immersion is the proper and genuine signification of the word Baptizo and also of those Typical and Metaphorical Baptisms spoken of and the spiritual Signification thereof Ergo Sprinkling is not Christ's true Baptism 1. That the proper and genuine Signification of the word Baptizo is Immersion or to â—ip c. we have proved which is also confessed by the Learned in that Language 2. The Figurative Baptism was 1st That of the Red Sea wherein the Fathers were buried as it were unto Moses in the Sea and under the Cloud Pools Annotations on 1 Cor. 10. 2. Others saith he more probably think that the Apostle useth this term in regard of the great Analogy betwixt Baptism as it was then used the Persons going down into the Waters and being dipped in them and the Israelites going down into the Sea the great Receptacle of Water though the Water at that time was gathered on Heaps on either side of them yet they seemed buried in the Water as Persons in that Age were when they were baptized c. The 2d was that of Noah's Ark. See Sir Norton Knatchbull The Ark of Noah and Baptism saith be were both a Type and Figure of the Resurrection not the Sign of the washing away of Sin though so taken metonymically but a particular Signal of the Resurrection of Christ of this Baptism is a lively and emphatical Figure as also was the Ark of Noah out of which he returned as from a Sepulchre to a new Life 3. Metaphorical Baptism is that of the Spirit and of Affliction the first signifies not a sprinkling of the Spirit but the great Effusion of the Spirit like that at Pentecost Acts 1. 4 5. Shall be baptized c. on which Words Casaubon speaks thus See Dr. Duveil on Acts 2. The Greek Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to dip or plunge as it were to die Colours in which Sense saith he the Apostles might be truly said to have been baptized for the House in which this was done was filled with the Holy Ghost so that the Apostles might seem to have been plunged into it as in a large Fish-Pond Also Oecumenius on Acts 2. saith A Wind filled the whole House that it seemed like a Fish-Pond because it was promised to the Apostles that they should be baptized with the Holy Ghost And the Baptism of Affliction are those great depths or overwhelmings of Afflictions like that of our Saviour's suffering i. e. no part free Matth. 20. 22. where you have the same Greed Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and like that of David who saith God drew him out of great Waters 4. The spiritual Signification thereof is the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ and of our Death to Sin and Vivification to a new Life This being so it follows undeniably Sprinkling cannot be Christ's true Baptism it must be Immersion and nothing else And in the last Place Finally To confirm that Baptizo is to dip both from the literal and spiritual Signification thereof as also from those typical and metaphorical Baptisms mentioned in the Scripture I might add further that this evidently appears from the Practice of John Baptist and the Apostles of Christ who baptized in Riuers and where there was much Water and also because the Baptizer and Baptized are said to go down into the Water not down to the Water and came up out of the Water John Baptist is said to baptize them into Jordan as the Greek Word renders it which shews it dipping and not sprinkling Would it be proper to say He sprinkled them into Jordan The Lord open the Eyes of those who see not to consider these things FINIS
Sir what reason do you give for this have you any ground to run that parallel from any Text of Scripture Is it not of your own making and devising But since you are for plain Texts of Scripture for every thing pray where do you read that any Man or Womanâ— Face or Head was only Baptised or that â—ver John Baptists or Christs Disciples Baptised any person naked You tell us of the immodesty and evil of such a practice and that it may tend to gratifie the Devil and to the sin of Adultery certainly such a thing is utterly to be condemned and never was practised you know well enough by us whom you reproachfully call Anabaptists As touching what Mr. Baxter to which you might have added Dr. Featly hath said concerning Baptizing persons naked we know they as well as you were too much guilty of backbiting vâ—lifying and reproaching of us yet they had no ground in the least to cast this odium upon us we challenge all Men or any person living to produce one instance that ever any Man or Woman by any of our perswasion was Baptized naked As to what Mr. Tombs said to Mr. Baxter of a former custom in some nations of Baptizing naked it affects not us nor do I believe there was ever any such custom used among any godly Christians Nor did Mr. Tombs ever so Baptise any Maids in Bewdeley nor any where else If he said he could do it it was doubtless his weakness so to speak but I am not bound to believe all that Mr. Baxter hath wrote of worthy Mr. Tombs but since they are both dead we will say no more to that but any thing you can catch up you resolve 't is plain to make the greatest use of imaginable to reproach your godly Neighbours and the truth of Christ. In Pape 15. the Anabaptists you say make a great deal of pudder and stir about the Apostles words in Romans 6. 3 4. and have pressed them into their service the words are as followeth therefore we are buried with him by Baptism they will say you have it that this respects burying in Water over Head and Ears in Baptism and therefore they make it an argument for Dipping The Apostle you say seems to have been stirring them up and puting them in mind of their Baptismal vows and Obligations It may be as well to Children of believing parents that were grown up as to themselves for in vers 3 saith he know ye not that so many of us as were Baptised into Christ were Baptized into his Death that is say you as they were Baptized into all the priviledges that were purchased by the Death of Christ so they were baptised also into the sufferings of Christ for they were obliged by their Baptismal Covenant to take up their Cross and follow the Lord Jesus Christ c. 1. Answer You shall now see whether 't is only those whom you call Anabaptists that make such improvement of this Text you say pudder and stir about it or whether others who were and are Pedo Baptists do not make the like use of it viz. to prove Baptism is an Image Symbol or representation of Christs Death and burial and Resurrection together with our Death unto sin and vivification to a newness of Life But before I shall quote the Authors I must tell you the Apostle is not in the context speaking of the sufferings of believers not a word of bearing the Cross Therefore from the Scope and coherence of the Text you cannot infer any such conclusion as you do Pray Reader take notice of the 5th Chapter and the beginning of this 6th and see if I or this Man speak the truth of the Texts in vers 1. of this Chapter the Holy Apostle says thus i. e. What shall we say then Shall we continue in Sin that grace may abound God forbid how shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein vers 2. Know you not that so many of us as have been Baptized into Jesus Christ were Baptized into his Death vers 3. Therefore we are buried with him by Baptism into Death That like as Christ was raised up from the Dead by the Glory of the Father even so we also should walk in newness of Life vers 4. For as we have been planted together in the likeness of his death we shall be also into the likeness of his Resurrection vers 5. Is here a word of the Cross or suffering for Christ or that we are Baptized to shew we must suffer Martyrdom with Christ no no unless it be the Death or mortification of sin or the old Man Tho' I deny not but such that are Baptized must look for suffering You say our Saviour calls his suffering his Baptism and a Blood Bloody Baptism it was but I have a Baptism to be Baptized with and how am I straightned till it be accomplished now you say the Apostle draws his argument from the premises in verses 4 5 p. 16. Answer 'T is very true the Apostle doth draw his argument from vers 4 5. c. but not from Luk. 12. 50. the Text you mention about Christs Baptism of suffering so that 't is evident to all you have abused this Sacred Text also and prest it in to serve your purpose Pray read all the Annotators you can get on the place particularly Mr. Pools and see if any favour your exposition of it 2. Tho' I have said enough to silence this Man or any other upon this Text Rom. 6. 3 4 5. in two Treatises yet left they come not into the Author or Readers Hand I shall repeat some passages once again Let all Men consider in the fear of God and take notice of the gracious design and condescention of our blessed Saviour in his instituting of the two great ordinances of the Gospel viz. the Lords Supper and Baptism for as that of the Lords Supper doth in a lively Figure represent the breaking of his Body and the pouring forth of his Blood so the ordinance of Baptism doth as clearly if rightly Administed represent or hold forth the Death Burial and resurrection of the same Lord Jesus Together with our death to sin and rising again to walk in newness of Life and that this appears from this Text and that in Col. 2. 12. shall God assisting be evinced The whole Church of the Romans and every member thereof were to reckon themselves dead to Sin and were bound to live no longer therein because by Baptism as in a lively Figure they had held forth the same thing nay by that Baptismal covenant they were obliged to live and walk in newness of life See Pools Annotations on the place where you will find these words viz. he seems to allude to the manner of Baptizing in those warm Countries which was to Dip or plunge the party Baptised and as it were to bury him for a while under water See the like Phrase Col. 2. 12. Baptism doth not only represent
had no better Counsel or followed no better Conduct at such an hour as this is it sure concerns us all to study the things that make for Peace and that by which we may edifie one another the Breach is too wide already O what want of Love is there in Christians to each other who are all Members of the Mystical Body of Christ and Children of one Father and Heirs of the same glorious Inheritance Sure we shall love one another when we come to Heaven and I hope His Reverend Pastor whom I have more cause both to love and honour than ten thousand Instructors in Christ he being the blessed Instrument in my Conversion all most forty Years ago gave no Encouragement to him thus to write and abuse his Brethren I would he had consider'd the Text He that hateth his Brother is in Darkness Joh. 2. 11. For my part I hope I can say I love them in whom I see the Image of God that differ from me in the like degree as those of mine own Opinion I am persuaded the want of Love to one another is one of the greatest Sins of this Age and that which is a high Provocation to God and if that which this Man hath done is a fruit of Love or tends to promote it I am mistaken True I have may be wrote as much of late as another on the Subject of Baptism but never without Provocation by means of divers Persons who have of late times wrote against us I have not begun the Controversie but have still been on the defensive Side nor can any justly blame us to clear our selves and defend that which we believe to be the Truth of Christ when urged to it As to his Answer to Mr. Collins he hath said something 't is true to one or two of his Arguments but the rest he has passed by in silence and left the chief Argumentive part in a great measure unanswered And as to his Reply to me I cannot see he hath said any thing that deserveth my notice at all but lest the easie unwary and prejudiced Reader should conclude he hath done Wonders should we aot return an Answer I have examined the stress of all that seems Argumentive which contains but a small part of his Book and having studied Moderation and Tenderness I hope it may tend to allay and quench the Fire of his Passion and bring him to a more moderate Temper However I shall leave it to the Blessing of God to dispose of the Issue of it as he shall seem good in his all-wise Providence and to help the Reader I have divided his Book into Chapters in my Answer and since he begins with the form or manner of baptizing there I shall begin also CHAP. I. Wherein it is proved That Baptism is not Sprinkling nor Pouring of Water on the Face nor Dipping of the Head only But that it is Dipping or Plunging of the whole Body under Water I Shall begin with Mr. Sbute's Fifth Page and shall shew him that he hath not yet buried Mr. Collins his answer but that it is still alive and as lively as it was before his pretended Answer came forth In pag. 6. he râ—cited what Mr. Cobins mentioned in the 2d page of his Reply to his Antidote viz. where Mr. Cobins says The right mode of Baptism is by Dipping To which Mr. Shute saith in p. 5. I think there is more to be said for Sprinkling or Pouring Water on the Face in Baptism than there is for Dipping or Ducking over Head and Ears in a River or Pond For the latter is more like a Punishment of Criminals than the Solemnizing of an Ordinance of God pray hear what the Scripture saith of Sprinkling and of Pouring Water upon Sinners to cleanse them Heb 12. 24 And to Jesus the Mediator of the New Covenant and to the Blood of Sprinkling c. â— Pet. 1. 2. Elect according to the Foreknowledge of God the Father through Sanctification of the Spirit unto Obedience and Sprinkling of the Blood of Jesus Christ. And Isa. 44 3. For I will pour Water upon him that is thirsty and Fâ—oods upon the dry Ground I will pour my Spirit upon thy Seed and my blessings upon thine Off-spring Ez â— 36. 25. Then will I sprinkle clâ—an Water upon you and ye shall be clâ—an from all your Filthiness and from all your â—â—ols wâ—â— I cleanse you Edâ—d 2â— 8. Here you see say you we do not read of Dipping nor Ducking in all those spiritual Metaphorical Baptisms which are all nearly reâ—ued unto the Ordinance of Baptism and tâ—nâ— to the fam thing but more effectually and perfectly and are accompanied with the same Promises namely the Remission of Sins Sanctification by the Spirit and the Gift of the Holy Ghost compared with Acts 2. 38 39. Answer 1. You might have added many other Places of Scripture where we read of Sprinkling But what would it signify the Sprinkling and Pouring mentioned in these Scriptures refer not to Water Baptism Read your learned Annotators and Expositors and you will find they agree as one Man That Sprinkling and Pouring of Water in Isaiah and Ezekiel c. do refer to the graci us Effusion of the Spirit in the Times of the Gospel and to the Purifying and Purging Vertue of the Blood of Christ and so that in Heb. 12 24. is to be understood you should not only say but prove Baptism to be here intended and then yoù had said something 2. Should the Sprinkling or Pouring in these Scriptures be meant of Baptism then it would follow that Baptism has mighty Vertue in it indeed even to wash away all Sin and Filthiness I thought nothing could cleanse from Sin out Christ's precious blood as it is applyed by the Spirit through Faith Baptism Peter tells you washes not away the Filthiness of the Flesh. Not the putting away of the Filthiness of the Flesh but the answer of a good Conscience towards God by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ 1 Pet. 3. 20. 3. If you should say Baptism is chiefly a Sign or lively Symbol of our being sprinkled with the Spirit or with the Blood of Jesus Christ we do deny it You have not attempted to prove it 't is evident Baptism is principally a Sign or Symbol of Christ's Death Burial and Resurrection see Rom. 6. 3 4. Col. 2. 12 13. compared with this in 1 Pet. 3. 20. which Sprinkling or Pouring cannot hold forth 4. But you intimate That these Spiritual Metaphorical Baptisms are nearly related to the Ordinance of Baptism I answer by pouring Floods of Water or by the great Effusion of the Spirit I deny not but the Baptism of the Spirit may be held forth and the Baptism of the Spirit signifies Immersion Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost c. Acts 1. 5. The Greek Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says Casaubon Is to Dip or Plunge in which Sense saith he the Apostles might be said to have been Baptized
for the House in which this was done was filled with the Holy Ghost so that the Apostles might seem to have been plunged into it as in a large fiâ—h-pond See Dr. Duveil on Acts 1. 4 5. The learned Casaubon was a Pedo-baptist yet knew better than to assert Baptizo is to Sprinkle or Pour but to Dip or Plunge as you here Friend what do you mean by saying All those metaphorical Baptisms are nearly related to the Ordinance of Baptism if you intend both signifies Sprinkling I deny it for both of them signifie Dipping or Overwhelming and so doth the Baptism of Afflictions also 't is not every small degree of Suffering that is the Baptism of Suffering Great Afflictions are so called and that from the literal and genuine Signification of the Word Baptizo to dip to plunge under and hence as I have elswhere shewed Vossius notes That every light Affliction is not the Baptism of Affliction but like that of David Psal. 32. 6. He drew me out of deep Waters hence also Sufferings and Afflictions are called Waves Thy Waves and thy Billows are gone over me Psal. 42. 7. it refers to Christ's Sufferings who was overwhelmed with Afflictions even unto Blood and Death The same as I have hinted is to be noted as to the Baptism of the Spirit it signifies the miraculous effusion of the holy Spirit like that at the Day of Pentecost Acts 2. 1 2. Now in this respect the Metaphorical Baptisms are nearly related in Signification with the Ordinance of Baptism I do confess for to Baptize in the Name of the Father c. is to dip in the Name of the Father c. and for a more full and clear Demonstration of this from a multitude of learned Men both Ancient and Modern See my late Answer to Mr. Burkiâ— entituled The Rector rectified from page 157. to page 206. Scapula and Stephens Two famous Men for their great Learning and accounted Masters of the Greek Tongue tell us That Baptizo from Bapto as to the first and proper Signification signifies Mergo Immergo item tingo quod fit immâ—rgendo inficere imâ—uere viz. to dip plunge and overwhelm put under cover over to die in Colours which is done by Plunging Grotius saith it signifies to dip over Head and Ears Pasor an immersion dipping or submersion it appears you neither know nor enquire after the proper literal and genuine Signification of the Word if you did you would certainly not say You think there is more to be said for Sprinkling for I would have you ask such as can tell you Whether in those Places in the Hebrews where Sprinkling is mentioned the Word signifies Baptizing or whether it is not rantizing another Word and of another Signification And as you regard not the literal so you mind not the mistical Signification of Baptism which is not chiefly to represent the Sprinkling of Christ's Blood but to hold forth in a lively Figure his Death Burial and Resurrection together with our Death unto Sin and rising again to walk in newness of Life as will farther appear in its proper Place See our late Annotators on Matth. 3. 6. And were baptized of him in Jordan A great part of those who went out to hear John say they were baptized that is dipped in Jordan Tho' they would have the Word to signify washing also which we deny not but then say we 't is such a Washing as is by Dipping always when applyed to this Ordinance 5. You seem very bold in saying Dipping over Hâ—â—d and Ears is more like a Punishment of Criminals than the solemnizing of an Ordinance of God 'T is no marvel you reproach us when you dare cast such contempt upon Christ's Sacred Institution it is to me a trembling Consideration thus to arraign the Wisdom of God Nor will it salve the matter should you say You do not think Baptism is Dipping for it may be so as far as you know and if you had read what a multitude of learned Men who were Pedo Baptists do affirm it is Dipping you would not sure have adventured to assert such a thing Suppose it be found at the last Day to be Dipping the Lord give you Repentance that you may have this Evil and all others done away through his Blood Sure there was as much nay more cause for during Men to have cast such a Reflection on that legal ordinance of Circumcision But you say Page 6 7. We do not find that there was either a River or Pond of Water in the Jaylors House for himself and all his Houshold 〈◊〉 be Dipped oâ— Ducked under Water for they were all Baptized the same hour of the Night c. 1. Answer Sir you should take more heed to your words and to what you assert Is it said they were baptized in the Jaylors House if it 〈◊〉 been done in a House our Saviour needed not to have gone to the River Jordan to be Baptized much less into Jordan Nor was there any reason for Philip and the Eâ—â—â—ch to have gone into the Water 2. Moreover doth not the Holy Scripture tell you that John also was Baptizing in Aenon near Salim because there was much water John 3. 23. Pray Reader note this well mind the reason why the Holy Ghost â—aith he Baptized in Aenon 't is poâ—sitively affirmed because there was much Water in that place intimating clearly that a little Water will not serve to Baptize Persons in Also observe what Mr. Pools Annotations say on this place of Scripture thus you will find it expressed viz. It is from this apparent that both Christ and John Baptized by Dipping the Body in Water else they need not have sought places where had been great plenty of Water These are his words that wrote those Annotations And if it be so apparent 't is as apparent you have been too bold to say that Dipping is more like a punishment of Criminals than an ordinance of God 3. What though we do not read that the Jaylor had a River or Pond in his Yard or near his House 't is rediculous to talk of a River or Pond in his House yet we ought to believe there was Water enough by or near his House to Baptize him and all his who believed You see it is granted by your own worthy Brethren Baptizing is Dipping there was nâ— need for the Holy Ghost to speak of the place where this Water was or whether it was a Pond or River And certainly they did not Baptize some and sprinkle or â—antize others Gospel-Baptism being but one and the same as to the subject and mode of Administration 4. How can you say Page 7. that they were all Baptized in his own House when the Text speaks not any such thing 2. How can you presume to assert that they did not go out of the House Reader observe the Text well Acts 16. 30. And brought them out and said Sirs what must I do to be saved Vers. 31. And they said
our Mortification and death unto sin but our progress and perseverance therein Burial implies a continuing under death so Mortification is a continual dying unto sin Look as after the Death and Burial of Christ there followed his Resurrection so it must be with us we must have Communion with and conformity to the Lord Jesus Christ in his Resurrection as well as in his Death both these are represented and sealed to us in the Sacrament of Baptism c. thus Pools Annotations The Assembly also in their Annotations on this Text say much the same things viz. In this Phrase the Apostle seems to allude to the Ancient manner of Baptizing which was to Dip the party Baptized and as it were to bury them under Water for a while and then to raise them up again out of it to represent the Burial of the old Man and the Resurrection to newness of Life Diodate in his Annotations saith the same Cajetan upon the place says we are buried with Christ by Baptism into death by the ceremony of Baptism because he that is the party Baptized is put under Water and by this carries a similitude of him that was buried who was put under the Earth Now because none are buried but dead Men from this very thing that we are buried in Baptism we are assimulated to Christ buried and when he was buried Tilenus a great Protestant writer in his dispute on this Text Page 88 89. speaks fully to this case Baptism saith he is the first Sacrament of the New Testament instituted by Christ in which there is an exact Analogy between the Sign and the thing signified The outward Rite in Baptism is threefold 1. Immersion into the Water 2. Abiding under the Water 3. A Resurrection out of the Water The form of Baptism viz. External and Essential is no other than the Analogical proportion which the signs keep with the things signified thereby for the properties of the Water washing away the defilements of the Body does in a most suitable similitude set forth the Efficacy of Christ's Blood in blotting out of sin so dipping into the Water in a most lively similitude sets forth the Mortification of the old Man and rising out of the Water the vivification of the new Man The same plunging into the Water saith he holds forth to us that horrible Gulph of Divine Justice in which Christ for our sakes for a while was in a manner swallowed up abiding under the Water how little a time so ever denotes his descent into Hell even the very deepest of Lifelesness which lying in the sealed or guarded Sepulchre he was accounted as one dead Rising out of the Water holds forth to us a lively similitude of the conquest which this dead Man got over death in like manner we being Baptized into his death and buried with him should rise also with him and go on in a new Life Thus far the learned Tilenus Sir 't is time for you to lay to Heart what you have done in trampling upon dipping or Baptising that is such a glorious significant ordinance as these Authors tell you and no doubt speak the mind of God And in the room of it exalt an humane and an insignificant invention Doth Rantism or sprinkling bear any proportion to those great mysteries here mentioned doth that figure oâ— hold forth the burial of Christ or that of the old Man can a few drops on the Face represent that or what representation is there in that of a Resurrection Alass you know not what you do â—ut to proceed Ambrose saith Water is that wherein the Body is plunged to wash away all sin 1 suppose 〈◊〉 means 't is a sign of this i. e. that all sin is buried Chrysostom saith that the old Man is buried and drowned in the Immersion under Water and when the Baptized person is afterwards raised up out of the Water it represents the Resurrection of the new Man to newness of Life 〈◊〉 us Epist. ad Tradit Philadelph saith that â—â—lâ—â—ving in his death we may be made partakers of his Resurrection by Baptism Baptism was given in memory of the death of our Lord. We perform the Symbols of his death Mark it Reader not of the pouring forth of or sprinkling of his Blood nor of the Spirit no no but as these Authors say 't is a Symbol of his Death Burial and Resurrection which sprinkling in no manner of way can represent Justin Martyr saith we know but one saving Baptism inregard there is but one Resurrection from the Dead of which Baptism is an Image And from hence we know nothing of your Infants sprinkling See more in Sir Norton Knatchbul's Notes Printed at Oxford 1677. who to the same purpose quotes Basil the Great Lactantius Bernard c. Mr. Perkins 2. Vol. Cap. 3. on Gal. saith the Dipping of the Body signifies Mortification or fellowship with Christ in his death the staying under the Water signifies the burial of Sin and coming out of the Water the Resurrection from Sin to newness of life And in another place saith the ancient custom of Baptizing was to Dip all the Body of the Baptized in Water To these Ancient Writers let are once again add here for your further conviction what some of the chefest Prelates of the Church of England have very lately said on Rom. 6. 3 4. The Reverend Dr. Sharp the present Lord Arch-Bishop of York in a Sermon preached before the Queens Majesty on Easter Day March 27 1692. saith he and this in antient times was taught every Christian in and by his Baptism when ever a person was Baptized he was not only to profess his Faith in Christs Death and Resurrection but he was to look upon himself as obliged in correspondence therewith to mortifie his former carnal affections and to enter upon a new State of Life And the very form of Baptism saith he did lively represent this obligation to them For what did their plunging under water signifie but their undertaking in imitation of Christs Death and Burial to forsake all their former evil courses As their ascending out of the Water did their engagement to lead a Holy and Spiritual Life This our Apostle saith he doth more than once declare to us thus Rom. 6. 3. 4. We are buried with Christ by Baptism unto Death that like as Christ was raised up by the glory of the Father so we should walk in newness of Life Thus Dr. Sharp Dr. Fowler Now Lord Bishop of Glâ—cester in his Book of design of Christianity Page 90. on Rom. 6. 3 4. saith Christians being plunged into the Water signifies their undertaking and obliging themselves in a Spiritual sense to die and to be buried with Jesus Christ in an utter renouncing and forsaking all their Sins that so answering to his resurrection they may live a Holy godly life Also Dr. Sherlock Dean of St. Pauls in his Sermon Charity without usury on Rom. 6. 3 4. saith Our conformity to the Death and
some things in one peculiar to his Spiritual Seed that no ways related to his Carnal Seed as such which proved the Covenant contained in promise to be distinct page 15 16. and some things in the other that belonged to his Natural Seed that appertains not to his Spiritual Seed as such of which this Man takes no notice I begin there with those things that belonged to Abrahams Natural Seed as such as peculiar to them 1. The first that I Name is That of Gods multiplying his Seed by Isaac 2. The Birth of Isaac by Sarah Abraham s Wife Gen. 17. 16 19. 3. The continuation of his Covenant with all that should proceed from Isaac according to the Flesh Gen. 17. 6. 4. The coming of Christ out of Isaac according to the Flesh. 5. The bringing the Natural Seed of Abraham by Isaac out of Egypt 6. The promise of giving his Natural Seed the Land of Canaan for their Possession Now can any of these things concern or belong to Abrahamâ— Spiritual Seed as such that is do they concern us Gentiles who do believe Observe also that as these things peculiarly appertained to his Natural Seed as such so Circumcision is expresly called Gods Covenant Gen. 17. Thou shalt keep my Covenant every Man Child among you shall be Circumcised verse 10. And ye shall Circumcise the Flesh of your Fore Skins and it shall be a token of the Covenant betwixt me and you verse 8. And I will give unto thee and to thy Seed after thee the Land wherein thou art a Stranger all the Land of Canaan c. so Gen. 15. 8. Now this Covenant and these promises I affirmed cannot belong to the Spiritual Seed of Abraham as such page 16. therefore a Covenant of peculiarity to which he hath given no answer Secondly I have shewed also what those things are that are Peculiar to the Covenant of Grace and so to Abrahams Spiritual Seed as such which Covenant only was by promise not a formal Covenant like the other viz. that of Circumcision Gen. 17. 7. 1. See Gen. 15. 5. Look towards Heaven tell the Stars if thou art able to Number them and he said unto him so shall thy Seed be and he believed in the Lord and it was counted to him for Righteousness This was not in the Covenant of Circumcision and referrs to Abrahamâ— numerous Spiritual Seed 2. So again I have made thee a Father of many Nations meaning Gentile Believers as divers Expositors shew 3. In thy Seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be Blessed Gen. 12. 3. Gen. 18. 18. Gen. 22. 18. I cited the Apostles words Gal. 3. 8. The Scripture foreseeing that God would Justifie the Heathen through Faith Preached the Gospel to Abraham saying in thy Seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be Blessed 'T is remarkable the Holy Ghost does not here refer to the Covenant of Circumcision Gen 17. 7 8 9 10. But to the free promise of the Covenant of Grace which Paul says positively Abraham received not in Circumcision Rom. 4. 9 10. Faith was reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness how was it then reckoned when he was in Circumcision or in Uncircumcision not in Circumcision but in Uncircumcision Now I desire it may be well considered by all Christians that the Covenant of Grace was only by promise and no Formal Covenant with any of the Saints under the Old Testament thus the Covenant of Grace run to Adam to Abraham to David c. 11 12. only by promise not a Covenant where there was a mutual restipulation between God and his Elect ones As in the Covenant of Circumcision there was between God and Abraham in respect of his Carnal Seed this Dr. Owen asserts also on Heb. 8. 6. page 227. When God renewed saith he the promise of it to Abraham he is said to make a Covenant with him and he did so but it was with respect unto other things especially the proceeding of the promised Seed from his Loyns but absolutely under the Old Testament it consisted only in a promise 1. It wanted its solemn confirmation and establishment by the Blood of the only Sacrifice which belonged to it 2. This was wanting saith he the Spring Rule and Measure of all the Worship of the Church this does belong to every Covenant properly so called that God makes with his Church that it be the entire Rule of all the Worship that God requires of it which is that which they are to restipulate in their entrance into Covenant with God but so the Covenant of Grace was not under the Old Testament thus Dr. Owen This is further confirmed by those expressions Jer. 31. 31. I will make a new Covenant with the House of Israel c. clearly intimating he had not so made it before with any except it was with Christ as our Head Representive and Mediator with whom it was made for us and in him with us before the Foundation of the World Tit. 1. 2. 2 Tim. 1. 9. Object Does not David say God had made with him an everlasting Covenant c. Answer I answer David was a Type of Christ Psalm 89 28 34 35. with whom the Covenant of Grace was made before the World began this therefore refers to the true David who was only able to answer the Condition agreed upon between the Father and himself as Mediator For the Covenant of Peace was between them both Zech. 6. 13. For unto us the Covenant of Grace is not a Conditional but an Absolute Covenant I will be their God and they shall be my People c. To Adam the promise runs The Seed of the Woman shall Bruise the Sepents Head c. To Abraham In thy Seed shall all the Families of the Earth be blessed In both places it contained only a gracious promise To Abraham and to his Seed the promise was made it is not said Covenant therefore when I say God made a Twofold Covenant with Abraham I mean that there were two Covenants contained in those Covenant Transactings of God with him one a Formal Covenant with him and his Carnal Seed which contained a Covenant upon mutual restipulation which was the Covenant of Circumcision which Abraham and his Carnal Seed subscribed to the other a free promise or Covenant of Grace to him and all is true Spiritual Seed which is confirmed by Christs Blood and which believers consent to and enter into when Baptized upon the profession of their Faith in Gospel days tho' I deny not but that they have actual interest in it as soon as they have Union with Christ or do believe in him Moreover it was through Faith only in the free promise of Christ and in the Covenant of Grace that all the faithful were justified and saved who lived under the old Testament tho' the Covenant it self was not then formerly a Covenant with them it being not Ratified nor confirmed by the Blood of Christ or Death of the Testator nor could it so be till the
Original Covenant of works made with Alam and all Mankind in him is not intended for this is undoubtedly a Covenant different in the Essence and Substance of it from the New In Page 219. He saith but it is evident that the Covenant intended was a Covenant wherein the Church of Israel walked with God until such time as this better Covenant was solemnly introduced this is plainly declared in the ensuing context he says it was becâ—me old and ready to disappear Wherefore it is not the Covenant of works made with Adam that is intended when this other is said to be a better Covenant Thus the Doctor Friend doth not he hereby clearly lay down a Covenant of peculiarity made with Abrahams natural Seed as such or a Covenant that only and peculiarly belonged to them and 't is as plain this began in that Covenant God made with Abraham In Page 288. he saith we must grant two distinct Covenants to be intended rather than a twofold Administration of the same Covenant meerly to be intended He also shews that the old Covenant which God made with the natural Seed of Abraham could not be the Covenant of Grace because there was no reconciliation with God nor Salvation to be obtained by vertue of that Covenant Observe the Doctor speaks not of Adams Covenant but of that Covenant God gave to the whole House of Israel or natural Seed of Abraham He further shews that the Covenant of Grace untill Christ came was only contained in promise by which Covenant all that lived under the Old Testament who had Faith in it were saved to Abraham and his Seed was the promise made Gal. 3. 16. That was the Covenant of Grace therefore say we the Covenant of circumcision and Sinai Covenant where there was mutual stipulation betwixt God and the whole House of Israel could not be the Covenant of Grace besides 't is said that that Covenant they broke and by so doing lost all the external blessings of it as the Prophet Zach. Chap. 11. 10 14. shws because of the Jews unbelief and putting the Messiah to Death God broke his Covenant with that People Zech. 11. 10. And I took my Staff even beauty and cut it asunder That I might break my Covenant which I made with all the People What is become now of your everlasting Covenant God made with all the People of Israel or natural Seed of Abraham Is it not gone are his Carnal Seed as such still in Covenant with God or are they not with their external legal Covenant cast out Sir the everlasting Covenant of Grace that stands firm 't is true that is confirmed by the Oath of God and Blood of Christ but the Covenant in which was contained circumcision and all the Legal Rites and Jewish Church and Church-membership is gone and taken away The New Covenant is not according to that Old Covenant God made with the whole House of Israel or Carnal Seed of Abraham if it be not according to it then it was not the same in Essence nature or quality See Jer. 31. 32. 1. This saith the Doctor is the nature and substance of that Covenant which God made with that People viz. a peculiar temporary Covenant c. Page 235. Mark it Reader He adds and concurs with the Lutherans who deny that by the two Covenants is meant only a twofold Administration of the same Covenant but that two Covenants substantially distinct are intended `1 Because in the Scripture they are often so called and compared with one another and some times opposed to one another the first and the last the new and the old 2. Because the Covenant of Grace in Christ is eternal immutable always the same obnoxious unto no alteration no change or abrogation neither can these things be spoken of it with respect unto any Administration of it as they are spoken of the Old Page 226 227. 1. He shews again that by the Old Covenant is not intended the Covenant of Works made with Adam Page 227. When 2. We speak of the New Covenant saith he we do not intend the Covenant of Grace absolutely as though that were not in being and efficacy before the Introduction of that which is promised in this place For it was always the same as to the substance of it From the beginning it passed through the whole Dispensation of times before the Law and under the Law of the same nature and Efficacy unalterable everlasting ordered in all things and sure Again he saith when God renewed the promise of it to Abraham he is said to make a Covenant with him and he did so but it was with respect unto other things Mark it especially the proceedings of the promised Seed from his Loins but absolutely under the Old Testament it consisted only in a promise And as such only is proposed in the Scripture Page 227. it appears that the Doctor understands the Covenant God made with Abraham as we do viz. the promise to Abrahams Seed viz. Christ and all Eternal blessings with him to intend the Covenant of Grace but whereas it is said God made a Covenant with Abraham c. that has respect to other things that which concerned his natural Seed and out of whose Loins Christ was to come That 's the Covenant of peculiarity he proceeds and gives three reasons why the Covenant of Grace could not absolutely in it self but in the promise of it only be called a formal Covenant Page 227. 1. Because it wanted its solemn confirmation and establishment by the Blood of the only Sacrifice which belonged unto it before this was done in the Death of Christ it had not the formal nature of a Covenant c. 2. This was wanting saith he it was not the Spring rule and measure of all the worship of the Church i e. this doth belong unto every Covenant properly so called that God makes with the Church that is the intire rule of all the worship that God requires of it which is that they are to restipluate in their entrance into Covenant with God but so the Covenant of Grace was not under the Old Testament for God did require of the Church many duties of worship that did not belong thereunto but now under the New Testament this Covenant with its own Seals and appointments is the only rule and measure of all acceptable worship wherefore the new Covenant promised in the Scripture and here opposed unto the old is not the promise of Grace Mercy and Life and Salvation by Christ absolutely considered but as it had the formal nature of a Covenant given unto it in its establishment by the Death of Christ c. Page 227. 1. Now pray observe does not the Doctor clearly hint thereby that no Rite Sign or Seal properly of the Old Testament can be a Rite Sign or Seal properly of the New Covenant how then could circumcision be the Seal of the said Covenant of Grace 2. It is evident in the Covenant of circumcision there