the Lords posts but they must have been utterly taken away So in Popish baptisme water is the Lords ordinance by them abused and turned to an idoll salt oyle c. are Antichrists ordinances set up also for idols these latter we utterly reject because they were never Gods ordinances in baptisme the water we reteyne having put away onely the abuse and lye of Antichrist annexed thereto If this bee not so then the Iewes should not onely have repented of and put away their lye when they used those lying words The Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord c. Ier. 7. 4. but they must have destroyed the Temple it selfe also And whereas the Papists and other hereticks make lyes of the Scriptures and of Christs holy words This is my body make their idoll of Transubstantiation and the like they thould not onely repent of their lies and put away their idols but also renounce Christs words and put away the holy Scriptures if this doctrine of our opposites be true 8. Nor doe they in deed repent who stil reteyne such baptisme as themselves think to be an idol c. for true repentance bindeth us to cast away all idols c. Answ. This is already answered neither doe we reteyn such a baptisme as wee think to be an idol but that ordinance of God which was an idol by Antichrists abuse and is through the grace of God restored unto his former truth that onely doe wee reteyne repenting of our former abuse thereof amongst them God himselfe as I have shewed was made an idoll by the Gentiles their repentance bound them to cast away their idolatry but to reteyn God still Wheras they say We have gotten the Lords baptisme by comming to the Lord in true faith and repentance who baptiseth us with the holy Ghost and with fire As for the outward washing which we had it need not be repeated as before is shewed and we may as lawfully eat the Lords Supper without a new washing as the idolatrous Isralites turning to the Lord might eat the Passover without a new cutting or circumcising 2. Chron. 30. 1. 5. 11. 18. 25. Ezr. 6. 21. And afterward say We have renounced that Romish baptisme as an impure idol in their abuse standing up in the place of Christ and his precious blood which it is not pretending to give grace and wash away sinns which it doth not c. they doe but shift and contradict themselves and deceive others and still run into errours more and more Answ. Great words as if he would beare down all before him But let us heare his proofes For first sayth he speaking of the Lords baptisme they speake of that which is inward whereas our question is of that which is outward Answ. A good beginning The Apostle sayth there is one Lord one faith one baptisme Eph. 4. 5. Himselfe also a little before sayd against the Anabaptists There is one baptisme as there was one circumcision Now against us he would have two baptismes one outward an other inward Whereas though there bee two actions one outward doen by men the other inward doen by Gods spirit yet both are but one baptisme one sacrament as the outward body and the inward soule make not two men but one man A sacrament is a sacred order between the outward visible thing and the spirituall invisible which have a mutuall proportion and likenesse between them The Apostle sayth That is not circumcision which is outward in the flesh but that which is of the heart in the spirit Rom. 2. 28. 29. If they have in Rome but the outward washing without the inward then have they not true baptisme but a false deceitfull signe Secondly it is not true that I spake but of the inward work onely for I spake also of the outward which being had in Rome need not be repeated as I shewed by the example of the Israelites Now which of us two shifteth contradicteth and deceiveth I or he let indifferent men say 2. They spake sayth he of abuses in the ministration and opinions of the Ministers thereof whereas our question is of the thing it selfe not of the abuse Answ. We speak of the thing it selfe Baptisme abused by the ministers and receivers neither of which are in Gods covenant and therefore can have no true signe or seale of his covenant unto them in that estate Secondly if it were not for abuses and opinions of men God and his truth and ordinances could never bee changed into lies and idols as the Apostle teacheth us they were Rom. 1. 23. 25. The Athenians were idolaters against the true God whom Paul preached and whom they ignorantly worshiped Act. 17. 23. If one would take them in hand to excuse them say Our question is of the thing it selfe the true God and not of the Athenians abuses and opinions were it not a worthy plea yet such we have for Antichristians baptisme 3. Their assertion sayth he implieth that they had not the Lords baptisme till they got it themselves by comming to the Lord in true faith and repentance which is plain Anabaptistry and covert Popery and Arminianisme whereby they debase Gods grace and exalt mans works For it must be understood either of the inward or outward baptisme if of the inward besides that it toucheth not the question it implieth Popery if of the outward it conteyneth Anabaptistry Answ. Deliver my soule ô Lord from lying lips from the deceitful tongue Psa. 120. 2. First he citeth as my words till they had got it themselves by comming to the Lord whereas the word themselves is of his own addition Secondly hee wresteth them to such a meaning as in his conscience he knew I never intended namely to debase Gods grace and exalt mans worke as doe the Papists and Arminians As if I thought that we came or could come to the Lord of our selves without being drawn of the Father or as if our comming to him were a meritorious work which errours I abhorr 3. Neither doe my words imply such a meaning any more then our Saviours when he sayd Come unto me all yee that labour c. and J will give you rest take my yoke upon you c. and yee shall finde rest to your soules Math. 11. 28. 29. To conclude of that speech Therefore they could come of themselves or their comming should be a meritorious work or the like were an openinjury to our Lords words His two baptismes inward and outward is before shewed to bee but'an evasion wee acknowledge but one baptisme Eph. 4. 5. Neither if it be understood of the outward doth it as hee sayth conteyn Anabaptistrie for the Anabaptists doe not hold that they have the outward baptisme by faith and repentance but doe repeat the outward vvork and baptise againe vvhich I deny So herein he hath done me double vvrong 4. Jf they had died in infancie they had not then had the Lords baptisme nor had been baptised
the righteousness of saith and forgivenes of their sinns in that sinful estate Thus I shewed Gods words not mine own for oracles He asketh if we wil be wiser and more righteous then God himself who accounted them stil to be his people under his covenant and himselfe to be their God and upon this ground called them to repentance c. Answ. All this notwithstanding whiles they continued unrepent and unbeleeving and hardned their necks against the Lord their God c. their circumcisim by Pauls doctrine was made uncircumcision Rom. 2. 25. their sacrifices were an abomination to the Lord Prov. 15. 8. And hee might have seen in the Scriptures that though Israel were divorced from the Lord Ier. 3. 8. and not his people or wife nor he her husband Hos. 1. 9. 2. 2. yet they are in respect of their former state their continuall profession and the future mercie towards them called Gods people still even till Christs time Esai 11. 11. 16. Amos. 9. 14. That he should not urge a phrase as his manner is against the plain doctrines of the Scripture Obj. What wil they say to the circumcision of Judah in their apostasie c. was it also among them none of Gods ordinance but an idol c. Answ. It was Gods ordinance though abused by the unworthy receivers as before is shewed But he from a false church and Babylon flâ—eth to Sion the true Church corrupted which is his perpetuall fallacie If Iudah or any Church in the world had doen with the sacraments as Rome hath doen they had changed them into idols contrary to the 2. commandement But Iudah never did so with circumcision and the Passover he sheweth no word of God to prove it Obj. Have the gates of hell more prevailed against the Christian Church since Christs coming then they did or could against the Church of the Iewes before his coming in the flesh Mat. 16. 18. Answ. This old popish reason hath been often answered by many Writers against the Antichristians and is of no more force for Rome turned to Antichrist then for Ephesus Corinth and other churches turned to Mahomet For what priviledge besides a popish dreame had Rome above Ephesus Should it because it crucified Christ and is therefore cursed above all cities have prerogative above Ephesus wherin was a church in Pauls time which was the ground and pillar of truth 1. Tim. 1. 3. 3. 15. yet is that church long since cut off but Romes church must continue for her good service to Divils and idols Rev. 9. 20. and for worshiping the Beast Rev. 13. He might have seen in Rev. 12. that the woman the Church perisheth not though she be fled into the wildernesse from the presence of the Serpent and synagogue of Antichrist His other repetitions again and again are before answered Obj. The ordinances of God may in any churches become unprofitable to men by their own sinns circumcision may be made uncircumcision to such as break the Law c. Rom. 2. 25. 26. so baptisme now But shall we therefore say that they are not in such churches to such persons the Lords ordinances nor his true signes and sacraments but idols and lying signes c. Was the Lords table in the Church of Corinth a table of Divils or the Lords Supper an idoll or lying signe c. to such as eat it unworthily Was it not the Lords ordinance and true sacrament though sinfully abused by them c. Ans. The Lords ordinances abide alwayes the same and holy in themselves howsoever abused by Christians by Antichristians by Iewes Turks or Pagans to their perdition Neither is there a like degree of abuse in all neither doth every abuse make a thing an idoll but when the honour due to God alone is given to a creature then it is made an idoll and so I have proved is doen in the church of Rome to which proofs he answereth not I instanced the Lords Supper in Rome whereof they have made an abominable idoll worshiping a peece of bread as their maker Mine opposite will never mention or meddle with this but shunneth it as convinced in conscience And from Antichrists church runneth to the Christian Church in Corinth and asketh if the Lords table there were a table of Divils I answer No not then in Corinth but now in Rome they have made it by their idolatrous Masse a table of Divils and as Moses sayd of Israel they sacrificed to Divils not to God Deut. 32. 17. so say I of these Antichristians their sacrifice of the altar is a sacrifice to Divils not to God This he should have disproved if he could have doen it and not to leave the persons and things whereof wee dispute and run to others So the Lords baptisme they have turned into an idol ascribing the gift of grace which onely is Gods to water words and works of men that as the Gentiles turned the truth of God into a lye Rom. 1. these Gentiles also have turned the truth of God and of his sacraments into lyes And as the Lords incense and sacrifices were an abomination to him from the hands of wicked sinners Esai 1. 13. Prov. 15. 8. so the Lords sacraments are an abomination to him from the hands of Antichristians And as hee doth so ought all his people to esteeme of them and not to regard lying words of such as cry nothing but the Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord the sacraments and ordinances of the Lord to deceive Gods people and to harden the synners in their wicked works Wheras I distinctly shewed the idolatry committed in Antichrists baptising of his subjects partly by perverting the holy signes as the Israelites did the brasen serpent â— King 1â— 4. partly by inventing signes of his owne as crosses exorcismes c. Mine opposite first †censureth the things I wrote to be notable shifts errours contradictions abuse of scriptures vain distinctions and odious assertions Such grace hath flowed from his tongue and pen. 1. Observe sayth he a needless distinction of idols nothing helping for the question in hand Answ. The distinction is true and needfull to discern the truth of the question against his clamorous reproches as if I called Gods ordinance in it self considered an idoll 2. Jf they mean sayth he that baptisme there had is an idol of both sorts they doe the more increase their errour Answ. I doe so meane yet is there no increase of errour I heare his bold words but no proof 3. They speak of crosses exorcismes c. whereas we speak of the baptisme it selfe Ans. So doe I but of popish baptisme mixed with Christs ordinances and Antichrists together All parts of a thing put together make the whole and it is deceitfull dealing to dazel mens eyes with the whores golden cup and to passe by the abominable ingredients the fornications that are in it when both are joyned together Rev. 17. 4. 4. They speak
God And because when they were first baptised they were not baptised into that particular church onely but are counted baptised into the catholike church and into Christ his death and burial Rom. 6. 3. 4. therfore though they renew the covenant yet their baptisme is not renewed for then it is manifested to the judgment of man that the seed of God though for the time it was not seen remayned in them and therfore their syn was not unto death 1 Joh. 3. 9. And this the Apostle teacheth us from God saying This is my covenant unto them when J shall take away their synns As concerning the Gospel they are enemies for your sake but as touching the election they are beloved for the fathers For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance Rom. 11. 27. 28. 29. Where we see that while mens synns are not by promise of God taken away they are not in his covenant as is confirmed also by Heb. 8. 10. 12. And in that Gods gifts and calling concerning his elect are without repentance they are to be restored into the covenant when they turne unto the Lord without any repeating of their outward baptisme Where he addeth this reason For baptisme is the signe of our entrance into the covenant and the Lords seale of his so receiving and admitting of us as circumcision was unto the Iewes Though it may in some sense be admitted which he sayth yet not as he intendeth and urgeth it For first Abraham was in the covenant of grace and justified by faith in Christ before he received circumcision Gen. 15. 6. Rom. 4. 3. And after that he received the signe of circumcision a seale of the righteousnes of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised Genes 17. Rom. 4. 10. 11. Secondly the children of Abraham were borne in the covenant and holy 1 Cor. 7. 14. Ezr. 9. 2. and borne unto the Lord Ezek. 16. 20. but were not circumcised til the eight day Levit. 12. and such infants as dyed before the eight day died not out of the covenāt not to speak of the women in Israel which were in the covenant without circumcision in the flesh Thirdly Moses sayd to men women and children ye stand this day all of you before the Lord your God c. that thou shouldst enter or pass into covenant with the Lord thy God Dent. 29. 10. 11. 12. 13. Yet all which had been borne within 40. yeres before were uncircumcised and so continued till Moses was dead Ios. 5. 2. 7. By all which it appeareth that men may otherweise enter into the Lords covenant then by Circumcision or by baptisme now come in sted therof How much more then if they have been baptised before and fallen from the covenant may they enter into it againe without a new baptising with water His other tautologies I omitt being before answered But he thinks to have help from Jer. 3. 12. 13. 14. where God calleth Israel to returne unto him and he will not cause his anger to fall upon them and sayth Turne o backsliding children for I am maried unto you and I will take you one of a citie and two of a familie and will bring you to Sion Where amongst many observations these are the chief 1. That God dealt otherweise herein then a man doth with his wife whom he putteth away and she become another mans as he shewed in Jer. 3. 1. 2 That these words The Lord thy God are words of the covenant Genes 17. 7. 3ly That he sayth J am maried unto you which the best writers expound to be the covenant of grace 4. That he would take them one of a citie and two of a familie teaching that they should not stay one for an other though the body of the people should remaine obstinate yet if a few returned he would receive them which sheweth the stability and eternitie of his covenant as Gen. 17. 7. which he performeth if but a fewe be made partakers of that grace as Rom. 11. 1. 5. Answ. He erreth himself and causeth to erre in not observing the scope of this scripture nor the conditions propounded and in not distinguishing the times past present and to come nor the covenant of the Law and the covenant of grace The scope of this scripture Jer. 3. 6. c. is to shew 1. the transgressions of Israel and Iudah under the covenant of the Law 2. the punishments inflicted for the same 3. and a promise of another covenant of grace which God would make with them in Christ. Israel played the harlot Ier. 3. v. 6. God called her to repent but she repented not v. 7. then God put her away and gave her a bill of divorces v. 8. yet Iudah her sister feared not but played the harlot also and dissembled so that Israel justified her self more then Iudah v. 8. 9. 10. 11. Then God seing them bothe to be covenant breakers promiseth of his grace a new covenant to be made with them in Christ which he proclaimeth first to Israel if they repent acknowledge their synns and turne unto him v. 12. 13. and so speaketh of his mariage with them to weet with the remnant of them one of a citie and two of a family whom he would bring to Sion v. 14. unto whom he would give faithfull pastours v. 15. not as under the Law and rudiments therof for the most excellent signes therof even the Ark of the covenant of the Lord should not be remembred or visited any more v. 16. But Ierusalem the Lords throne the Christian Church should be for the Gentiles of all nations v. 17. and for the Iewes and for the Israelites walking togither v. 18. Then sheweth he the signes and fruites of his grace in them manifested by their calling upon God as their Father in Christ v. 19. their weeping and supplication for their former synns v. 20. 21. the Lords promise of mercie to them that returne and their acceptation of his mercie offred v. 22. shewed by their humble confession of their synns and just punishments v. 23. 24. 25. The same argument is in Jer. 31. both touching Israel Iudah where after many promises he speaketh of a new Covenant with Israel and Iudah not like the covenant made with their fathers when he brought them out of Egypt which they brake though the Lord was an husband unto them but a covenant that he would write his Law in their harts and forgive their iniquitie which Paul expoundeth to be the new Covenant or Testament now confirmed by Christ Heb. 8. 8. c. Now to apply these promises which concerned future times graces in Christ to that present time whē they were in their synns unrepentant unbeleeving unforgiven under the bill of divorce and put away from the Lord is quite to mysse of the mark which the prophet aymeth at For though he speaketh to Israel as a body or corporation which continueth through many ages yet not those persons then
living but their posteritie are meant for they perished in their synns save some few that turned to the Lord but their after generations found mercie Neyther can we deny if we rightly observe th'Apostles doctrine in Rom. 11. but those and the like promises made by the prophets doe belong to the Iewes even at this day though for the present they are without the covenant in their owne persons for when the fulnesse of the Gentiles is come in all Israel shal be saved sayth he as it is written There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer and shall turne away ungodlynes from Iakob And this is my covenant unto them when I shall take away their synns As concerning the Gospel they are enemies for your sakes but as touching the election beloved for the fathers The conditions propounded he observeth not namely Return thou backsliding Israel and J will not cause mine anger to fall upon you Onely acknowledge thine iniquitie c. But pleadeth as if they in that rebellious estate were still in their persons in the covenant of grace visibly though God because they returned not had given them the bill of divorce Contrary to the gospell which sayth If we say that we have fellowship with God and walk in darknes we lye and doe not the trueth If we confesse our synns he is faithfull and just to forgive us c. If we say that we have not synned we make him a lyar and his word is not in us 1. Ioh. 1. 6. 9. 10. Now this was Israels state they walked in darknes and synns and left all the Commandements of the Lord their God they would not turne from their evill wayes nor hear the Lords prophets nor beleeve in the Lord their God but walked in all the synns of Ieroboam they departed not from them until the Lord removed Israel out of his sight And if any of them after their dispersion returned to the Lord they were then received so also were the Gentiles that turned to him and so the Iewes at this day that come unto Christ. He distinguisheth not the times For their mariage with the Lord which he sayth the best writers expound of the covenant of grace if he referr it to the future time of Christ is true but then it will nothing help those unrepentant synners divorced from the Lord for by the bill of divorce the mariage is dissolved as before is proved If he referr it to former times it agreeth not with the scope of the prophesie as I shewed but if that be granted him then his best writers wil hardly prove it to meane the covenant of grace for better then they doe shew it to be the covenant of the Law even Ieremie himself and Paul his expositor For Ieremie in chap. 31. v. 32. useth the same word Baalti J was maried to them when he speaketh of the old covenant made when they came out of Egypt which was the covenant of workes not of grace though they were then also in the covenant of grace as they were in the faith of Christ. And Paul expoundeth that word Baalti according to the Greek version J regarded them not Heb. 8. 9. which is quite contrary to mine opposites purpose But it is usual in the Prophets to speak of things to come as already doen as Esaias prophesying of Christ sayth Unto us a child is borne Esai 9. 6. who was not borne til many yeres after And so here the Greek version so much approved in the new Testament expoundeth this word Baalti J am or was maried futurely thus For J wil rule over you and wil take you one of a citie and two of a familie and bring you into Sion so it is a prophesie of a future mariage with Christ and accordeth to the Apostles writing unto that people saying ye are an holy nation a peculiar people c which in time pass◠were not a people but are now the people of God which had not obteyned mercie but now have obteyned mercie 1 Pet. 2. 9. 10. When was the time that Israel were no people nor obteyned mercie unless when Lo-ammi and Lo-ruhamah were borne Hos. 1. 6. 9. and Ephraim was so broken that it was not a people Esai 7. 8. Thus Peter testifying they were no people by which name Moses calleth the Gentiles when they were estranged from God Deut. 32. 21. and Paul saying that God regarded them not or cared not for them because of their breach of covenant Heb. 8. 9. doe overthrow all my opposites plea for them in their most synfull and unrepentant estate That which he sayth from Jer. 3. 1. that God dealt otherweise herein then a man doth with his wife whom he putteth away c helpeth him not First he should say then a man might doe with his wife for it was syn for such a man to returne to his wife it polluted the land Jer. 3. 1. the reason wherof was the man by unjust divorce had caused his wife to be defiled as the law closely teacheth Deut. 24. 1. 4 which fault cannot be imputed to the Lord. Secondly the Lord dealeth likeweise with the Gentiles when they turne from their adulteries he receiveth them according to his former covenant and spiritual mariage with Noe and his seed Genes 9. 9. 16. Esai 54. 1. 4. 5. 9. 10. So the promise being conditional benefited not them that would not returne unto him The last point of the stablenes of Gods promise though but a few are made partakers of it Rom. 11. 1. 5. is true and concerneth as well the Gentiles as the Iewes for in all ages God brought some of the Gentiles into his grace as the whole historie of the scripture sheweth Wherfore it is marvel how he could so insist upon the promise made to the Iewes to their children in Act. 2. 39. wheras the promise of grace in Christ perteyned also to the Gentiles as is testified by all the Prophets Deut. 32. 43. Psal. 117. Esa. 19. 24. 2◠49. 1. 6. Ezek. 4◠22 And wheras next he digresseth to speak of Iudah and from Esa. 54. 4. compared with Ier. 51. 5. would shew how in one respect they were forsaken and bare the reproch of widowhood to weet by their captivity in Babylon and in an other respect they were not forsaken as a widow of the Lord who yet remembred his covenant to shew them mercie he foloweth his own wisdom in expounding the scriptures regardeth not the wisdom of God who elswhere hath opened that prophesie after a heavenly manner The prophet Esaias in chapt 53. foretold of Christ and of his suffrings and in chap. 54. he prophesieth of the Christian church and beginneth Sing joyfully ô barren woman thou that didst not beare for moe are the children of the desolate then the children of the maried wife sayth the Lord. This argument he goeth on to inlarge shewing the former shame and reproach which this
Apostle speaketh of such as are dead to syn that is mortified Christians which live not in syn neyther reigneth it in them but they are freed or justified from syn and are alive unto God But Antichristians such as are the professant members of the church of Rome are not dead unto or freed from syn for they are the subjects of the Man of syn the worshipers of the Beast for whom is prepared the wine of the wrath of God Revel 14. 9. 10. They are of that church which by my opposites confession a little before is fallen into most synfull and deep apostasie is a notorious â—arlot and idolatress which all the people of God ought to forsake Wherefore they are rather to be counted dead in synns as th'Apostle speaketh of the Gentiles Ephes. 2. 1. and that they are in deed dead and not partakers of the first resurrection is evident by Revel 20. 4. 5. 6. in that they are the worshipers of the Beast and murderers of the witnesses of Iesus Wherfore the doctrine of Baptisme in Rom. 6. is farr from proving the Antichristians or other heretical and apostate churches to have the true baptisme of Christ or seale of his covenant but his servants they are to whom they obey even of syn unto death Rom. 6. 16. The other scripture is Ephe. 4. 4. 5. There is one body and one spirit even as ye are called unto one hope of your calling one Lord one faith one baptisme By which words it appeareth that such as have the One baptisme have also one and the same faith Lord hope spirit and body which to affirme of the Antichristian church of Rome and of all other heretical and Apostate churches that professe Christ is very impious And most firme arguments there are from the Apostles words to the coÌ„trary of that which this man pleadeth for As The Romish and other heretical churches have not the one same faith with the true Churches of Christ witness their blasphemous doctrines published by the Council of Trent and in other books and the Apostles prophesie that they are departed from the faith 1 Tim. 4. 1. c. therfore they have not the one Baptisme They have not one and the same Lord Iesus Christ but have Antichrist the Man of syn for their Lord therefore they have not the one baptisme They have not that one hope nor that one Spirit neyther are they one bodie with the true Christian churches therfore they have not that one baptisme These things are partly prooved before in the description which I set downe of Antichrists church they are also acknowledged of all Christian churches which disclaim the unitie with the Antichristians in their faith spirit bodie And the scriptures most abundantly disclaime this feighned unitie as 2 Cor. 6. 12. what concord hath Christ with Belial meaning none at all And Belial is there put for Antichrist and his retinue as in 2 Sam. 23. 6. 22. 5. The Apostle sheweth that the Antichristians have from God strong delusions to beleeve lyes unto their damnation 2 Thes. 2. 11. 12. That they are departed from the faith doe give heed to â—educing spirits and doctrines of Divils speaking lyes in hypocrisie c. â— Tim. 4. 1. 2. That the false teachers among Christians privily bring in damnable heresies even denying the Lord that bought them and bring upon themselves swift destruction 2 Pet. 2. 1. That the Beast which is the kingdome of Antichrist and the false prophet his ministers and all that worship him or take his mark shal be tormented in fyre and brimstone for ever and ever Rev. 20. 10. c. 14. 9. 10. And shall we now say that these miserable creatures have one Spirit hope Lord faith and baptisme with the saincts and true Churches of Christ My soule come not thou into their secret that so affirme The second argument for such churches is If they be not under the covenant of God but divorced from the Lord c then is there no salvation for any in those churches Answ. I deny the consequence For then after Israel was divorced from the Lord as is testified in in Ier. 3. 8. there was no salvation for any among them which I know mine opposite himself would not say Objection Why out of the covenant of God there is no salvation Answ. I grant it But though the church be not under the covenant of God but without it or divorced from him yet some parlicular persons in that church may through Gods grace be in his covenant For as every true church is in the covenant of God yet some hypocrites and reprobates are in the same which perish for ever so every false church is out of the covenant yet some truly faithful and elect may be therein which by the covenant of grace may be saved Example in Rahab the Canaanitess the church whereof shee was had not the covenant of grace in Christ yet she having heard of Gods works towards Israel beleeved in God and was saved and before she joyned her self to the church of Israel shee shewed the fruits of true and living faith wherby shee was justified is put in the catalogue of the Saincts Jos. 2. 1. 9. 10. c. Heb. 11. 31. 39. Jam. 2. 25. 26. The like is to be thought of the other nations farr off from God who by some meanes hearing of his name and trueth might imbrace the faith unto salvation though the churches wherof they stood members were false and idolatrous 1 King 8. 41. 42. 43. So where mine oppositeÌ„ bringeth scriptures to prove that they which are not in the covenant of God and Christ cannot be saved he proveth that which is not denyed but this he should have proved if he could that if a church be false and not under the covenant none in that church can by any meanes come unto the faith and covenant of Christ for this I deny And his argument if it had been sound should have been this If Antichristian churches be not under the covenant of God but divorced from the Lord then is there no salvation for any that are under the covenant of that church and in no other covenant and so I would have granted his argument as confirmed by the Holy ghost that all such are in the state of damnation 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. Rev. 14. 9. 10. Here to help the church of Antichrist into the covenant of Christ he bringeth in the profession of the Iesuites of Rhemes which as he sayth â—old Christ by nature to be truely both God and man to be the one eternal Priest and Redeemer which by his sacrifice and death upon the cross hath reconciled in to God and payd his blood as a fâ—ll and sufficient ransome for all our synns c. againe to be the singular advocate and patron of mankinde that by himself alone and by his owne meritâ— procureth all grace and mercie
can be transformed as the ministers of righteousnes 2 Cor. 11. 14. 15. is it such a marvel that he should transforme his temple and church into the Temple of God and church of Christ and yet as he is a Divil stil notwithstanding his transformation so his Temple coÌ„tinueth stil the Temple of the Divil and church of Antichrist how ever they are disguised with other names and habits And to help a litle to the discerning of both these opposite mysteries of pietie and impietie wee are to know that Christs Kingdome beginneth in the kingdome of Satan and is perfected in the Kingdome of God and Antichrists kingdome beginneth in the kingdome of God and is perfected in the kingdome of Satan For the god of this world having blinded the eyes of infidels who are dead in synns and walk according to the prince of the power of the aier Christ by his Ministers sent into the world and by his word of trueth the gospel causeth light to arise unto them openeth their eyes and turneth them from darknes to light and from the power of Satan vnto God that they may receive forgivenes of synns and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in him and thus God delivereth them from the power of darknes and translateth them into the kingdome of his beloved son Then cometh Satan by Antichrists which are his ministers privily crept into the church and by the word of lying which is Antichrists gospel he darkneth the mindes of them that have not received the love of the trueth and turneth them back againe from God and by damnable heresies privily brought in draweth them even to deny the Lord that bought them and so bring upon themselves swift destruction Then doe they goe out from the church blaspheme the way of trueth and togither with the Beast doe warr against Christ whom yet in name and pretense they would seem to honour and serve so accomplishing the mysterie of their iniquitie unto assured damnation if they turne not againe unto God This thing not being observed how Christ beginneth in the world and draweth men out of it into his church and Antichrist beginneth in the church draweth men out of it into the world againe as the Dragons taile draweth the starrs of heaven â—â—fteth them to the earth Rev. 12. 4. mine opposite thought it absurditie and contradiction in me for writing thus When th Apostle therfore telleth us that Antichrist sitteth as God in the Temple of God it is to be vnderstood first of their invading and destroying of Gods church and people as the heathens of old dealt with Jerusalem and dwellers therin secondly of their owne vayne ostentation whiles they will have it called the Christian catholik church and th Pope the head of the same Vpon this he thus inveigheth What have we here Doth himself now by the Temple of God vnderstand Gods church and people yea such as was answerable to Ierusalem and the dwellers therin of old why then hath he so eagerly oppugned us hereabout c. Answ. I oppugne the present church of Rome which Antichrist destroyeth not but buildeth and adorneth as an alluring harlot the Christian church which was in Rome of old that hath he invaded and destroyed long since for they then were Saints such as he hateth these now are worshipers of him and of idols Divils and are an habitation of Divils So there is as much difference between the church of Rome now and the church then as between the Bishop of Rome now the Bishops then they were Christs ministers this now is Antichrist as mine opposite himself confesseth And what cause hath he to insult as if he had got the victorie Let wise men judge But he proceedeth Obj. Where can he shew in the scriptures that sitting is put for invading or destroying c. Otherwhere stil he teatheth that by sitting is meant abiding continuing dwelling c. What if I cannot prove that sitting is put for invading or destroying if I prove my assertion by other words of the text shall it not suffice The words Eiston Naon into the Temple may imply by a figure his invading and the person that invadeth being an enemy a theef a wolf implyeth his destroying for our Saviour sayth The theef cometh not but for to steale and to kill and to destroy 1 Joh. 10. 10. The scripture often wanteth words easy to be understood so here Paul sayth of Antichrist that he having entred into the Temple of God sitteth as God And if they regard not my exposition they shall have his on whom they so much rely Mr. Iunius I mean who so explaineth it saying The testimonie of signe is this that Invading the temple of God he shal sit as God Jun. Animad vers in Bellarm. Controv. 3. l. 3. c. 14. not 18. But what if I confirme it by the word sitting which he thought so unlikely In Esai 14. 13. the Prophet upbraideth the king of Babylon thus Thou hast sayd in thine hart J wil ascend into heaven c. J wil sit also in the mount of the congregation in the sides of the North meaning mount Sion where Gods temple was But this is meant of Nebuchadnezars invading of Ierusalem to spoile the same as the historie sheweth 2 King 25. and in him Antichrists tyrannie against the church was lively figured As for sitting to mean continuing though it doth so often times yet not alwayes Christ sate upon the mount of Olives Mat. 24. 3. the disciples sate in the house Act. 2. 2. yet dwelt they not or continued long there And when the Babylonian invaded mount Sion to sit there he continued not there but having spoiled the citie burned the Temple and captived the people he returned into Babylon 2 King 25. so Antichrist spoiling Christian churches returneth to his whore of Babylon his proper habitation which he wickedly boasteth to be the Sion Temple and church of God Wheras mine opposite expounded the Temple of God to be the church and shewed not whether he meant a church particular or general and catholik I sayd for a particular church it wil not agree with the prophesies of Antichrist whose citie or church is so great as peoples kinreds tongues nations doe dwell in the streets therof Rev. 11. 8. 9. He gainsayeth me thus First Still he calls that Antichrists church which th' Apostle calleth the Temple of God Answ. It is his own interpretation that the Temple meaneth the church and that he that sitteth in it is Antichrist and sitting he wil have to be continuing and why may not I call that church wherin Antichrist sitteth continually as God Antichrists church yea though it were indeed Gods church as he supposeth Seing the citie wherin Christ did but dwell was called his owne citie Mat. 9. 1. And that which God sayth in my house and in my kingdom 1 Chron.
thereupon It was not Gods people in Babylon that killed those witnesses Rev. 11. but it was Babylon that killed those witnesses Gods people therin Because Gods people killed not those witnesses but the Beast in his catholik citie or church therfore thinks he that citie of the beast is not his church a fayre conclusion Obj. Note here that by the great citie is meant not onely the citie it self but the whole jurisdiction authority and dominion therof how farr soever extended Answ. It is a good note and worth the marking for the great citie being the church of Rome as before is proved it followeth that the extents of that church reach further then the materiall walls of Rome even to all nations that are of the Popes religion and therfore to bound it within the Lateran parish of Rome is to restreyn that which God sheweth to be more large It were a happy day if the Popes unruly power were limited within the Lateran parish and his jurisdiction reached no further But he must have a larger scope to range in yet a while and weak warriers are they against him that plead for his whorish church of Rome that it is the true church of Christ and under his covenant of grace It is the thing that the Pope would most gladly have proved and I am well assured Babylon wil not fall til it be otherweise battered Obj. Where yet observe further that the church of Rome being fallen into deep apostasie and having the man of syn sitting ther in as God who hath that citie for his throne the things that are spoken of this citie are also applied to the apostate estate of that church of Rome and the other churches that are under the jurisdiction of the prelacie of that Sea whersoever and of whatsoever people kinred tongue or nation they be c. But shall wee therfore conclude that by the Temple of God 2 Thes. 2. 4. may not be understood the church of God Answ. How glorious is the trueth that forceth those to yeild that fight against it His former reasons that by the Citie in Rev. â—1 8. the church was not meant he now frustrateth himself But still he cleaveth to his first plea The temple of God 1 Thes. 2. is the church of God I may answer hereto as God by Ieremy did to the Iewes Trust not in lying words saying The temple of the Lord the temple of the Lord the temple of the Lord are these Ier. 7. 4. Our dispute is in what sense Paul calleth it the Temple of God whether as the true temple builded by Solomon or as the false temple builded in Samaria by the Apostate Israelites which the Prophet calleth the house of their God Amos 2. 8. as the Apostle calleth this the Temple of God Now faine he would have this Romish temple of apostate Papists to be the true temple of God and that they notwithstanding their deep apostasie are Gods true church under his covenant which I deny and have before disproved and Paul in the very same place counteth them among those that perish for beleeving lyes which shal be damned for not beleeving the trueth 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. and Christ teacheth that being worshipers of the beast their names are not written in the book of lâ—fe Rev. 13. 8. 17. 8. but they shal be tormented in fyre and brimstone for ever Revel 14. 9. 10. 11. and that the whorish church Babylon the great the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth which is drunken with the blood of the Saincts and of the martyrs of Jesus shal be destroyed for ever Rev. 17. 5. 6. 18. 21. And who now that have not their right eye blinded wil not rather say it is the Samaritans Temple then Solomons though in pretence and colour the Temple of God And seing every true church now is a particular congregation in one place but the church of Rome is a new found catholik church spred over many nations under one head Bishop the Pope it can not possibly be Christs true church having neyther the constitution faith worship ministerie order or ordinances of Christ but of his enemie Antichrist Wheras I formerly wrote Neyther is that if they meane a particular church answerable to the Temple in Israel which was not for one synagogue but for the whole nation of the Iewes and for the Gentiles that came to the faith through the world To this he sayth How greatly forgets he himself and how presently seing but a line before he sayd the Temple figured not onely the catholik or universal church Ephe 2. 21. but also every particular church by proportion 1 Corint 3. 16. 17. And may we not then apply it to that wherof it was a figure c. Answ. No for mine opposite granteth that the Temple was primarily a figure Christ but so to apply it in this place 2 Thes. 2. himself thinketh not fit I deny not but some where it may and ought to be so applyed but considering that the Temple of God wherin Antichrist now sitteth is a catholik church spred over many nations as was prophesied Rev. 11. 8. 9. I think the applying of Pauls words in 2 Thes. 2. to a particular church is neyther fitting to the type nor to the prophesie nor to the accomplishment of it which we see at this day The priests in Israel figured Christ chiefly secondarily Christians Rev. 1. 6. But to apply those things which Paul speaketh of the Priests in Heb. 10. 11. 12. to us Christians were not onely unfitting but heretical Obj. The Candlesticks and Lamps were set in the Temple of God and the church of Rome was a golden Candlestick as well as the rest of the primitive churches and this man himself sayth definitely the true churches were many of them apostate when John wrote whom yet notwithstanding Christ acknowledgeth to be golden candlesticks In any of which of Antichrist had sit as in the church of Rome I suppose this man would not deny but his sitting then should have been in the Temple of God whether it were considered as a particular candlestick it self or a branch of the great general candlestick c. Answ. 1. If the Candlesticks were churches in the Temple the church then the Temple in such respect is the catholick church for one particular church is not in an other 2. I grant that the church of Rome was a golden candlestick in th'Apostles time and I think mine opposite would not deny but then also the Bishop of Rome was a starr in Christs right hand But now the Bishop is a starr fallen from heaven and acknowledged to be Antichrist why then may not the church be fallen with him as Paul forewarned Rom. 11. 22. and the candlestick removed from it as wel as from Ephesus Rev. 2. 5. except Rome have a privilege above all other cities because it crucified Christ. 3. I grant also that
a new Temple altar preisthood and signes differing from Christs as in deed he hath doen. And that idolatrous house erected for the worship of the true God not onely the Israelites but the Prophet Amos calleth the house that is the Temple of their god Am. 2. 8. as Paul calleth the house wherin Antichrist sitteth the temple of God 2 Thes. 2. yet this man blameth me for comparing that Temple with Ieroboams idol temples which Israel builded when he forgat his Maker Hos. 8. 14. how justly let men of judgment consider 2. His 2. exception is about Babylon and the Beast that I make them one with the Church of Rome and distinguish not Babylon from Sion This I have before cleared shewing that the church of Rome is the whore of Babylon Rev. 17. and I distinguish it from Sion which he confoundeth with Babylon being himself in that blame which he would impute unto me And to teach that God calleth us out of any civil state or goverment I have formerly proed to be erroneous and seditious contrary to the Apostles Rom. 13. 1 Pet. 2. 3. That Antichrists Apostasie and the church of Rome with him is much worse then Ieroboams and Israels with him I constantly affirme and let the synns of them both be compared and it wil soon appear Did Ieroboam pray unto creatures as the church of Rome doth to innumerable even all Saincts and Angels and some mere fictions Did Ieroboam hold any of those manifold blasphemous heresies now holden in the church of Rome Nay let the very Babylonians of old be taken and I wil undertake to prove that the church of Rome is not behinde them but in respect of the light of the Gospel revealed by Christ much worse 4. I grant that in Pauls time the church of Rome was set in the way of God and soon after fell into apostasie but where he chargeth me to say that the ordinances of God stil reteyned in that church are stollen he wrongeth me For I acknowledge not this church now to be that which was in Pauls time but a counterfeit arisen since a theif partner with Antichrist in robbing the church as the Babylonians robbed the Temple and abusing the ordinances therof to their perdition But then he objecteth Jf the church of Rome should repent c. they should not reteyn the baptisme and other ordinances of God which she hath but must part with them seing they are stollen goods And here he insulteth asking the Anabaptists how they can ever be thankfull ynough to me for thus pleading their cause c. Answ. If the Babylonians should have repented and joyned to the church of God at Ierusalem they there might have had an holy and lawful use of Gods vessels altars c which before they had stollen and abused so may these spirituall Babylonians have at this day if God give them grace to repent joyne unto Sion Here then the Anabaptists wil conne mine opposite but little thank for his gratulation 5. He calleth it my like errour and iniquitie to match baptisme and the other ordinances of God in the church of Rome with the feasts worship and sacrifices of the heathen who were without Christ and without God c. These assertions he sayth are miserable and Anabaptistical Answ. But why then doth he not refute them by the word of truth I could as easily call his assertions miserable and Papisticall but he would take that for no sound conviction And had he but related mine own words in that 85. page of my book the reader might have seen how little cause he had to exclaime â— I spake not generally of the heathens feasts worship and sacrifices as he would intimate to his reader but distinctly of those which had been ordeyned of God differing from other of their own devisings 2. I sayd the heathens kept Gods ordinance as well as Rome with their sacrifice of the Mass. He telleth his reader I match the baptisme c in Rome with the worship and sacrifices of the heathen Is this good dealing so to change my words But sundry such injuries I must beare And why may we think doth he in sted of the Lords supper now turned into a Romish mass put baptisme But because he thinketh that he hath colour to plead for one sacrament more then for an other In handling that point of their baptisme I instanced this other seale our Lords supper and an other ordinance of God Excommunication both which he passeth over yea every where when it cometh in his way he shunneth it throughout his book as in this place He knew well it was as a red hot yron that would burn his fingers But of it we shal speak more when we come to handle their baptisme 3. To his reason I answer the heathens were in deed without Christ and without God Eph. 2. and so are these Romish Antichristians or els the Apostle hath not given us a true rule to discerne Antichrist by that he denyeth both the Father and the Son 1 Joh. 2. 22. The hethens reteyned the knowledge of the true God in some mesure as their writings manifest and worshiped ignorantly the true God whom th'Apostles preached Act. 17. 23. so the Antichristians ignorantly worship the true God whom we preach and beleeve and as ignorantly by stocks and stones and prayers in an unknowen tongue like Parrats as did the heathens of old The hethens reteyned a knowledge of Christ the Redeemer figured in the sacrifices ordeyned of God so the Antichristians reteyn a knowledge of Christ in name and signified in the sacraments but as impiously doe they abuse them by holding they conferr grace ex opere operato by the work doen and other iniquities mixed with them as did the heathens and by beleeving and worshiping a Christ made of bread they surpass the heathens in ignorance and idolatrie Finally had mine opposite read Mr. Bezaes larger annotations on Eph. 2. as he read him on 2 Thes. 2. he might have seen the Antichristians very litle inferiour to the heathens without God even in Mr. Bezaes judgment which yet I suppose he would not have called miserable and Anabaptisticall as he doeth in me Touching the state of Israel in my discourse as he calleth it he confesseth I have many truthes which he also holdeth yet some sleightes errors c also mixed which he instanceth Seing he yeildeth the rest for truthes I referr the reader to the things there written which being observed he may the better judge of our controversie As first that we both agree The covenant between God man was alwayes conditional by the Law if they did his commandments they should live by them if they continued not in all things written in the Law to doe them they were cursed By the Gospel he that beleeveth in the Son of God hath everlasting life and he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life And all the figurative covenants that
even in this his last book where he dealeth against the Anabaptists For in his Chr. plea p. 27. 28. he sayth Circumcision once received in the apostasie of Israel was not repeated againe at their returning to the Lord and leaving of their idolatrous wayes c and quoteth among other scriptures 2 Chron. 30 ch and Ezr. 6. 19. 20. 21. Of which the one speaketh of them that returned in Ezekiahs dayes whiles the Israelites were in the land the other of them that had been dispersed among the heathens and returned So I where I treat of Baptisme handle those estates indistinctly which is made a great matter against me by him that doeth the same thing himself against others But now I wil speak of them a part The Israelites that rent themselves from Iudah I take to be a false church and so continued whiles they dwelt in the land After they were dispersed and were no church The first I shew thus The twelve tribes by Gods institution were all one church both in Moses time when they had the Tabernacle among them and encamped all round about it in the order set of God Num. 2. and after in the land of Canaan whiles the Tabernacle stood when the Temple was built by Solomon both which were signes of Gods presence and dwelling with his church And to keep them in this unitie he commanded all the men of Israel to come joyntly togither from all parts of the land three times every yere to worship him and keep their solemne feasts in that one place which he should choose and at all other times to offer their sacrifices there and in no other place and thither onely to bring their first fruits their commanded and their voluntarie oblations Exod. 23. 14. 17. 19. Deut. 12. 5. 6. 7. Who so did otherweise blood was imputed unto that man and he should be cut off from among his people to keep the people from offring their sacrifices unto Divils Levit. 17. 3. 4. 7. Now when the ten tribes revolted and made Ieroboam king then Israel forgat his maker and builded Temples Hos. 8. 14. For Ieroboam took counsel and made two calves of gold and sayd unto them Jt is too much for you to goe up to Jerusalem Behold thy gods ô Jsrael which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt and he set the one in Bethel and the other he put in Dan and this thing became a syn And he made an house of hye places and made priests of the lowest of the people which were not of the sonns of Levi. And he offred on the Altar which he had made in Bethel 1 King 12. 28. 33. And having cast off the Lords Priests Levites Ieroboam ordeyned him priests for the hie places and for the Divils and for the calves which he had made but such of all the tribes of Israel as set their harts to seek the Lord God of Jsrael went to Jerusalem to sacrifice unto the Lord God of their fathers 2 Chron. 11. 14. 15. 16. Thus of one daughter of Sion one â—hurch there became two women or daughters the one to weet Jerusalem the tribe of Iudah the Lord named Aholibah that is My Tabernacle in her the other Samaria the ten tribes he named Aholah that is her own tabernacle So Israel was without the true God and without a teaching Preist and without Law 2 Chron. 15. 3. and the Lord was not with Jsrael 2 Chron. 25. 7. but at their first falling away he threatned by his Prophets that because Ieroboam had made himself other gods and molten images and cast the Lord behind his back Ieroboams house should be cut off and taken away aâ— dung and the Lord would smite Israel and root them up out of that good land which he gave to their fathers and would sâ—arter them beyond the river 1 King 14. 9. 15. Yet for to shew his patience towards his people whom he had chosen for his above all peoples of the earth and for to save his elect among them and to make the rest the more inexcusable he forbare them many yeres and by all the Prophets and all the Seers sayd unto them Turne ye from your evil wayes and keep my commandements my statutes yet they would not heare but hardned their necks and beleeved not in the Lord their God but rejected his statutes and his Covenant that he made with their fathers and folowed vanitie and became vaine and went after the heathen that were round about them and left all the commandements of the Lord their God therfore the Lord was very angrie with Jsrael and removed them out of his sight 2 King 17. 13. 18. From these and other the like testimonies against this people I gather that from the time they departed from the Lord from his Temple altars and holy signes of his presence with his people in Christ from his Priests and the lawfull sacrifices at Ierusalem which were figures of Christ and from the communion of their brethren the Iewes which remayned the church of Christ and made a new Temple altar priesthood and church of humane and synfull institution that this their church Temple preisthood and worship were false For that is trueth which agreeth with the will and word of God all humane devices in religion are lyes and vanities If it be â—ayd the Lord himself rent the kingdom from Solomons son and gave it to Ieroboam 1 King 11. 29. 31. and therfore this second church was also of divine institution I answer though God divided the kingdom yet he divided not the church there might have been twelve kings over the twelve tribes as there were of old twelve princes Numb 1. 5. 16. and yet they should have been one Church The kingdom or Civil state is an ordinance immediately under God Rom. 13. the church or ecclesiastical state is an ordinance immediately under Christ the mediator and he is the head of the bodie the church Colos. 1. 18. The civil state is above the ecclesiastical as God is the head of Christ therfore the Church is to be subject to the Magistrate the higher power the minister of God though he be an heathen Rom. 13. 1. c. 1 Pet. 2. 13. 14. for the civil state is not taken away by difference of religion error heresie or any apostasie from Christ but the ecclesiastical state is by such things dissolved the Candlestick the church may be removed and of a Church of Christ become a Synagogue of Satan 1 Joh. 2. 18. 19. Rev. 2. 5. 9. In their civil state the Israelites were to be subject unto Nebuchadnezar an heathen when he conquered them Ier. 27. 6. 8. 12. but for their ecclesiastical estate they might never submitt to Nebuchadnezars church or priests nor offer to God upon any of his altars So to Ieroboam as king they might be subject without dissolving their communion in the mysteries of Christ set in the Temple altars priests
of 40. yeeres in the wildernes were uncircumcised till Iosuahs reigne Jos. 5. 2. 6. yet with them in that estate Moses renewed the covenant to bee the Lords people and that hee would bee their God as he had sworn to their fathers Deut. 29. 10. 13. And whereas mine opposite boldly affirmeth that all the writers in the world prove no such matter viz. touching Gods ordinances given to the heathens the sonns of Noe for signes of salvation it will appeare otherweise even by the greatest enemies of the heatheÌ„s the Iewes themselves Who though they gloried in circumcision and the Lawes given by Moses yet thus they write Jt is lawful for an heathen to offer burnt offrings unto God in every place and he himselfe may offer in an high place which he hath builded But it is not lawful for an Jsraelite to help him c. for behold we are forbidden to offer without the Sanctuarie Levit. 17. And it is lawful to teach them and to learn them how they should offer to the name of the blessed God Maimony in Misn. treat of Offring sacrifices chap. 19. s. 16. Thus by the Hebrewes testimony the Gentiles might lawfully use sacrificing in their own lands on their altars c. and the Iewes might instruct them to doe it aright though they themselves might not doe it with them being restreyned of God And as for the state of grace and salvation with God they also say Whosoever receiveth the seven commandements given to the sonns of Noe of which I have spoken elsewhere and whereof circumcision was none and doth them he is of the saincts of the nations of the world and he hath a portion in the world to come that is in eternall life if he receive them and doe them because the holy blessed God hath commanded them c. Maimony in Misn. treat of Kings chapt 8. s. 11. Thus mine opposite needed not to have made it so strange what I wrote of the state of the Gentiles nor have called it an idle flourish had he duly weighed their estate as Gods word and humane writers bear witnes of it But this indeed is admirable sayth he that he should account the heathens superstitions to bee Gods ordinances and yet esteem the circumcision and other ordinances of God had in Israel to be lying and deceitful signes c. Besides in all his bead-roule of Writers there is no mention at all of circumcision whereabout our question is c. Answ. 1. I called both the one and the other the ordinances of God in respect of their divine institution The other nations that fell from God and the Israelites that fell from God I count them all abusers of Gods ordinances which were not in their use of them true signes and seales of eternall life unto them but false and deceitfull Thus I match them alike without respect of persons as I am taught by the Apostle Rom. 2. 9. 10. 11. 12. The heathens superstitions if he mean things of their own devising I never esteemed Gods ordinances at all no nor Romes superstitions at this day 2 That circumcision is not in the bead-roule as he calleth it hee need not marvell seeing it was not commanded the heathens as before I have shewed It seemeth hee had a speciall fansie to circumcision above all other Gods ordinances otherwise why might not he think that it might be prophaned as much as any other There was no more holines in it then in the sacrifices And the Apostle sayth Jf thou be a breaker of the Law thy circumcision is made uncircumcision Rom. 2. 25. what then will it availe that Israel had circumcision when they broke the Law yea were without the true God and without Law 2. Chron. 15. 3. and sacrificed to Divils Deut. 32. 17. 2. Chron. 11. 15. Finally here he seeketh for circumcision where it was not to be found but within three leâ—es after in my book I instanced some among the nations circumcised even by his owne confession and there he hath passed it over without answer as if he had not seen it Such intreatie and worse I bear at his hand with patience Let me here adde the testimony of a learned man Mr. Calvin in his Sermon against idolatrie upon Psal. 16. 4. hath these words There are diverse which at this day use another starting hole for confessing that it is a detestable thing to mingle themselves with the idolatries of the Paynims they wil not that this extend it self to the superstitions of the papacie as though all the impieties of the Paynims had not been the corruptions of the true service of God From whence I pray you drew the Paynims all their ceremonies but from the holy Fathers The mischief was that they corrupted that which was wel instituted of God And yet al the abominations that were in the world had this goodly cloke of the name of God and of Religion but this made them not therefore justifiable neither might the faithful communicate with them Of Mr. Iunius iudgement for the church of Rome IN my brief answer to the things which mine opposite alleged from Mr. Iunius whose treatise they have printed the second time he taxeth me for omitting many clauses in that work But I then and still doe hold it ynough to take away the mayn grounds which being doen the other of lesser moment will be also found insufficient I shewed by the scriptures the Church of Rome now to bee an other and not that church which was in Pauls time therefore no just proportion to be between them In sted of disproving that which I shewed he after his manner asketh a question Whether J think these the Man of syn with his worshipers come in the place of the ancient true Church be the Temple of God the people of God under the covenant of God having the baptisme of God c. or whether there be no such there at all though corrupted and abused Answ. I have often told him and proved by Gods word that this present church of Rome is not Gods true Temple or people under his covenant having his baptisme but a false church arisen since vainly pretending the church covenant and baptisme of Christ. Seeing Gods word moveth them not let it be lawfull for me to oppose mans authority to mans D. Whitakers answering Bellarmine sayth This church succeedeth the Apostles indeed but as a den of theeves doth the house of God and as an harlot doth the faithful citie Jt reteineth the chests and coffers wherein of old the tresure was as Chrysostom elsewhere writeth but hath lost the treasure it selfe Jt is no more Bethel the house of God but Bethaven that is the house of vanitie or lies Yea Mr. Iunius himself hath thus well written of it The Church of Christ is sayd to fight against the Pseudo-christian or falsely called christian church over the which Antichrist ruleth Also when Bellarmine citeth Tertullian marveilously praising Rome Iunius
baptisme had in Rome we shall speak of it in due place Onely let it here be observed that this baptisme is there administred by such as are not of the body or Church by their own graunt but by ulcers gangrenes c. And Mr. Iunius himselfe answering Bellarmine so urgeth it saying of the Man of Syn the popish Hierarchie he is not properly of the Temple for the ulcer sayth he is not of the body though it be in the body So I straine not the similitude beyond the due proportion if Mr. Iunius his owne reasoning be good Object Of Himenaeus and Philetus it is sayd their word did eat as a gangrene 2. Tim. 2. 17. 18. would he then conclude that the baptisme ministred by them was not true baptisme c. Answ. First it is not sayd of the men but of their doctrine that their word fretted as a gangrene but Mr. Iunius maketh the very men ulcers and gangrenes in the body but not of it If the officers or members of a church teach heresie that doctrine is as a gangrene but the persons teaching them are truly officers or members of that church though synfull But in Rome the officers are ulcers not of the body in his account so his example is not fit Secondly if they were by the Apostle delivered to Satan as is probable by 1 Tim. 1. 20. then they and their folowers were no true Christian church but a synagogue of Satan to be reckned among the Antichrists 1 Joh. 2. 18. 19. and so could not administer true Christian baptisme to their disciples Obj. Where he againe denyeth any calling to be in the church of Rome and asketh How God doth call in that church let him ask it of such of his followers as have heretofore been of the Priests and members of that church c. Answ. He againe wrongeth me as too often saying that I deny any calling to be in that church it never entred into my hart I hold there is some calling in the churches of Turks and Iewes much more in false Christian churches I denyed that God is there calling as in his church which they plead for that is God hath not there his ordinary true ministers but Antichrists hierarchie doth call the people from God How be it by some whom God raiseth up of ministers or people his witnesses whom that church murdereth Rev. 11. 3. 7. and by reading the scriptures and other writings God calleth his people out of that Babylon Witness the late Archbishop Marcus Antonius de Dominis who testifieth that without persuasion counsel or advise of any man of what sort so ever he was by reading the scriptures and Fathers drawen to mislike and forsake that Roman church And thus among Turks Iewes heathens I doubt not but God calleth some from them by the light of his word and spirit Yea not onely in the church of Rome but by it and the ministerie of it God calleth his elect for as the Apostles doctrine in the true church was to the reprobates the savour of death unto death which yet is no condemnation of the true church or ministerie therof so some groundes of Christianitie doctrines in the false church by the false ministery erected to destroy mens soules with heresies and idolatrie God of his wisdom and goodnes causeth them to turne unto the conversion and salvation of his chosen which yet is no justification eyther of that church or ministerie Let this answer once suffice to all his repetitions And to Mr. Iunius on whom he so relyeth I could oppose Mr. Calvin man for man who sayth We see the horrible confusion that is in Poperie but yet there is not any doctrine to pluck men back to God nay rather the doctrine which is there doth draw them quite and clean from him And we see that the Divil hath gotten such sooting there that all is full of trumperie and illusions and the loving God is quite forsaken Sermon 31. on Deut 5. 7. Obj. What difference Mr. Junius observed between the ministerie simply considered and the hierarchie growen in that church upon it himself could best have shewed This here is evident that in one respect he acknowledgeth the hierarchie to be an order or estate of apostasie in the church an accident c. in an other respect he esteemeth the ministery of Gods holy things to be there though exceedingly corrupted Ans. By such differences and distinctions mine opposite would cary us from the trueth that I say not from common reason For he granteth the church it self the people to be exceedingly corrupted with most synfull and deep defection and apostasie yet in another respect to be the temple the people of God Now we have the like for the Bishops and Priests in one respect an order of apostasie in an other Gods ministerie Wherfore then have we been led about with distinctions of the ministerie or hierarchie from the church the one to be the Man of syn the son of perdition the other to be the Temple of God The plaine way should have been thus The Ministers and people of Rome are in one respect an apostatical church in an other a faithfull church in one respect the synagogue of Satan in an other the Temple of God But eyther my judgment faileth me or Mr. Iunius driveth at an other matter let men of understanding minde his writing Further I answer by like distinction we are to put difference between the Angels that synned or synfull men simply considered as Gods creatures and the poyson of syn which as an accident is growen upon them and this is true But shall that their being Gods creatures free them from damnation which that poyson that accident syn hath brought upon them No man of knowledge wil so say Even so the Man of syn the Pope hierarchie people of the church of Rome which are all in apostasie from the faith of Christ and service of God can not in that estate be judged heyres of salvation except God turne them againe to Christ for the scripture hath given sentence of their damnation 2 Thes. 2. 3. 10. 11. 12. Against their bare affirmations to prove Rome on Gods behalf altogether a church a company called of God with his calling by the spirit and the holy Scripture c. And that God calleth her with his calling by his spirit and word c. I objected the Apostles testimony God shal send them strong delusion that they should beleeve lies 2. Thess. 2. 11. and this is verified by the manifold heresies idolatries wherewith the whole body of that Church is poysoned And strong is the Lord God which wil condemne her Rev. 18. 8. and with the spirit of his mouth he wil consume that lawless one 2. Thess. 2. 8. Mine opposite replieth Might he not also thus conclude against Iudah in Apostasie that God did not cal that Church nor any in it or by any of them in that estate alleaging Ier. 5. 30. 31.
is also true but should have this addition taught of the holy Ghost To such as keep his covenant that remember his commandements to do them Psal. 103. 17. 18. For if we deny him he also wil deny us 2. Tim. 2. 12. That God hath regard to his covenant in Apostaticall churches and estate is also true but barely by him set down without shewing how That Moses teacheth us in Levit. 26. namely that the Israelites for their apostasie and forsaking of God should be chastised and if they would not amend they should at last be scattred among the heathen and perish among them and they that are left if they confesse their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers and if their uncircumcised hearts be humbled c. then God will remember his covenant with Iakob and will not cast them away nor abhorr them to destroy them utterly to breake his covenant with them but will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors 4. The fourth of Christs dying once and our being once baptised I also grant 5. The fift that the Church of Rome was espoused to Christ and had his baptisme in the Apostles dayes is true But where he addeth that she hath ever since reteined it with other grounds of Christian religion there he goeth too farr For many grounds of Christian religion she hath forsaken as all that are not Papists will acknowledge Wherefore he addeth a qualification either for faith or order or both in whole or in part This is so large as will bring in not onely the heathens of old but all the old condemned heretickes in the Apostles dayes and after yea even the very Iewes and Turkes at this day For in part they retein the grounds of Christian religion It is a ground of Christian religion to beleeve that there is one God and that the very Divils as the Apostle sayth doe beleeve Iam. 2. 19. But not to goe so farr as I grant him that the Papists in baptisme retein Christs ordinance in whole or in part so he cannot deny but also in the Lords Supper now turned to an abominable idolatrous Masse they reteyn Christs ordinance in whole or in part and so in other their abominations The Pope himselfe the great Antichrist the son of perdition reteyneth Christian religion in part The image of God wherein he made man at the first Gen. 1. 26. remaineth in all men still in part as the Scriptures testifie Gen. 9. 6. Iam. 3. 9. Wherefore if the reteyning of things in part holdeth men still in the state of grace and salvation who then shall be damned What a wide gate is here opened into the kingdom of heaven that if men reteyn Christian religion either for faith or order or both in whole or in part they remain still in the church and covenant of grace which is quite contrary to the doctrine of Christ and of his Apostles Math. 7. 13. 14. 22. 23. 1. Cor. 6. 9. 10. Gal 5. 19. 20. 21. 6. His sixt reason from the Iesuites profession made in their Rhemes Testament c I have before answered it being in his second argument made for the church of Rome And that which he addeth of their baptising with water in the name of the Father c is of no more weight to justifie their baptisme then the like elements of bread and wine and the words of Christs institution This is my body c are to justifie the Popish Masse to be the true supper of our Lord. Of which Mass to omitt that which many others have written of the abomination of it Mr. Calvin sayth thus The Mass â—n itself is a ronouncing of the death of Jesus Christ and a sacrilege forged by Satan utterly to abolish the sacrament of the Supper 7. His seventh reason that Iewes and Pagans are turned to the popish Christian â—aith was also refured in answer to his second reason brought for the church of Rome The conclusion that there needeth no repeating of baptisme as there was none of circumcision is granted and by me never denyed 8. Likeweise his eight reason that God hath his people in the Romish Babylon Rev. 18. 4. under his covenant of grace is before answered But he should have proved if he could that Babylon itself which is the church of Rome is under the covenant of grace that I deny the holy Ghost shewing in Rev. 17. 18. ch that she is under wrath and destruction He sayth the children of that church should plead with their mother as the Prophets taught and dealt with Jsrael of old Hos 2. 2. 3. 1. 4. 1. 2. 12. c that she take away her fornications out of her sight c. It is true so they should but why doth this man diminish from the word of God For the Prophets words are Plead with your mother plead for she is not my wife neyther am J her husband let her therfore â—ut away her whordomes c Hos. 2. 2. Thus doe I plead against this mother church of Rome but my opposite blameth me and pleadeth for her she is the wife of Christ and not divorced as before we have heard Baptisme sayth he is not of her adulteries but of Christs ordinances True so is the Lords supper so is excommunication not of her adulteries but of Christs ordinances and we reteyn them from Christ. But that whorish church hath corrupted and adulterated all these and other ordinances of Christ turned them to abominable idolatries and lyes for which we also plead against her and her synfull abuse of these divine ordinances shall nor justify but the more condemne her 9. To his ninth and last reason if baptisme be renounced then also the articles of â—aith the Scriptures and translations likewise mariages dissolved c. I answer Farr be it that we should renounce any good thing whith the church of Rome abuseth any more then Paul renounced the true God whom the Athenians ignorantly worshiped Aoâ— 17. 23. Whatsoever is of divine institution among Papists Iewes Turks or heathens we renounce it not but their profanation and abuse of holy things we doe renounce Neither can wee justifie their estate or any holy thing in their sinfull abuse of it â— though we put difference between the things which in their owâ—â— nature are good and the persons which are evill Thus men maâ— see how weak and without edge his reasons are to justifie the bap tisme in the church of Rome to be in their use of it the true seale of Gods covenant of grace in Christ unto them Next this he setteth himselfe to answer objections The first wherof he maketh this But the baptisme had in the Church of Rome iâ— not true baptisme but an idol and lying signe a detestable and cursed sacrament a fiction and not true Christian baptisme no better then when we wash our owne face with water dayly c. Answ. That it
hee pleaded against the Pope and his Hierarchy that they they onely are the Man of syn the son of perdition the Beast the Antichrist and why wondred he so at me when I called for proofe that Christ was maried to that Beast seeing he hath the same baptisme the same Lords Supper the same beleef touching the Articles of faith that the people of his church have But their counterfeit profession of Christ is before discovered And they that baptize which are the Hierarchy he confesseth to be the Man of syn the Antichrist they are none of the church as we have heard but ulcers gangrenes c. what now have such to doe with the name of the Lord or administration of the seales of his covenant And compare with this that which himself sayth in the 3. page of his book that the action of baptisme is wholly enjoyned and layd upon the baptiser and not upon the baptised If this be so where hath God layd the action of baptizing upon Antichrist the Man of syn and if God hath not layd it upon him how can hee truely doe it in Gods name How will they prove sayth he that it is a lying signe unto them in their estate seeing baptisme as the other sacraments in Israel and under the Gospel hath this in it to be a signe by the ordinance of God not at the pleasure of man And God is the God of truth and appoynteth no lying signes but true Neither can mans iniquity make Gods signes to be lying signes Synful therfore and erroneous it is so to think if not also blasphemous so to speak Answ. And was it synfull and erroneous thinketh he in Paul when he sayd They changed the truth of God into a lye Rom. 1. 25. For if mans iniquity cannot change Gods signes into lying signes how should it change the truth of God into a lye And how could Ieremie have proved unto the Iewes if mine opposite had then lived to plead for them that those were lying words when they sayd The Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord c. Ier. 7. 4. for had they not in deed the Temple of the Lord his true ordinance and signe whereof they spake The word of God is truth Ioh. 17. 17. How then should mans iniquity make Gods truth to be a lye unto themselues though they pervert the word unto all manner false-doctrine errour and heresie Idols are lies Esa. 44. 20. Ier. 16. 19. 20. How can the Pope make an idoll of the bread in the sacrament though he fall downe and worship it and beleeve it is his maker seeing as it is bread it is a true thing and Gods good creature as it is sacramentall bread it is a true signe by the ordinance of God who appoynteth no lying signes Is it not blasphemous now and would he not rend his clothes as did Caiaphas if he should heare one call the Popes sacrament of the altar an idol or a lying signe unto him in that estate But to conclude The sacraments are in deed signes by the ordinance of God not at mans will Gods ordinance maketh them signes of grace to the faithful receivers onely 1. Cor. 11. 20. 29. Rom. 2. 25 Act. 8. 36. 37. If infidels and Antichrists falsly challenge and usurp Gods signes and abuse them to open idolatry and their own perdition they change the truth of Gods ordinance into a lye unto themselves and whiles they vainly think to have forgivenesse of synns by them they add syn unto syn and receive their own damnation Whereas I had set downe two reasons to prove the Popish baptisme false and a lying signe unto them mine opposite passeth them over as too heavy for him and cometh to set downe differences between Gods ordinances and mens corruptions Gods signes and mens errours Mariage meates and drinks and the abuses of these the scriptures and the errors gathered from them the Sun Moon and Starrs as they are creatures and as they are made idols and worshiped of men c. Wherein he laboureth to prove the thing which we hold and doth most injuriously intimate against us as if we thought the contrary Should we be so wicked as to imagine the ordinances of God or his creatures to be evill in themselves Farr be it from us Nay we say that the papists for abusing the sacraments and turning them to lyes and idols shall have the greater judgement not for abusing bread and wine and water as they are creatures onely but for abusing them as they are sacramentall signes ordeyned of Christ which maketh their profanation more horrible their damnation more just But this is a practise of many that plead for errour to leave the arguments which doe convince them and to propone new questions and reasons of their owne that they may seeme to say something by multitude of words So when I shewed the example of the idolatrous Israelites that repenting and forsaking their false Synagogues lying signes in them usurped they needed not a new outward cutting or circumcising as is shewed at large in our former writings Discovery p. 116. 120. Apolog. p. 110. 113. He passeth over the reasons manifested in those books as if he had never seen them when as the one was most of it penned by himself And now he pleadeth Wheras they say that circumcision was also a lying signe and false sacrament to Jsrael in their defection how doe they prove it where doth the Scripture teach it will they have us take it on their bare word and beleeve that their saying are Oracles c. Answ. He might have seen reasons in the books before cited besides those that I have set down But thus in seeking to wound us he hath smitten through his own sides as if himselfe when he wrote those things in our Apologie would have had men beleeve his bare word and that his sayings were Oracles Whereas if ever hee wrote soundly in his life he did it in that Apologie as all men of good judgement may perceive Further now to answer him I say that I spake of their lying signes which implyed their Passover and sacrifices as well as their circumcision And those being so profaned as for them they were by Gods Law to bee cut off as murderers Levit. 17. as sacrificers to Divils not to God Deut. 32. 17. 2. Chron. 11. 15. 15. 3. were they then true signes unto them of Gods grace and fauour and forgivenesse of their synns in Christ The Scripture teacheth they could not be partakers of the Lords table and of the table of Divils 1. Cor. 10 21. In particular for their circumcision I proved it thus True circumcision was the seale of the righteousness of saith Rom. 4. 11. Jsrael in their apostasie were fallen from the faith Hos. 11. 12. they were without the true God without Priest to teach without Law 2. Chron. 15. 3. and how then could they have the true circumcision the seale of
should be syn in the church of Rome if they should reject baptisme and not keep it Which doth plainly evince that it is not a vaine idol and nothing for then it were not syn but their dutie to cast it away and not to keep it at all but that it is the Lords ordinance c. Answ. The first is true for without the word and commandment of God it could be no seale of his covenant or have any relation at all therto The second is a deceytful reason concluding from the holy commandment of God to the unholy keeping of it in Rome It should be syn in them to reject baptisme the Lords supper professedly it is syn in them to keep them as they doe profanely It were better for a man never to be baptised or eat the Lords supper all his life then to communicate with the church of Rome in eyther of these as they profane them for we may not doe evil that good may come therof Rom. 3. 8. So his plaine eviction that it is not a vaine idol in their abuse of it is but a plaine fallacie let him apply it to the other Sacrament and it wil appear Antichrist hath transformed the Lords supper into an abominable massing sacrifice and therin worshipeth a wafer cake for his maker and redemer this he durst not deny to be a notorious idol But his reason if it be good wil prove it no idol thus It should be syn in the church of Rome if they should reject the Lords supper and not keep it Which doth plainly evince that the Lords supper in Rome though changed by them into a wicked Mass is not an idol for then it were not syn but their duty to reject it The refutation herof is this Rome and all nations syn that doe not beleeve aright in Christ and keep all his ordinances The more that they openly renounce Christ or any of his ordinances the more they shal adde unto their syn Yet in that they keep them not aright but have changed the truth of God into a lye and his holy ordinances into idols they are also great synners for which if God give them not repentance they are under wrath and damnation 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. Of this point I have spoken before in answer to his 6. reason for the church of Rome His 13. and last errour is but a repetition of former matters about the brazen serpent Gods ordinances and creatures considered in themselves c to which I have before answered shewing that it helpeth the Papists no more to clear them of idolatry herein then the heathens of old who made idols of creatures and ordinances which in their own nature and first institution were good and holy And hitherto of his errours wrongfully imputed unto us To these by his figure of repetition and multiplication he hath added from the former grounds Contradictions Abuse of scriptures Uaine distinctions and Anabaptistical assertions all which being but the same things turned and repeated and by me before cleared I count it needless labour to make the same answers againe to his empty calumniations Of Circumcision in Israel THe reason why we repeat not the outward work of baptising with water againe such as have been baptised in false churches is the example of the Israelites who after their falling from God and from the Church and after the Lord had given them the bill of divorce when they repented and turned to the Lord were admitted to the Passover without any new cutting or circumcising in the flesh 2 Chron. 30. Ezr. 6. And because I denyed them in such estate to have true circumcision which is the signe and seale of the righteousnes of faith Rom. 4. 11. mine opposite as his manner is chargeth me with very erronious and ungodly assertions and maketh a longsome discourse of the state of Israel and of words and phrases used concerning them And unto ten lines of mine in Animadv pag. 70. he giveth an answer of above 30. pages in his Christian plea pag. 65. to pag. 96. to blinde his reader with many words I wil briefly shew the insufficiencie of his answers And first that Israel after they departed from the Lord his Temple altars sacrificers and church and made new Temples altars sacrificers signes and a new church of their own divising that Israel I say from that time was not a true church I have before shewed my reasons in handling the state of the church of Rome Mine opposites first colourable reason is from such scriptures as stil name them the Lords people and the Lord to be their God and to remember the covenant of their fathers Abraham c 2 King 9. 6. c. and 13. 22. 23. Answ. I have heretofore answered that this Argument They are called the Lords people therfore they are his true church is not to be granted For 1. Things are named in scripture sometimes as they have been before though they be not so still as Abigail is called the wife of Nabal though he were then dead and she maried to David 1 Sam. 30. 5. Solomon was begotten of Uriahs wife wheras she was then Davids Mat. 1. 6. Jesus was in the house of Simon the Leper Mat. 26. 6. so named because he had been a Leper c. 2. They were so called in respect of their profession that they would be so estemed and named though in deed they were without the true God 2 Chron. 15. 3. as O thou that art named the house of Jakob c. Mic. 2. 7. 8. Thirdly in respect of their calling unto him and his covenant afterward though for the present they were none of his as Jn that day J wil marie thee Jsrael unto me for ever c. Hos. 2. 18. 19. 20. 23. Thus the Gentiles were called Christs sheep because they should after be brought into his fold Ioh. 10. 16. and God had much people in Corinth an heathenish citie Act. 18. 10. 1 Cor. 12. 2. And the Jewes to this day are Gods people and beloved not for their present state which is cursed but for the promise that they shal hereafter be graffed againe into Christ Rom. 11. 11. 20. 23. 25. 26. 9. 4. with Esa. 59. 20. 21. Ezek. 34. 23. 30. Hos. 3. 5. Fourthly in comparison with the Philistines and other heathens they were called the people of the Lord because they never renounced their God in name and professedly but pretended the contrary Fiftly that God did not presently cast them off in respect of calling them to repentance and of their dwelling in the land or as the scripture sayth in 2 King 14. 27. of putting out the name of Israel from under heaven For his covenant was to punish them by degrees Levit. 26. 16. 18. 21. 24. 28. 33. and at last if they repented not to scatter them among the heathens til their uncircumcised harts should be humbled and they rued their former syn and then
he would 〈…〉 his first covenant and so receive them againe to grace in Christ. Vnto which I now add this sixt that God called himself the God of Jsrael and them his people because of many among them that were in deed his both such as yeilded not to Ieroboams idolatrie but went to Ierusalem to sacrifice 2 Chron. 11. 16. and seven thousand in Jsrael which bowed not the knee to Baal 1 King 19. 18. and such also as erring at first in simplicitie were by the Prophets brought to repentance though the general state of the land never repented but went on in their syn til the Lord cast them out of his sight as is testified in 2 King 17. His next chief ground is the comparison of Iudah who likeweise for sook the Lord and sometime became more corrupt then Israel so that if Israel were not in trueth Gods people and church then Iudah was not Answ. I have shewed how Israel might be called Gods people still and why I judge them not to be Gods true Church For Iudah they changed not the constitution wherin they were set of God made no new face of a Church no new Temples preists c as did Israel Therfore they did wickedly in the true Church as often times greater impietie is committed in the Church then among the heathens yet the state of the church of the heathens may not be compared though the punishmēt of such as transgress in the Church and repent not shal be worse then the heathens Mat. 11. 20. 24. Secondly the defection of Iudah was not generall like Israels though sometime the scriptures speak generally when many are corrupted but even then when for their synns they were caried into Babylon there was a godly company compared to a basket of good figgs Ier. 24. 2. 5. 6. 7. which had cried out for all the abominations were marked and reserved of God Ezek. 9. 4. c Thirdly the state of Iudah was often times reformed by many good Kings as Iosiah Ezekiah Iehosaphat and others the people brought to repentance and the covenant renewed but never so in Israel by any king that there reigned from their first apostasie to the captivitie 2 King 17. Fourthly for the wicked troupes in Iudah that refused admonition persecuted their brethren killed the Prophets mainteyned idolatrie for which the godly left their synfull communion I hold them not Gods true Church or in his covenant of grace Because the covenant was alwayes conditional if men repent and beleeve as I have before proved and mine opposite himself hath granted This may suffice to his often repeated reasons which are deduced and varied from the groundes aforesayd Touching 2 Chron. 15. 3. IShewed from the Prophet Azariahs speech to Asa and all Iudah that Israel was without the true God without teaching Priest and without Law 2 Chron. 15. 1. 2. 3. and therfore could not in that estate be judged to be in the covenant of grace Mine opposite laboureth to bring Iudah it self also within this estate but that hath no colour with it The distinction of names Iudah and Israel the state of Iudah under Solomon Roboam Abijah and Asa though corruptions were come in plainly sheweth it otherweise and I leave it to the readers judgment 2. he granteth it may well be understood of the 10. tribes and sheweth good reasons for it how then doth he take away the weight of the reason that Israel being without the true God without a teaching Priest Gods true ministerie and without Law could not in that estate be Gods true church in his covenant of grace or have the true seales therof unto them He fayrly denyeth the conclusion Jt wil not prove sayth he that circumcision or the other ordinances of God had in Jsrael or in Judah were false and deceytfull signes c. Jf it would then it might be urged against Iudah also and where then was circumcision c. I answer If there were no circumcision but among them that were without the true God without his ministerie and without his Law then was there no true circumcision in the world For if we consider the first institution of circumcision Gen. 17. and the Apostles doctrine of it in Rom. 2. 25. 28. 29. 4. 11. and the doctrine of Christian baptisme now answerable to circumcision of old it is impossible that that people should have the true seale of righteousnes and salvation from God in Christ that are without God and without Christ. No colourable excuses or distinctions wil here availe◠except men can prove an absolute promise of salvation whether men repent beleeve or no whether they be in God and Christ or no Which is contrary to all the scriptures Wherfore this one testimonie is ynough to overthrow all his long plea for Israel as if they in this synfull stare unrepentant continued stil actually in the covenant of grace and state of salvation And what colour maketh he against this plaine scripture He first speaketh of forsaking God what it meaneth and how it is spoken of the Iewes in the Prophets namely of forsaking his Law Temple Worship and service and not simply of so dealing with the Lord himself as the bare words and letter it self might seem to imply For even in the defection of Israel when Ieroboam set up the calves yet stil they intended to worship the Lord that brought them out of the land of Egypt c. 1 King 12. 28. Answ. First observe how here he would not have the bare words and letter of the scripture to be insisted upon yet is it his continuall practise and onely colourable reasons For the Temple of God 2. Thes. 2. and the people of God are his mayn grounds for the church of Rome and of apostate Israel 2. He omitteth the words which I cited that Israel was without the true God c and speaketh of an other phrase of their forsaking the Lord to ease his burden which he found too heavy 3. It is granted him that by forsaking the Lord is meant the forsaking of his Law Temple Worship and service and not that they did professedly renounce God but stil pretended and intended to serve the true God what would he inferr hereupon This maketh the more against his plea for them The scripture sayth they were without the true God without teaching Priest without Law this was true eyther in their own account or in Gods not in their own account for they thought they stil reteyned the true God even as the heathens of old hereticks Antichristians and Iewes at this day perswade themselves that they serve the true God therfore they were such in Gods account Now Gods judgment is alwayes according to trueth when mans judgment erreth and deceiveth himself Thus then though Israel thought themselves the true church and to have the true God as mine opposite also thinketh and pleadeth for them yet in the Lords account which is trueth they were without the true God
barren desolate woman had for her widowhood the contrary comforts that she should receive from her maker her husband the Lord of hosts Here are two women intimated one that hath an husband and children an other barren desolate and in widowhood whose estates God would change as Anna prophesied The barren hath borne seven and she that had many children is wexed feebl◠1 Sam. 2. 5. This barren woman Paul interpreteth to be Jerusalem which is above the mother of all us Christians For it is written sayth he Rejoyce thou barren c. Gal. 4. 26. 27. the fruitful woman was the earthly Jerusalem the church under the Law answerable to Agar the bondwoman in bondage with her children vers 25. For the Iewes church was in their legal policie under the Law as an husband til being made dead to the Law by the body of Christ they were maried to an other that they might bring forth fruit unto God as the same Apostle teacheth Rom. 7. 1. 4. Now this heavenly Ierusalem consisteth as well of Gentiles as of Iewes and this woman bringeth forth children conceived by the immortal seed of the word the gospel wheras before the church under the Law brought forth many Ismaels children of Agar servants not free borne to be cast out with their mother Gal. 4. 30. Whether now is it safer to take this mans exposition of the earthly Ierusalem the mother of the Iewes or to folow the Apostle expounding it of the high Ierusalem the mother of us all But it would require a volume to goe through his many allegations out of the Prophets where he worketh upon advantage of words and phrases neglecting yea contrarying the mayn doctrines of the gospel whiles he pleadeth for open obstinate and unrepentant idolaters yea and such as were divorced from the Lord that they continued notwithstanding in the covenant of grace in that estate Touching Hos. 2. 2. WHeras the Lord testifieth of Israel that she was not his wife nor he her husband and willeth her therfore to put away her whordomes left he stript her naked c. Hos. 2. 2. 3. Mine opposite laboureth by comparing the prophesies before in ch 1. and after in ch 3. c to prove that this was not meant til Israel was put out of the land And yet that putting out of the land he maketh to be the stripping of her naked which was an effect and reward of her former estate And mixing the several prophesies togither wheras in the 23. verse of the 2. chapter the Lord speaketh of the dayes under the Gospel he giveth this conclusiō Thus now she is a wife and not a wife she is a wife but a wife of whordoms Hos. 1. 2. she is not a wife that doth demeane her self loyally as she should but hath her adulteries between her brests Hos. 2. 2. And after a longer discourse he inferreth But what is this to the point of the question in hand which is not touching the condition afterward but concerning their circumcision and estate from the time of Ieroboams apostasie whiles they were yet in the land c. Answ. He keepeth his wont to pretend the question otherweise then it is The point was indefinite about the circumcision of Israel in their Apostasie These were his own words The baptisme of the church of Rome is true baptisme as the circumcision in Israels apostasie was true circumcision and not to be repeated againe And if it be not a true baptisme it is a false baptisme c. He referred us not by any scripture to their apostasie before or after they were put out of the land I answered him in a few lines and shewed him from 2 Chron. 30. Ezr. 6. 21. that there was no repeating of circumcision therfore not of baptisme Those two scriptures he himself also now urgeth against the Anabaptists the latter wherof speaketh of a time long after their captivitie Then I briefly referred him to 2 Chron. 15. 3. Ier. 3. 8. Hos. 2. 2. 13. 1. to shew their synfull estate to be such as that the ordinances of God which they in shew reteyned could not be unto them the signes and seales of forgivenes and of life eternal and therfore wire in their use of them false and deceytfull Thus neyther he nor I put any difference of their estate though now he pleads it for advantage But it is sufficient for to end our controversie if the things I speak of be after their captivity for then returning with repentance they were not recircumcised so we if we be baptised in false churches need not be rebaptised So he hath written many leaves to plead for the whore Israel but where shall we find this soundly concluded which I denyed that when they were not the Lords wife nor he their husband then in that estate were it before or after their captivitie let him take his choise their circumcision sealed unto them forgivenes of synns and life eternal This not being proved he hath led his reader into a wood where it would weary any man to folow him in his windings and yet in the end he shall not find that which his soule thirsteth after touching their circūcision when they were no longer the Lorde wife Now to his distinction she is a wife and she is not a wife take it at the best she is a wife of whordoms a wife threatned to be stripped naked c. Where is the promise of forgivenes of her synns unless she repented And where is the testimony of her repentance No where til Christ made the remnants of their posterity his wife and his people after they had been no people 1 Pet. 2. 9. 10. but whiles they were in the land they grew more hard unbeleeving and unrepentant 2 King 17. 13. 14. 15. c. But when she had the bil of divorce Ier. 3. and was indeed not his wife nor he her husband but he had stript her naked and sent her among the heathens her companiōs where now was the seale of the forgivenes of her synns she abiding unrepentant This is the thing that should be shewed which is not to be seen in all his large discourse And what help findeth he at the hands of the Chaldee paraphrase which he citeth thus Rebuke the congregation of Israel and say unto her that she submitteth not her self to my worship therfore neyther doth my Word accept of her prayers until she shall remove her evil works c. Wil this prove true circumcision among them First it appeareth that the Paraphrast understood this of them whiles they were in the land otherweise then he which referreth it to their after state Secondly in that synfull estate whiles they worshiped or served not the Lord but Idols as after the Chaldee speaketh the Word of God that is Christ as himself expoundeth it accepted not their prayers And could they then offer any true sacrifice or administer true sacrament when
Elias prayer against Israel and Gods answer J have reserved to my self 7000. men who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal Even so then sayth he at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace c. By this we are taught 1. That if a few or any one of a people be reserved of God though the multitude be cast away yet it cannot be sayd absolutely that God hath cast away his people And this may lead us to understand why God called Israel his people in their apostasie because some he kept from falling into it some he brought out of it by repentance 2. That those are in deed Gods people whom he foreknew the rest are cast off Now those which are foreknowen of God are described thus that he also did predestinate them to be conformed to the image of his sont them he also called them he also justified them he also glorified Rom. 8. 2◠〈◊〉 Thus are we led to judge who are Gods people when we see their calling justifying and gloryfying that is their sanctification â— Cor. 3â— â—8 by which iâ— charitie we are to judge of their predestination and estate in grace 3. That as the remnant of the Iewes which imbraced the gospel were the election of grace that is the people whom in charitie we should judge to be elected of God according to his grace and the others are blinded hardned cast off til God give them repentance so in Israel they that kept themselves from the coÌ„mon idolatrie of Baal inwardly and outwardly and reteyned the true service of God were his election of grace and to be judged his true people the others that synned in Baal were dead til God gave them repentance unto life Thus the Apostles exposition and application of those 7000. in Israel may help us to judge of their estate aright And not because circumcision was unto them the seale of grace and of forgivenes of synns to conclude that therfore it was likeweise to them that served Baal for so we should prostitute Gods grace and the seals therof to such as God condemneth and rejecteth Fiftly he instanceth the worship of Baal by Iudah Ier. 7. Judg. 2. c. Wherto I answer as before that Iudah in her constitution remayned a true church though corrupted Israel being a false church as hath been manifested Neyther was the defection universall and open as in Israel As for such in Iudah as so fell from God and would not be brought to repentance the Prophet telleth them they trusted in lying words when they sayd The Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord c. Ier. 7. 4. 8. the Lord threatneth to cast them out of his sight and forbad his Prophet to pray for them Jer. 7. 15. 16. So their circumcision became unto them uncircumcision Rom. 2. 25. To this he objecteth Though mans idolatrie c may make Gods sacraments improfitable to himself yet can they not make them lying and deceitfull signes but that in the Lords ordinance they are unto all and therfore also unto them his true signes and faithfull seals on his part of forgivenes of synns and life eternal For shall the infidelitie of man turne the truth of God into a lye God forbid Answ. I have before answered that all Gods ordinances are in them selves and on his part holy faithfull and true They are true seals of forgivenes of synns but to such as are worthy partakers of them in faith otherweise they seale judgment unto men 1 Cor. 11. 27. 28 29. And it is not his ordinance that open and obstinate idolaters and wicked men should administer or receive them Ezek. 44. 9. Numb 15. 30. 31. Levit. 7. 20. Psalm 〈◊〉 1â— 17. That men may turne the truth of God into a lye the Apostle plainly teacheth Rom. 1. 25. so may they the truth of his ordinances into lyes But the truth of God as it is in himself or his faithfulnes is unchangeable if men beleeve not or sanctifie him not they perish by the judgment of God which is according to trueth and his faithfulnes suffreth him not to save such unless he make them first new creatures and beleevers Joh. 3. 36. 1. Joh. 5. 10. 12. Sixtly he expoundeth Israels death in Hos. 13. 1. to be by the exposition of sundry writers not death in syn but slayn for their synns or their estate overthrowen or neer utter destruction c. Answ. Both may be true that first they were dead in syn and after destroyed civilly for their syn Gods judgmeÌ„ts are according to mens deserts he destroyed not the Amorites Egyptians and other nations til their iniquitie was full Gen. 15. 16. Wherfore to condemne the exposition which I gave because an other consequent folowed upon it as the ruine of Achabs house or the like is no fitme argument And to his many expositors whom he citeth I oppose one greater then all even th'Apostle in Rom. 11. before spoken of who sheweth the election of grace to be in the 7000 that worshiped not Baal and not in the multitude of the Baalists And if they were not of the election of grace then were they dead in syn though he and many say the contrary Finally he alleageth the sayings of the Prophet before and after The Lord found Iakob in Bethel and there he spake with us c Therfore turne thou to thy God c. Hos. 12. 4. 5. 6. 9. And yet am J the Lord thy God from the land of Egypt and thou shalt know no God but me I did know thee in the wildernes c. Hose 13. 4. 5. Answ. I have before shewed that the prophets speak to Israel as a corporation or body which after a sort continueth one and the same through many generations when yet as touching their particular persons or generations they are different contrary as godly fathers in the state of grace and life may beget wicked children without grace and in state of death Ezek. 18. 9. 10. 13. 14. 17. 18. c. So the King of Tyre had been in Eden the garden of God a proselyte in the Church Ezek. 28. 13. not that heathen king then living but his predecessor Huram long before 1. King 5. So Paul speaketh of the Iewes cast away of God as the same people till their last calling Rom. 11. And I doubt not but a man preaching to convert them at this day might apply unto them the like sayings I am the Lord thy God from the land of Egypt thou shalt know no God but me J led thee in the wildernes c. But alwayes in such general phrases the promises of grace belong onely to such as beleeve and turne to the Lord the others that remaine hardned shall perish And hitherto of his exceptions against the scriptures which I cited although as I shewed if they had continued Gods true church in the land yet wheÌ„ they were for obstinacie in their synns cast