in Mr. Baxters own words then which I think there need no other if they be well weighed to convince a wise man that by Scripture rule no infants in infancy are to be baptized To which purpose he writteth thus p. 126.127 at large viz. First in the commission Mat. 28.19.20 Christ adjoineth baptizing immediately to discipling go disciple all nations baptizing them Secondly if any person be so impudent as to say It is not the meaning of Christ that baptizing should immediately without delay follow discipling they are confuted by the constant example of Scripture for there is no mention that I can find of any one person that was baptized long after their discipling or that ever the Apostles of Christ did delay the baptizing of disciples John 4.1.2 Iesus made and baptized more disciples then John See how making and baptizing disciples are conjoined Act. 2.38.41 the 3000 were presently baptized the same day that they were made disciples without staying till the morrow though one would think the number of 3000 might have excused the delay if they had taken longer time to do it in And some would think that their conversion being so sudden the Apostles would have waited for a trial of their sincerity but this is not the wisdome of God though it seem to aim at the purity of the Church Scripture tells us of another way Acts 8.1.2 the people of Samiaria when they believed were baptized without delay And v. 13.14 Simon Magus was presently baptized though yet not brought out of the gall of bitternesse or bond of iniquity and had no part or fellowship in that business yea the Samaritans were generally baptized by Philip before they had received the holy Ghost for he was yet fallen upon none of them onely they were baptized in the name of the Lord Iesus verse 16. So Acts 8.36.37.38 the Eunuch was baptized in his journey as they went without delaying one day or hour after he professed himself to be a disciple So was Paul baptized as soon as he rose from his blindnesse upon the words of Ananias Acts 9.18 So was Cornelius with his friends baptized immediately without delay the same day Lydia and her houshold were baptized without delay Acts 16.15 and the Iaylor the same hour of the night that he was discipled Acts 16.38 So the Corinthians Acts 18.8 and Ananias language to Paul repeated Acts 22.16 is plain and now why tarriest thou arise and be baptized c. and of the houshold of Stephanus that Paul baptized it is implied too and it is most observable which is said in Iohn 3.26 of Iesus himself that he baptized by his disciples and all men came unto him where it is undeniable that Iesus baptized without delay even as fast as they came to him and professed themselves disciples and can we have a better example then the Lord Iesus himself And thus you see saith he that according to all the examples of baptism in the Scripture not to speak of Johns baptism there was no delaying no not a day usually but they were all baptized as soon as they were discipled Thus far are the very words of Mr. Baxter brought by him in proof of infant baptisme and here brought again by me in proof of the clear contrary viz. that according to all the examples of baptism in the Scripture not one infant was ever baptized in the primitive times but that all that ever were then baptized did first believe and were converted were first made disciples by the preaching of the Gospel to them and did first come and professe themselves disciples and thereupon were immediately admitted which things I dare say t will be out of doubt with all rational considerate impartial Christians that they were never performed by any infants and if not then whether all these examples do not clearly shew rather that no infants were then baptized then that any were or now ought to be a child of 7. years old at least may easily decide it notwithstanding so childish is Mr. Baxter as to set down this at large that he may thence make himself a clearer way as by the constant example and practise of the primitive time to prove your present practise of baptizing of infants which premises and conclusion viz. that men and women of old were baptized without delay so soon as ever they were converted to the faith and were discipled and professed themselves disciples therefore we must baptize the children of Christians in infancy or else our practise is utterly inconsistent with the rule of Christ and contrary to the practise of the primitive times and consequently a sinful practise are as sutable as Humano capiti cervicem pictor equinam Iungere Si velit or as when Mulier formosa superne desinat in turpem piscem And howbeit Mr. Baxter in defence hereof tells us p. 128. they who baptize the children of Christians at age as the Anabaptists do cannot possibly do it when they are first discipled I am so amazed at that expression that I can hardly believe he minded what he said when he pend it nor do I think the man had his wits well about him when he wrote all the rest that follows in proof therof through out that whole chapter of his where the further he proceeds the more he abounds and sinks ore head and ears in absurdities contradicting himself and his own principles and overthrowing the very thing he there prosecutes the proof of for First so farre is it from being impossible to baptize believers children immediately after they are discipled if we forbear them till they come to years that indeed it is impossible that they should be discipled at all till then in such a way as all those were discipled in whom he hath produced as examples in this case for whatever conversion there seems to him to be of all or at least the most of the children of believers so timely that neither themselves nor others be can discipled when by the preaching of the Gospel they are brought over both to believe and to be willing to obey the Lord Jesus and do freely serâ—ously and as may seem to us sincerely professe their faith in him and their readiness to obey him and their repentance from those dead works and waies of the flesh they have formerly lived in unless he suppose it possible that these should live in sin and their desires to be baptized in the name of Christ for remission of their sins then I say they appear first to be discipled in foro hominum Ecclesiae for whatever they were before in foro Dei is nothing to us and then and not before to be baptized As for us therefore we have a steady rule to go by in the baptizing of persons according to which we still baptize them as of old they did when first discipled yea though they are persons whose parents were Church-members or in other meer relative only or reall discipleship yet they are first
in after ages too were the Apostles themselves viz. Father Peter Father Paul Father Barnabas Father Iames Father Iohn and the rest whose authority from Christ was great indeed and adequate with the Scriptures then written and the foundation for all the Churches to build on and such was not the authority of the Churches then much less since which are to be subjected to their word in Scripture this Church and these fathers never knew such a baptism as yours nor is there the least tittle of talk concerning any such matter to be found among them Or if by the Church and Fathers of it whose authority and practise you build on you mean those of the ages next to the Apostles Then first I marvel why you should put your selves upon the triall by succeeding ages and decline the first and purest age of the Gospel of all specially since there 's as clear history and more infallible testimony given in the word of what was done by the Church and the first fathers the Apostles then ever was in any age inferiour to it whatsoever and more specially yet since its being in after ages is no palpable argument of its being in the first age for the mystery of iniquity was at work from the very Apostles t is now Ergo it was then is not so good a wherefore to our why as we look for besides t is ingenuously confest by your own writers viz. Mr. Blake in answer to Mr. Blackwood p. 58. that faith can hang on the humane testimony of the succeeding fathers in whose daies infant baptism was no further then de facto viz. that it was onely and not de jure that it ought to be and Mr. Marshal p. 5. of his sermon that the practise of the thing in their dayes proves not the truth of it at all Secondly neither doth the second Century help you so much as to a proof de facto For First as much as you would seem to be verst among the fathers in which many Priests are better read then in the Scriptures and some to seem to be better read there then they are will quote the fathers when they have not read them but by snaches and pickt a few fine phrases out of them to make their sermons the more sententious yea and sometimes for those very sentences for which they might more truly quote the Apostles that primitively pend them witnesse one of your tribe whom I heard with my own ears say of Heb. 2.16 he took not on him the nature of Angels thus viz. for as Saint Barnard saith when as he might as well have said as the spirit or as the Scripture saith He took not on him c. if yet he knew that t was in the Scripture as much I say as you are versed in the fathers you are desired by Mr. Blackwood a man better read in those fathers then either you or I yea you and Mr. Marshall also who quotes Iustin Martyr are desired by him in his storming of Antichrist p. 25.26.27 to prove if you can out of any place of Iustins genuine works who is the antientest father extant next the Apostles whose works are accounted on that there is so much as the name of infant baptism much more the thing yea he tells you ye may as soon find a Dolphin in the woods as any such thing save onely that t is once mentioned in a spurious book falsely called his out of which book Mr. Marshalls quotation is neither doth Mr. Blake gainsay this nor yet Mr. Marshall in their replies nay they rather seem to grant that it s to be doubted it was so which makes me as well as Mr. Blackwood not a little wonder that Mr. Marshall should quote it with so much confidence I mean so as to assert it thereupon as a matter manifest that the Church counting from the time of Iustin Martyr viz. 150 hath bin possest of the priviledg of infant baptism for the space of 1500 years and upwards for had he not doubted but that the words he cites were without question the words of Iustin himself he had not had sin but now he hath no cloak sith he demonstrates to all men Dubitatum per magis dubium and tells the world to make them believe that Iustin disputes the condition of children that dye baptized and unbaptized when yet it s not believed but much doubted by himself whether Iustin did any such thing yea or no as to the words Mr. Marshal p. 4. of his sermon cites out of Irenaeus who lived toward the end of the second Century which Englisht are thus viz. Christ came by himself to save all all I say who are born again unto God infants and little ones c. it s not likely that in this sentence that father by the word born again meant baptism as Mr. Blake and Mr. Marshal contend for by that sence they father such absurdity upon that their father as children that pretend to honour their father may be ashamed of whilst they make him say Christ came to save all infants that are baptized when as neither all infants that are baptized are actually saved quâ baptized nor are any unbaptized infants damned quâ not baptized but both alike saved as both alike they either dye before they have bard themselves by actual sin and derserved exemption or living to years believe and obey Christ and both alike damned as living to years they both alike obey not his Gospel but however let Mr. Blake and Mr. Marshal squeeze what they can from the quotation it must yet remain as doubtful whether the speech of Irenaeus if it were his own were at all of infants baptism as it doth whether the speech fathered on Iustin though it be of infants baptism were at all his own and so what dubious evidence the second century affords so much as de facto that infant baptism was then in being all men may see whilst you can say no more then perhaps it was so and a fool may say as much as perhaps it was not which is a proportionable answer to that argument for t is commonly said in the Schooles saies Mr. Marshal that forte ita solvitur per forte non Secondly but what if your testimony de facto concerning the practise of infant baptism in the second century were as clear as t is cloudy yet what green headed antiquity is this in comparison of that we plead from viz. the Apostles themselves when you are stormed out of all your strong holds then you send us still to ages above us and cry out your practise is of 1500 years standing but sith you cannot say as we can of ours t is above 1600 years old nor is yours now likely to live to it as good you had said but 15 for our way onely being found in the first century and yours not at all before the second we are a people so much elder then you upstarts that your antiquity is but novelty with us
the shadowes flie away and Christ comes as a swift Roe and young heart upon the mountains of Bether so that now we are to exercise our selves rather unto Godlinesse for all bodily exercises as baptism breaking bread and Church order c. profit little besides t was said there should be a falling away from all those forms of worship and the way of ordinances which was in the primitive times 2 Thess. 2.3 and a treading down of the holy City and Temple Rev. 11.1.2 as to the form it then stood in both which have fell out also accordingly so that there hath been a taking of all that dispensation of ordinances in their primitive purity totally out of the way therefore now we are to meddle no more with them at all at least unless we had some extraordinary Prophets as the Iews had after the treading down of their temple and and worship to satisfie and shew us that its the mind of the Lord we should set up that old fabrick and form again Baptist. This is the old tune which you and your followers have been used to sing in any time this seven year which yet I could never learn to this day distinctly to sing in after you and I am perswaded never shall unlesse I could hear more clearnesse and distinction in the sound then yet I do to whom while I sound how sutable your sense is to the sense of Scripture you are Barbarians when you speak thus That Christ now comes in the light and power of his spirit as a swift Roe and hart upon these mountains of division that now are between the PPPriests among themselves and between others and them and that abundance of light comes dispelling that fog and smoak of mens traditions which hath risen out of the bottomlesse pit and of a long time darkned the Sun and the air and the hearts of people all this I grant but that this coming of his doth put an end a ne plus ultra to any one of his own traditions or ordinances that were instituted by him and in his name delivered to the Churches in the primitive times as a part of his will and testament then this is as hard a lesson for me to learn as t is for some to learn that t is their duty to be baptized for assuredly nothing but Christs own personal coming shall put a period to any one tittle of his Gospel will and Testament or of that outward dispensation which by appointment from himself was then in force and therefore to neither baptism imposition of hands or Churchfellowship in breaking bread every of which most undoubtedly was a part of the preceptory part of Christs Gospel in those daies and of that new Testament ratified in his blood 1 Cor. 11.25 which gospel testament and holy will of his that he as a great Prophet left in charge for all men to observe when he went away Mat. 28.20 Mark 13.34 Luke 19.17 to the 28. and not any new one delivered since is the very same according to which he will judge all men at his return any part of which therefore in either promise or precept suppose but the ordinances of it for I am sure it was a testament and Gospel that had ordinances then wo be to that man or angel that shall once dare to declare as null yea let no man flatter himself and delude others with pretences of an Angelical Seraphical life to be led now in an higher kind of way then the Saints and Churches did in the primitive ages of the Gospel for I tell that man that if he were not only appearing to himself to be wrapt up above Paul but really an angel from heaven and not Christ himself who when he comes personally shall say indeed unto his servants come up higher he must be Aaathema preaching and holding forth other then what the Apostles at first delivered to the Churches of Galatia who received the Gospel with the outward ordinances and Church order thereof Gal. 1.6.7.8.9.11.12 compared with 1 Cor. 11.23.24 c. in which Scriptures its evident that the whole intire Gospel which was preached then by Paul who received it together with the ordinances of baptism Gal. 3.27 and the supper not of man but of the Lord was strictly required to be kept without hearkning to any other things then what were then delivered and received in the Churches though spoke by an angel from heaven or their very selves who at first preached them who if ever any such thing should have fallen out as their falling off from that truth and contradicting themselves for so doing must have been held accursed yea if Paul himself should have come some 100â— of years after to the Churches of Galatia and gainsaid what he had said before saying you received the Gospel from me at first with ordinances but now you may let the ordinances of it alone it s enough for you to believe onely and live up to God in the spirit he had condemned himself to cursing out of his own mouth if then the Apostles that at first gave out the Gospel to the world were not on pain of being accursed to preach any other then what at first they preached what cursing attends thee O wretched Ranter that deifiest thy self and takest upon thee not onely to deny but to defie the Gospel of Christ in the ordinances of it and the holy oracles of the living God Thou tellest us of a coming of Christ by his spirit into the hearts of men after which there need be no more use of ordinances that when Paul saies men must continue breaking bread till he come he means till he comes in spirit but I tell thee if the right eye of reason were not utterly darkned in thee thou couldâ— not but understand that till he come 1 Cor. 11. speaks of the same time as Christ himself speaks of when he saies to his Church in Thyatira Rev. 2.25.26 which were then in a Church posture and under the use of ordinances that which ye havâ— already hold faâ—t till I come and that that time was no other then the end of this world which he shall put a period to by his personal coming is cleared by the verse following he that over cometh and keepeth my works unto the end to him will I give power over the nations where by the end as he means the same period he pointed at before in that phrase till I come so he means the time of Christs second coming to judgement to raign at the end of this world mentioned Mat. 24.3 and in scores of Places more and not the time of his coming by his spirit unto men for so he was come and hath come more or lesse well nigh as soon as and even ever since he went away yea according to his promise he soon sent his spirit to abide with his people in their observation of his commandements and not otherwise as a comforter in the absence of his person Iohn
three fat parsonages or special benefices together t is a shame that for all the night is so far spent here in England yet even here there is such endevouring for preferments still such heaping up of more spiritual dignities and Ecclesiastical emoluments then one and pluralities of profitable places ingrost by single persons and such as would be singularly accounted of too but never will be by wise men had in so little as single shame whilst they harp so much after such double honour the Pope and Arch-bishops in the Popish times were till of late they grew more corrupt complainers and correcters of this greedy practise Alexander the third and 301 Bishops in a Lateran councel saies Mr. Den in a Sermon of his concerning Iohn the Bap. p. 64. concluded no Priests should have 2 benefices 1179. 1231. Richard the costly Archbishop of Canterbury complained to the Pope that Priests in England held more livings then one and though it hath been thought that many livings are a good step to a Bishoprick yet I have read of one John Bland saith he elected Archbishop of Canterbury but refused by the Pope chiefly for holding two livings without dispensation 1233. and John Pecham Archbishop of Canterbury made a Canon that no Clergy man within his province should hold two livings 1304 what a stinking shame is it therefore that to this day there is such inhauncing ingrossing for my part I am well assuted that though it be not yet yet long it will not be before stick and stone of the whole fabrick of the tripple BBBabel or National Ministry will fall and all their severall sorts of forced maintenances fall with them throughout Europe but first here in England for the tenth part of the City i. e. the Clergy here falls first yea as there have two woes to the Clergy fell on them here already which have cast out the two corrupter sorts of these spiritual men and all their spiritual maintenance and revenues the first whereof fell upon the flat Popish false Ministry viz. Cardinals Votaries Friers Abbots Nuns and Abbeyes and with them all their maintenance and the foolish forms of their false ministrations viz. their golden legend and book of false miracles bulls indulgences Masses dirges â—igintals and other trumpery the second upon the second part of the great City or Clergy viz the Archbishops Bishops Chancellers Comissaries Dears Deans and Chapters Archdeacons and their Officials and with them fell all their land means and maintenance together with all their false manner of ministration viz. the Common-prayer liturgy book of ordination of Priests and Deacons Homilies and all the Crutches of that lame and lazy Clergy so the third is now nigh to come upon the Presbyterian Clergy whether they see it or no for the face of the skies and Scriptures do both look and lour alike upon them with whom will fall that their still pleaded for maintenance by Tithes Gleabs Parsonages Vicarages and all their Ecclesiastical Profits and emoluments whatsoever together with all their Church constitutions Synodical directories and formes of worship and government Classes creeds Catechisms parochial posture yea their Euphrates too is dayly drying up in the hot sunshine of the Gospel though they for the most part scorched with great heat rather blaspheme the name of God that hath power of these plagues then repent to give him glory Rev. 16.9 I say most certainly all these false national parochial constitutions of Church and Ministry Babi-baptism and maintenance must down in due time but in the mean time though I wish its fall yet I heartily wish that you Clergy were so charitable as to share the maintenance that 's yet alloted you as the National Ministry a little more evenly among your selves and not be so basely covetous as to sherk one another without reproof and to suffer some to have two or three livings or if but one yet that worth two happily three perhaps four five six or 700 per annum as some livings are and some as honest and painful and worthy in their way and godly in suo genere as the other to be pincht within the income of as few scores as the rest have 100ds by the year some having but seven some six others but five others four three two and some scarce a score of pounds to bring the year about with and yet have not a farthing worth of help from the high flown favorites of their times Dr. Featley had two livings while he was alive as it seems by himself in his Epistle to Mr. Downham to whom he complaines that both his pulpits were taken from him but though Episcopal Parasites did hold no more then they could get yet we being six or seven years past the darknesse of those times me thinks now the Clergy should cry out upon each other when they see any clambering beyond a competency and consider the incompetency of their fellows voluntarily whether the Parliament augment one out of another yea or no but no bubble stands higher then the rest of the water it rides on for a while but t will break within a while and be level'd to the residue of its element in the mean time they have enough among them if they can be contented to enjoy it in equal portions and not fall out about the shifting it so much is yet left though so much already is confiscated that moderate minded men that mean not to erre from the faith by the love of money more then of Christ need not set up their Notes to the State to administer more I le tell thee what thou hast had and yet hast oh HHHireling SSShepheard within this Island of Brittain nay in England which is but the one half the whole of which is but a poor patch of about a tenth part of the rest of Christndome and this out of thy own mouth I mean a man of thy own fraternity see Helin Geog. p. 464.465 an Episcopal Clergy man vaunting of the greatnesse of thy maintetenance which mouth of thine is still opening in some or other of the younger brothers of the present Presbytery to this day to call out for more The Clergy saith he meaning of England onely was once of infinite riches as appeareth by the Bill preferred to King Henry the fiâ—t against the Temporall revenues of the Church which were able to maintain 15. Earles 1500 Knights 6000 men of Arms more then a 1000 Almes-houses and the King also might clearly put up 20000 pounds as they now are not so rich so are they far more learned and of more sincere and Godly carriage wherein they give place to no Clergy in the world and for learning I dare say cannot be any where paralleld neither are they so destitute of the externall gifts of fortune but that they are the the richest of any Ministers of the reformed Churches For besides 5439 Parochial benefices being no impropriations and besides the Vicarages most of which exceed the competency beyond Seas here
universals or to these individuals from indefinite declarations and verily take your Minor term little children which you so frequently Syllogize by indiscrimination not expressing what little children or else indefinitely and more restrictively for some only not naming which it s equally ridiculous to argue thus viz. The Scripture gives good report of little infants in general Therefore believers infants only have faith and the holy spirit and thereby right to baptism and not any other infants Or thus The Scripture speaks well of little infants indefinitely i. e. of some at least though not all and we know not which as having faith the spirit and right to baptism Therefore undoubtedly these little infants whom we baptize are well spoken of in that kind and must be baptized As t is to argue thus The Scripture declares that John Baptist had the holy spirit Eego all the infants of believing parents must be supposed to have it in infancy and may thereupon be baptized Yet these are but as it were the several streins which you dispute in which put all together into a bag and shuffle as much as you will that which comes out first wil be a sensless non sequitur do what you can But you offer concerning this that particular infant viz. a believers of whom I denied that if it were brought unto you together with a heathens the spirit could more appear to you to be in it than in the other you offer I say to make it appear that that infant should appear to have the holy spirit above the other for that was indeed the business I then put you to prove and this you do as well as those may be said to do who by mending make their mater worse than t was before whisest there is not a tittle to be found in your Argument which doth not as fully prove the holy spirit to be in all infants as in any at all on this wise it runs Disputation Da That which to doubt of is breach of Christian charity doth sufficiently appear ri But to doubt these little children have the holy Ghost is a breach of Christian charity i Ergo that these little children have the Holy Ghost doth sufficiently appear The Minor is proved thus To doubt that these little children are such as the Scripture in generall hath declared them to be and that they have right to the kingdome of heaven c. is a breach of Christian charity whose rule is Praesumere unumquenque bonum nisi constet de malo the Apostle saying 1 Cor. 13.3.5 it thinketh no evil charity believeth all things especially since it cannot appear that those have by any actuall sin bard themselves or deserved to be exempted from the general state of litle infants declared in Scripturâ—s Ergo To doubt that they have the Holy Ghost is a breach of Christian charity Disproof Besides the falsity of both the premises there 's no more at all concluded from them concerning any one infant then might if they were true indeed be as truly concluded from them concerning all First O the rottenness and infirmitie of the Major it is most manifestly fals for there are many things which to doubâ— of may be a breach of Christian charity which yet do not at present sufficiently appear To doubt that this or that particular infant will hereafter live holily and imbrace the Gospel may be a breach of Christian Charity whose rule is ever to hope the best till it sees the contrary and yet that this or that particular infant will live holily and imbrace the Gospel when he comes to age doth not yet so sufficiently appear but that as more plainly as things appear with you in infancie then at age by particular profession it may more sufficiently appear when they are grown up yea till then it appeareth not at all The Minor also is false for to doubt that this or that infant hath at present the holy spirit is no breach of Christian charity at all sith what hopes soever we may have of them as to the future yet at present there is no evidence that they have it nor yet any promise at all that it shall be given to them in infancy nor at years neither till they believe and obey the Gospel and as there is no promise of it to them in infancie so in meer infancy there is no such use of it to them as t is promised to be of unto believers neither doth it either quicken inlighten convince convert comfort or any other way officiate as a seal of redemption and remission of sins to such as have no sins as yet to be remitted Secondly if both these premises were as true as you suppose them yet would it follow no more from them nor from all you say toward the proof of either of them that believers infants have the holy spirit then it would that unbelâ—evers infants have it in the evincing of which I shall only transcribe your Syllogism and proof of the Minor and instead of your term these little children write little children of infidels and so leave you and all the world to judge whether your own Argument doth not as clearly conclude unbelievers infants to have the holy spirit as the infants of believers and so consequently that all have it if any at all as well as some That which to doubt of is a breach of Christian charity doth sufficiently appear But to doubt that little children of infidels have the holy Ghost is a breach of christian charity Ergo that little children of infidels have the holy Ghost doth sufficiently appear The Minor is thus proved To doubt that little children of infidels are such as che Scripture in generall hath declared them to be and that they have right to the kingdome of heaven c. is a breach of Christian Charity whose rule is presumere unumquemque bonum nisi constet de malo The Apostle saying in 1 Cor. 13.3.5 it thinketh no evil Charity believeth all things it hopeth all things especially since it cannot appear that the little children of infidels have by any actual sin bard themselves or deserved any more then others to be exempted from the General state of little children declared in Scripture Ergo to doubt that little children of infidels have the holy Ghost is a breach of Christian Charity In which though both propositions be flatly false yet I call heaven and earth to witness whether all that you bring in proof of the Minor do not prove it as much breach of Christian charity to doubt that any infants as t is to doubt that believers infants have the holy spirit one infant having no more deserved ill by actual sin then another Thus all that ever you have done hitherto is utterly undone for the Argument you began upon and the basis of your building is that believers infants for their baptism only you plead denying the baptism of other infants as well as we have the holy spirit this
upon you above that are held out by any of you out of the armory of Scripture in defence of infant baptism and those are Col. 2. 12. 1 Cor. 10.1.2 both which not onely knock sprinkling oth'head but may also very easily be sheathed in the bowels of baby-baptism As for the first it speaks as well nigh all scripture doth not much medling with infants not onely to buâ— of adult disciples only of whom as well as to whom and not of infants in way of satisfaction to them and answer to those that would have brought in the old circumcision made with hands among them Paul saies ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands which circumcision without hands there spoken of is not baptism neither as some dream who thence also draw in circumcision and baptism to be of so neer kin that as they have both one name so they must both have one subject also for baptism is no more done withoutehands then the other but the sanctification or inward circumcision of the heart cutting off the foreskin i. e. the filth of the heart which things infants do not in token of which he tells them they are not sprinkled but buried i. e. overwhelmed in water with Christ in the outward baptism wherin also they are risen with him through faith c. All which things he that imagins they more include then exclude the sucking infants of such to whom he speaks is no man in discretion with me As for the other place its most evident the Apostle speaks not of baptism litterally but Metaphoically onely there they were baptized unto Moses i. e. by the visible tokens of Gods presence amongst them viz. the cloud and Sea assisting and siding with them and overthrowing their adversaries they were confirmed in the belief of God and his servant Moses as we by baptism are in the faith of Gods goodnesse to us and of his Son Jesus Christ in further confirmation of which meer figurative sence of the word baptized you may do well to consider that though they were said to be baptized in the cloud and in the sea which phrases however sound forth such a total immersion as is not in two or three drops of water fingered on the face yet they were not so much as wetted with either the cloud or the sea for its said Exod. 14.21.22 the sea was made dry land under them and they went through it dry shod or on dry ground which they could not be well said to do had it so much as rained upon them such a figurative sence of the word baptize there Mr. Baxter himself denies not p. 90. yet Dr. Channel urged that place in a publique dispute at Petworth Ian. 1651. as one of his arguments for infant baptism besides Secondly if you will needs have it properly taken that they were baptized really and not quasi baptized as Mr. Baxter yields they were and if you will needs make that baptism such an emblem of ours that ours must have an adequate subject to that which say you was infants as well as parents then t will put you to your trumps to excuse your selves handsomly in your now denying to infants the same spiritual meat and drink in the supper which they then eat and drank of in a figure also viz. the Manna and the Rock which both were no other Antitypically then the bread and wine are mistically in the supper i. e. the Lord Jesus Christ. For all your vain boasting therefore of what innumerable arguments you have from Scriptures I say the Scriptures are sure enough on our side nevertheless taking the word in a sutable sense you do well to call your Scripture armes or arguments innumerable for indeed they are not to be numbred for even unit as much more nonit as non est numerus being no more than just none at all Secondly whereas you boast of the innumerable Arguments which may be brought for your infant rantism from reason the full force of reason is utterly against you and so wholly assistant to our cause that the unreasonablest man amongst you will once see it when sound reason comes to reign and sway the scepter indeed Yea not to stand reasoning on it now how reasonless a thing it is to ask a company of men and women as the priests were wont to do at the font thus viz. do you believe in God the Father and Christ c. and will you be baptized in this faith and when they answered yes that is all our desire then instead of them who profess their faith and desires to be baptized to take a small sucking babe out of their armes and dat him with a drop or two on the face and send away all the other unbaptized Babist The sureties or parents in so saying do but represent the child that could not speak for it self and expresse his good resolutions to forsake the divel c. and his desires to be baptized Baptist How reasonless is it to put questions to infants through their parents ears and then very gravely suppose them answering again through their parents mouthes yea as reasonless as to suppose that all people should see through none but the blind priests eyes nor yet to stand reasoning how reasonless a thing it is to signifie things to sucklings while they understand them not and that too by such a vanishing visible sign that when they can understand they neither see nor never shall and such like Trumpioall transactions to which there are as few grains of reason concurring as there are inches in an Apes tail even your selves however it happens that you so contradict your selves yet that is no news with you as to sound it out here how Reason fights on your sides for infant baptism are even in this very cause found falling out with and fighting down right against reason hand smooth but some four or five pages below this why else is there such a reasonles reply made to seven or eight several objections which by your own confession p. 16. reason makes against infant baptism but I le spare you till I come thither 3ly That the practise and authority of the Church of God you so much boast of from the beginning and the Fathers thereof which you complain and grumble much p. 1.11.12 that t was set aside and might not be admitted into your assistance at the Disputation is so utterly against your infant baptism that even this alone were it of any esteem with you had bin enough to have silenced all your disputes for it and laid the itch and quencht the heat of your hearts after that meer novelty is most manifest if by the Church of God and the Fathers therof you mean what I do viz. the Church of God in the primitive which were the best and purest times of the Gospel whose practise in this particular is set out in the word but specially in the Acts of the Apostles the fathers of which Church and of the Church
of But First with spending so much time and searching so much into their testimonies as you have compelled me to do that me thinks I am out of my element where I desire to be i. e. the Scriptures whetâ—er I le return by and by God willing especially this last testimony of Tertullian which yet I could not help unless I would for want of help betray the truth when I saw how Mr. Marshal Dr. Holmes and others had almost stolen away corrupted and by fair words enticed our old friend Tertullian to serve on their side for we would not willingly be cousined of what is our due yeâ— least any man should think of me above that he seeth me to be and take me to be a man of much reading because I talk so much of the Fathers I testify that I am of little further acquaintance with these Fathers for my converse is mostly with Maâ—thew Mark Luke Peter Paul Iude Iames and Iohn then this controversie hath brought me to which now is so much that though I honor them as honest and good men in their times as finding many things of much worth and excellency in them yet for all that I am sick Secondly with seeing what abundance of absurdities silly reasons senselesse anti-scriptural sentences odd conceâ—ts vanities vaâ—ieties of error as well as verities uncertainties whether some of their books be their own or no mistranslations foisting of what of their own other men please into their works as Ruffinus into Origen falsities flat contradictions amongst themselves and such like are to be found among them sufficient enough to cause all men to trust no more to their testimonies then with their own eyes they see the same testifyed in the Scriptures Thirdly I am sick more yet to find the whole Clergy after whom the whole world wonders and walks in error wondring so much after these Fathers and walking after them where they walk in error and yet neglecting to give heed to them where they speak the truth and which is worst of all sleighting the short pure and plain waies of God the Father of all of Christ our Father and the first Fathers next and immediately under God and Christ Supreme Governors of the Church and givers out of the Gospel to the world I mean the Apostles who in my mind write the way of the Gospel if men were not willing to go astray from it because it is narrow self denying and thorny though more briefly yet more clearly to any common capacity then the most voluminous of all the other fathers do for we use all plaineâ—s of speech saies Paul 2 Cor. 3. Wherefore Fourthly and Lastly I am sick most of all to consider what a stirr ministers make in their quotations of the Fathers marching on and giving such a broad side as they think with two or three sentences ou of the fathers as if they would bear all men down before them that come near them no higher read then in the Scriptures no better armed then with the sword of the spirit the word of God For this only is dispised as much as Davids sling and stone before Goliah and this too though in coole bloud the Scripture is confessed by themselves to be so instar omnium that nothing is of any force but what flowes from it for though some Clergy men dote so far that they believe the Fathers no otherwise then they would have the world to believe themselves i. e. because ipse dixit yet some are so wise as to confesse that how far forth soever the Fathers may serve to prove to us things de facto to be done in their several ages yet their testimonyes de facto cannot prove any thing to us to be de jure at all whereas if it be so and ye so it is I am me thinks become a fool at this time in falling before I was aware so up to the ears in contest about a few testimonies of the fathers as well as I and others heretofote in counting so extraordinarily on them wherefore I do henceforth humbly conceive and confess my self to the people together with all my fellow father-fool'd friends viz. the Clergy of all Christendome to have been no better then childish and semi-simple so far as such high and holy heed and such heedlesse submission hath been given by us to these fathers Schoolmen and other authors as hath occasioned extreme seduction from the Scriptures hear therefore O thou most miserably be wildred Priesthood of the Nations and understand for so thou shalt if thou return from out of that thick wood of Authors Polemical Tracts Schoolmen Casuists Tomes Volumes of Fathers Councels Commentators Treatises Systemes of Theology framed forms of old and New Creeds long and short Catechismes confessions of Churches c. in which thou hast wandred and lost thy self from the truth to the unfeigned study of that little book of Scriptures which alone if thou wilt be admonished by it is able to make thee and them that hear thee wise enough unto salvation Thou speakest what thou hast seen of thy fathers we speak what we have seen of our Fathers what thine teach in their books we regard not quâ ipsi dixerint unless quâ dictum prius by our Fathers if they teach no other then what our Fathers teach in theirs it is no more then what thou having the same Scripture the same liberty to search the same promise of the same spirit to guide the same accesse to God in prayer for it mayest learn not at second hand from them but at first hand from thence as easily as themselves but when they go aside from that and thou with them and thine with thee a venture this seems no other to me then Ignis fatuus with a false flash going before and Ignoramus fatnus with his false faith and a number of ignorants following after Thou tellest us of thy novel antiquity of Counsels National Oecumenicall of Churches Greek and Latin of Fathes Austin Gregory c. and yet confessest thy self that particular Churches have erred and may erre and if all particulars then why the universal which consists of all particulars cannot thou canst not prove and that generall councels which the School-men term the representative Church are subâ—ect to error and have sometimes decreed heresie and falshood for truth thou confessest by Dr. Featley p. 17. of his figment And that none of the fathers nor yet the joint consent of many is a competent judge for faith to hang upon concerning the right of things is confest by Mr. Blake p. 58. of his to Mr. Blackwood and yet to go round again thou ventest thy self out of the mouthes of others as if their verdict were enough to warrant and canonize all that for verity that is vented by them Tell us therefore no more as Dr. Featley doth of Gregory nor yet of Gregory the great whose testimonies if they were for thee but now I think on t they are not for
things let that or any judicious Gentleman spel and put together and see if it be not tantamount to such a testimony as this viz that those that believe and aâ—e not baptized shall be damned for to be damned and not saved are all one and as for children of Tuâ—ks and Pagans dying in infancy you record it it as a monstrous thing that I should say that for ought I knew they might be saved yea by the reply that was made to that speech of mine by one who said perhaps I thought the devills might be saved it appears that your party thinks it as possible that the devils may be saved as soon as the dying infants of Turks and Pagans and yet of the children of believing parents who in your opinion do also believe themselves you say the opinion of the Anabaptists which denyeth baptism to little children puts the parents out of hopes of their salvation und makes them to be in no better condition then Turks and Pagans yea you say believing parents may say of their children that dy without baptism what hopes of our child who is in no better condition then the children of infidels and really they say true if the state of infidels dying infants be so damnable as you saie it is is it you or we Sirs whose doctrine damnes believers if they be not baptized I le conclude this matter with you much what in your own words and form of speech Christ shuts out only unbelievers from heaven whosoever believeth not shall and be damned this doctrine of yours that little infants are believers and yet out of all hopes of being saved if not baptized shuts out believers if they be not baptized i e. if they be not rantiz'd for that is the best baptism you use and by consequence if your doctrine which you delivered in this Account as judicious Gentlemen that read it will affirm be true that even believers not baptized shall be damned you had need baptize your believing infants indeed i. e. to do more then cris crosse two or three drops of water on their faces or else for all your plea for their baptizing on pain of their damnation they l be damnâ—d if they be no more then sprinkled for want of true baptism when all is done for that is not so much as the Ceremony it self in truth which you are so hot for without the substance yet would I not have you be an abhorring for all this but pittyed and prayed for rather that you may in time for this and all other your follies and false accusations of others of things whereof you are more guilty your selves abhor your selves in dust and ashes that you may not be an abhorring as he is more then half blind that doth not see who will be once amongst both God and men Rev. 17.16 Rev. 19.2 And thus I have done with your first Argument Review The second is this little Children under the law received the Seal of the Gospel covenant for circumcision was the seal of the righteousness of faith which is the Gospel-Covenant The Law saith Do this and live the Gospel only believe in the Lord Iesus Christ and therefore God calls it an everlasting covenant and the Apostle saith the Law that came 430 years could not disannull it Gal. 3.17 and he saith expresly the Gospel was preached to Abraham ibid. ver 8. nay more the carnall seed of Abraham Ishmael and Esau men branded for Reprobates in Scripture yet because they were born in Abrahams house received that seal by Gods appointment Why then should not children under the Gospel receive baptism which the Adversaries confess to be the Seal of the Gospel-Covenant Re-Review This poor forlorn wretched Argument hath been handled and laid sprawling once or twice before where both its consequence is denyed and good reason gien of the senselessness of such syllogizing as is here from the Law to the Gospel therefore it is but needless to defend our selves any further against it it being a demi-dead man that is disabled from being dreadful to us already nevertheless sith he hath strengthens himself again what he can and comes up recruâ—ed and attended with a company of scambling and for the most part very unsound sentences at his heels t wil not be amisse to enter the lists a little with him and these his Auxiliaries First then Sirs whereas you come in again with that crooked consequence viz. infâ—nts must be baptized under the Gospel because circumcisied under the law we might more pertinently let up a shout at your shameful folly in this particular then set upon the shewing of it any more it is so palpable for verily as is proved sufficiently above these two viz. the Covenant of the law and the Gospel from the Identity of which you infer an Identity in the subject of the ordinances and administrations of both and by way of analogy would evince them both to belong to the same persons I must tell you these are two Testaments or wills of God concerning men in those two different times viz. before Christ and since and these two so specifically distinct that they not onely run upon different strains and require different terms as your selves here confesse the law saying do this and live the Gospell onely believe but also stand upon different promises whereof the Gospels being of the heavenly Canaan are better then the laws which were but of an earthly one and these also pertaining to two different seeds viz. the legal to the natural children of Abraham i. e. Isaac and his posterity by generation the Evangelical to the spiritual seed of Abraham i. e. such as are of Christ by faith and regeneration and they had also different dispensations the one circumcision the other another thing viz. dipping a thing no way like it and different subjects also for those different dispensations so that if men and their ministers were not all turned Momes they could not but must manifestly perceive it the old Testament admitting to circumcision onely males and these onely on the eighth day in case they were in the house so young and all the males in the house whether sons or servants whether born in the house or bought with money of any stranger and all this without respect to either faith or repentance in the persons to whom dispenst or any prae-preaching to them by the person dispensing the new Testament taking in to baptism as no servants upon the masters faith so all persons in the world both males and females upon their own and that upon any day and not the eighth onely wherein after they have been preacht to they professe to repent and believe Mat. 3. Act 2. Act. 8. Act. 18. The proof of which real specifical diversity of these two Covenant◠〈◊〉 yet farre more evident First because the spirit denominates them so to be in Scripture calling them expressely the two Covenants Gal. 4.24 and also very often in plurali the Covenants the covenants
as the other they that are baptized with the spirit and fire are also baptized in the spirit and in fire and put into the spirit and into fire i. e. wholly into a holy flame of zeal for God and the Gospel for that 's the baptism with fire that is there mainly spoken of and not as the Dr. divines that outward appearance of cloven tongues onely like as of fire that sat upon them in the assembly Act. 2.3 for that was but a special accidentall visible token of Gods presence extraordinarily appearing among those particular persons at that time baptizing them inwardly with the other which is no more necessarily incident to all persons that are baptized with fire and to all those unto whom that baptism with fire is promised which are indeed all the Saints that repent and believe the Gospel as well as those that were met on the day of Pentecost as we see Mat. 3.11 where Iohn promises the baptism with fire as well as with the spirit to all penitents most of which never had that vision of cloven tongues which appearance of cloven tongues I say is no more incident to nor to be expected by all that are baptized with fire then the appearance of the spirit descending in shape of a dove and lighting upon Christ at the time when he was baptized or filled with the spirit which was much vvhat such another special casual and visible token of Gods presence as the other is incident to or to be expected by all those that are baptized i. e. filled vvith the holy spirit and albeit this phrase in the spirit may seem to sound so non-sensically to Mr Cook out of our mouthes that are a people of no account vvith him yet I hope it shall seem congruous enough out of the mouth of the holy spirit and the holy Apostles themselves for they use it more then once or twice in the holy Scripture and me thinks he should not be unlesse he be willingly ignorant of it for not onely doth Iohn say twice viz. Rev. 1.10.17.3 of himself in this manner viz. I was in the spirit and he carried me away in the spirit but likewise Paul saies plainly to all Saints Gal. 5.6 walk in the spirit and to himself and all Saints v. 25. if we live in the spirit let us walk in the spirit and testifies of the Saints also Rom. 8.9 that they are not in the flesh but in the spirit if the spirit of God dwell in them where by in the flesh he means all over all together or totally fleshly drenched drowned in flesh plunged over head and ears as it were in flesh filth and corruption as the world is that lies in wickednesse so that there is nothing but flesh to be seen upon them as he is that is buried in water whom that Element hath wholly covered and by being in the spirit no other then that which is the baptism with the spirit i. e. being indued with the spirit wholly sanctified in every part though but in part with the spirit all over seasoned washed clensed by the spirit for thus he is that is baptized with the spirit i. e. he is in the spirit as well as the spirit in him More then this yet though the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be rendred with as well as in for t is both with and in water that we are baptized when we are baptized as we should be when it stands between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that we may read it as well I baptize you with water as in water yet can it not be very properly read so when it stands between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet so it stands Mat. 3.6 Mark 1.5 for though I can bear with him that saies thus viz. Iohn baptized with water yet he that shall say that Iohn baptized with Iordan or with the River Iordan as if all Iordan was used to every ones baptizing rather then in Iordan and in the River Iordan I shall think that his braines crow out nonsense which is intolerable Whereupon as to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all Translators do there English it in and not with and though I can read it with together with them as well as in when the Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet by their leave and with non-submission to their judgements as no way sleighting them further then I find them not fallible and saving both the Dr. and Mr. Cooks conceits to the contrary I see no reason sith one of those places is a relation of the same thing with the other but that as Mat. 3.6 Mat. 5.1 we must read thus viz. they were baptized of Iohn in the River Iordan so we may without such uncouth utterance of the thing as seems to them to be in it yea and as agreeably to Scripture language as otherwise read Mat 3.11 Mar. 1.8 thus viz. I indeed baptize you in water but he shall baptize you in the holy spirit and fire But more then all this yet though the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is used in those places may without any advantage to you be read with as well as in yet the praeposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is used Mark 1.9 where it is said that Christ was baptized of Iohn into Iordan that cannot possibly be rendred with which yet in the intent of the spirit is doubtlesse the same in sense and signification as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in the other and more significant to our purpose for howbeit it be rendred in Iordan as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is elsewhere yet into Iordan were more agreeable to that rendition of it that is usuall in other places but so to read it viz. he was baptized of Iohn into Iordan doth render your sprinkling a plain piece of Nonsence for it cannot be sensibly said he was sprinkled into Iordan therefore you will in no wise give way to that the Doctor indeed leaves A. R. and bids him farewell in that point as if he were affraid to have any noise of it and saies not a word against it but Mr. Cook and Mr Blake who saves himself a labor uses not a jo◠more then what Mr. Cook furnishes him with to that purpose do both sternuously stand against the reading of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mark 1.9 by into Mr. Cook p. 14. and Mr Blake p. 4. of their respective returns to A. R. and Mr. Blackwood who both make mention of that passage yet the utmost that both these repugnants bring against it is of no more force then a very feather for all that they say is this that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth often signify in or by and not into as Mat. 2.23 Mark 4.13 Mat. 5.45 Mat 10.9.11.13.33 he dwelt in Nazareth in Capernaum neither by Ierusalem c. neither possesse mony in your
Ba. argues from the samenesse of the Olive tree the Jew was broken off from and the Gentile was grafted into that therefore as infants stood members then so they must now I answer it is true there is some kind of indentity between the Jewish and the Gospel Church but not such as concludes an indentity of membership for infants they are the same ingenere visiblis Ecclesiae they agree in the common name of Church and visible Church elected and segregated from the world but there 's little else that I know of wherin they are the same they differ in circumstantials in their accidental forms in their officers ordinances customs constitutions subjects members that being constituted of one whole nation of people or fleshly seed of Abraham taken out from all other nations this of a spiritual seed of Abraham i. e. believers scaterred here and there taken out of any nation as they happen to be called almost every nation some the ceremony of inchurching Abrahams own much more any other mans meer fleshly seed being ceased Mr. Bax. peddles on apace and brings a company of Scripures in proof of infants Church-membership and baptism which though he stile them as indeed his whole book Plain Scripture proofs for those two yet a man that is not minded to force the Scripture into the Service of his own fancy because it does not serve it freely may look till dooms day before he see in them any plain perspicuous proof of either one of these or of the other Christ saith he Mat. 23.37 would have gathered Ierusalem oft as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings but they would not therefore sure he would not have put them or their infants out of the Church the strength of the consequence lies here saith he he would have gathered whole Ierusalem and that into the visible Gospel Church therefore infants also Now that Christ does not speak of whole Ierusalem here as he saith he does both men and infants the circumstances of the text do fully evince to us for he speaks of the same persons he speaks to and the same persons he complains of saying ye would not the same and no other are they to whom he speaks when he saies Oh Ierusalem how often would I have gathered c. but those were men and women only whom he called to believed in him and not infants Again he gathered them by preaching of the word into baptism and membership and received all that came and no more viz. sometimes the children and not the parents sometimes the parents and not the children so that a mans foes for the truths sake sometimes were they of his own family his own flesh therefore he offered not to gather infants for he preacht not to them nor called them at all nor were any more baptized and added to the Church-fellowship in the Gospel then they that gladly received the word that did not infants yea 3000 were gathered into the first Gospel Church by preaching and baptism in one day and never an infant among them all for they surely did not continue in fellowship in breaking of bread and prayers Acts 2. Therefore whereas Mr. Ba. in his Epistle to the parish of Bewdley challenges Mr. T. to name him one particular Church since Adam either of Jewes or Gentiles where infants were not Church-members if they had any infants till 200 years ago I name him the first Gospel Church that ever was Act. 2. in which there was not one infant yea there was three thousand baptized in one day and it is a hazard but that those three thousand had many perhaps no lesse than three thousand infants belonging to them all and yet as Mr. Cotton thinkes so think I that none of their infants were baptized with them much lesse were added with them to the Church or continued with them in fellowship as the whole Gospel Church did in breaking of bread and prayers yea though there was no infants in that Church which was gathered at Ierusalem it self to which Christ saies how oft would I have gathered thy children c. and therefore Mr. Baxs sense is very sinister so I challenge him again to shew me not by such dubious muddy cloudy circumlocutory inconsequential consequences as he doth but undeniable evidences any one of all the Gospel Churches of the primitive times either of Jewes or Gentiles which we are all to reâ—orm by viz. Ierusalem Rome Corinth Galatia Philippi Ephesus Thessalonica or any other to fellowship in which there was one infant baptized added and admitted and I shall cry him mercy and lay down the Cudgells at his feet and acknowledge he hath broke my pate The next Scripture he uses is more impertinent then this yet Mr. Ba. makes a certain shift to squeese an argument out of it and to compel it invita minervâ not a little against its own intent and meaning to corroborate his crooked crazie creed concerning the inchurching and cristening of infants viz. Rev. 11.15 whence he thus Syllogizes If the kingdoms of this world either are or shall be the kingdomes of the Lord and of his Christ then infants also must be members of his kingdom i. e. the visible Church the Antecedent is the words of the text indeed as he saies but the sequel is so sure and follows so firmly in his fancy that he saies nothing can be said against it that is sense or reason but indeed it self is against both sense and reason Who would ever think if the word did not declare that the things of wisdome are hid from the wise and prudent that such a disputer as Mr. Ba. holds himself to be should deduce the now membership of infants from such a premise as this viz. because the kingdomes of this world are or else shall be the kindomes of God and Christ what 's this I trow toward the eviction of the other much every way saith Mr. Ba. yea so much that for any thing he can see this text alone were sufficient to decide the whole controversie whether infants must be Church members Amen so beit say I let this Scripture decide it and let 's see what Mr. Ba. saies on t If they can say quoth he by kingdoms is meant here some part of the kingdom excluding all infants such men may make their own creed on those termes let the Scripture say what it will I know in some places the word kingdome and Ierusalem c. is taken for a part but if we must take words alwayes improperly because they are taken so sometimes saith he then we shall not know how to understand any Scripture so of necessity it must be understood properly i. e in its prime signification of the whole kingdoms and whole Ierusalem with him and not improperly for a part onely though Mr. Blake to Mr. Black saith upon occasion of our pleading for the proper signification of baptize nothing more ordinary then to have words used out of their prime signification whereby
baptized by them for we do not read that any of the Apostles or Apostolike men did ever baptize any but such as are newly converted to the Christian Religion but I and such as I am have from our infancy imbraced the Christian Religion and no other now if our Adversaries did rightly infer that because there is neither precept nor example in Scripture for baptizing of infants therefore it is a needlesse thing in like manner I may as truâ—y conclude for asmuch as their is neither precept nor example in Scripture for baptizing such as have been bred up in the Christian Religion and never professed any other I and suâ—h as I am have no need at all to be baptized Baptist. That some are sent to baptize is proved above and sure enough if it be as we see t is Act. 2 39-10.47 48. mens duty to be baptizd or else Christ hath required a service of every man and that sub poenâ too and yet though never so willing to be baptized left them in no possible capacity to perform it for want of provision of administrators but that you and such as you are yea and that though some are sent to baptize have such a Supersedeas from being baptized as you pretend to be vouchsafed you by Christ Jesus because you have been long of it and been bred up in the Christian Religion is such a strange piece of businesse as I know not in any wise what to make of who in foro hominum ecclesiae at least take baptism to be the visible badge that so distinguishes between those that are of the Christian Religion and other people that who so shall say he is of the Christian religion and yet never was nor will be baptized must excuse me if according to the tenor of Christs Testament I own him not as yet to be a Christian. What you call the Christian Religion in which you say you were bred up I know not if you mean the doctrines of faith repentance and good manners alone as yet and abstract from baptism this whether it be a great while or but a little while since you began to put it in practise the matter is much at one for degrees as to the length or shortnesse of the time since we were converted do not vary the nature of the case this I say is so far from exempting that t is the onely thing ingaging you to baptism and howbeit you say there is neither as I am sure there is not for baptizing infants yet you cannot possibly but see that there is both president and precept for the baptizing of all believers and of all in any Nations that are discipled so that if you have been converted not lately but long ago and remained till now unbaptized you have so much the more need to hasten to it and instead of being held excused from now doing it at all because you did it not when first you should to be exâ—uscitated in the words of Ananias to Paul saying and now why tarriest thou arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins calling on the name of the Lord. But if by the Christian Religion which you say you were bred up in you mean either that Christian Religion of the Rantizer that teaches men to change the ordinances of Christ that of baptism specially as to its form and subject and to make void his command through his tradition of a new baptism to all or that Christian Religion of the Ranter that so rebells against that law of Christ that he will give way to have now no water baptism at all these two Religions as Christian as you count and call them are both but Anti-christian with me Ranterist You make such a deal of do about water baptism as so needful that there may be no Church-fellowship held without it but for ought I see yet t is a matter of no such weight but that we may serve God as acceptably to the full without it for in Christ Iesus neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision but faith which worketh by love Gal. 5.9 circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing but the keeping the commandaments of God 1 Cor. 7.19 Baptist. T is true that when Paul spake this which was when there was an abolition of circumcision so far as was consistent with the Jewes ability to bear it and when it was now de jure to grow out of date then circumcision was nothing and uncircumcision nothing so that t was altogether needlesse to be circumcised but as nothing as it is now yet so something was it once when that testament it was the sign of stood that every soul of whom it was then required that was not circumcised was to be cut off from having fellowship with that Church and people and as nothing as this baptism or no baptism is with you now yet no lesse then this at least must we say of the unbaptized that every soul that shall refuse to be baptized is to have no fellowship with Christs Church and people Acts 2.41.42 Secondly as nothing as circumcision and uncircumcision baptism or no baptism are with you yet faith which worketh by love is something as Paul himself also doth seem to hint and the keeping of the commandements of God which love to the Lord Jesus he that saies he can expresse without keeping his commandements among which baptism in water is not the least and without counting those commands of his not too grievous to submit to makes either Christ a lyar or elle himself Ioh. 14.23 1 Iohn 2.4.5 1 Iohn 5.2.3 Thus farre concerning water baptism to which in the primitive times there were and in all times also wherein it is or shall be truly dispenst and sincerely submitted to there assuredly are or will be two other baptisms concomitant viz. First a baptism with sufferings Secondly a baptism with the holy spirit to support under those sufferings in order to the being baptized with the last of which baptisms there was then an ordinance or administration of Christ viz. prayer and laying on of hands which was practised toward all believers after baptism in water which as it was kept on foot from the Apostles daies and downward among the Churches of Christ in after ages and is as to the substance of the service kept on with far lesse corruption and alteration then that which yet cleaves to their baptism among all but the Presbyterian part of the national priesthood and people so that it is of right to be used in order to the self same end and in the self same manner now as then it was because the present use and practise thereof is so openly not to say obstinately denied not onely by the Ranter who rases the whole foundation and the Presbyâ—erian and Independent Rantizer who rase down that or at least do not raise it but also by several societies of persons baptized who to the great grief of such congregations as own the
whole truth and are built upon the whole foundation or beginning doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles do yet ignorantly withstand it and some even of these bitterly band against it I shall the Lord assisting in all possible meeknesse brevity and plainnesse make good unto them and that in this one single long-winded syllogism onely least the presse which now presses on apace after me and is at the very heels of me all along at my penning of this whole businesse called Anti-ranterism should overtake me and stand still for want of such supply as it expects hourly from me least also I out run too much as I have almost done already the bounds prefixed to this interposed Treatise the Minor proposition of which argument being proved and cleared from those clouds of objection wherewith some strive to darken it will both evince and evidence the continuance of that service also in its right use to this day so sufficiently that howbeit much more might be spoken yet no more shall at this time at least by me Whatsoever was in the primitive times taught practised dispensed or submitted to own'd or observed as a command of Christ as one of the oracles or holy things of God as a part of that foundation on which the true visible Church is built as one of the very principles of the doctrine of Christ as a practical part of the Law Will and Testament of Christ concerning them in order to their receiving the holy spirit of promise according to the promise at their first beginning to be disciples at or about the time of their baptism and before actual fellowship in the visible Church in all the Churches and among all baptized believers even men and women without exception of any without the least hint of any limitation of it to those times onely and without the least intimation to us in the word of Christ that t was his will it should then cease and hath also plain injunction form Christ for its continuance for its being taught to and observed by the disciples that should be successively in all the world through all nations and generations of it to the end and hath also the same ends grounds and reasons why it was to be used continuing still to this day as much as then is certinly in the same manner as then to be observed to this very day But on this wise is that service of prayer and laying on of hands not onely on officers Deacons Elders messengers in order to their receiving of the holy spirit to impower them in a fuller measure for those severall functions but also on common disciples men and women in order to their receiving the holy spirit in such manner and measure as Christ Iesus shall be pleased to impart it in to comfort them under sufferings and make them fit for fellowship in the body or visible Church Therefore that service of laying on of hands with prayer on common disciples men and women as well as that on officers in order to their offices is now to be observed as in former daies The first proposition is so undoubtedly true that if any should be so irrational as to deny it as I judge none will but the Rakesham Ranter that regards neither God nor devil and reckons on all Christs commands as not worth a rush I shall be more rationall then to believe him to be a man fit to reason with or that it can be to any purpose in never so reasonable a manner to bespeak him As for the Minor wherein t is affirmed that the businesse of prayer and laying on of hands after baptism in water upon every disciple man or woman is such as was taught practised dispensed submitted to ownd and observed as an ordinance and command of Christ c. as it followes in the Major that remains yet to be cleared which by that time I shall have done in each of those particulars that are there asserted of it either expressely or by such plain and legitimate deductions and inferences from the Scripture as may be justly satisfactory to any sincere souls that love truth and allow others to draw inferences from the word without which who can prove that he shall be saved as well as themselves and by discovering the weaknesse of such exceptions as are ordinarily made against the present use of this rite or service t wil be more then high time for me to quit this subject also whereas therfore contrary to what is asserted in the very front of the foregoing argument viz. that laying on of hands was taught in the primitive times I find it intimated to us by way of query that some who even therefore as well as for other reasons by them rendred cannot practise it are in no wise satisfied that such a thing as laying on of hands on all baptized believers was ever taught by either Christ or his Apostles in proof of this that laying on of hands was taught I send such as doubt of it first to the name of doctrine of Christ by which in common together with the other five principles of it it is denominated Heb. 6.1.2 leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith towards God and of the doctrine of baptisms and of laying on of hands which denomination of doctrine of Christ could not possibly belong to it properly but that it was somewhere or at sometime or other taught by either Christ or his Apostles or disciples in the judgement of any that are but so far learned as to know whence the word doctrine is derived which as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the greek is of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so is of doceo to teach but secondly whereas t is desired that we should if we know of any direct to some place of Scripture where ever Christ or any of his Apostles or disciples did preach this doctrine that all baptized believers ought to practise or submit unto laying on of hands for my own part I shall direct the enquirers to several Scriptures in one of which as it is expresse enough so in the rest its plain enough to such as are not more resolved to proceed in propounding questions then when they are answered to be resolved that some or other of the Apostles or disciples of Christ did teach and preach that doctrine the first of these is Heb. 5.12 where to that Church of the Hebrews or Iews the very platform to all the rest which as to its more compleat outward form and order and that denomination of the Church to which God added dayly such as should be saved had its first being and beginning under Peters teaching Act. 2. t is said thus viz. whereas for the time ye ought to be teachers ye have need to be taught again which be the first principles of the oracles of God Where note first from the words taught again that they were taught
once before all the principles of the doctrine of Christ whereof this laying on of hands is said to be one and not only so but secondly from these words you ought to be teachers that by this time they should have been of ability to teach these principles to others which also shews that these principles ought all along still to be taught Moreover if it be queried where or by whom these Hebrewes were at first taught this A B C these principles of the oracles of God there spoken of is it not as clear as the sun to any serious understanding considerate spirit that it was by Peter at Ierusalem in his first preaching there in obedience to Christs commission Mat. 28. after power was come upon him from on high in Act. 2. which I direct to as a second place wherein we may find it preached did not Peter there lay this foundation of the principles of the doctrine of Christ among them in preaching as they did themselves in practising Heb. 6 2. and howbeit the whole form of the doctrine he there delivered is not set down as none of the doctrine that Philip preacht at Samaria is nor of that Paul preacht at Philippi Act. 16.14 nor at Corinth Act. 18.8 yet is it not by sundry passages as evident that he taught that principle of laying on of hands among all the rest as it is and how evident that is is shewed above that they in those other places preached baptism shall we think that Peter taught the principles of the doctrine of Christ all which he was to lay as one foundation among them by the halves did he build them upon one part of the foundation and not on the other part did he constitute them partly upon it and partly beside it did he teach them all the rest of the principles every of which its said Heb. 5.12 they had been taught viz. faith repentance baptism resurrection and judgement and did he leave out that one onely of laying on of hands specially since it s said that with many other words he exhorted that people who are said there also to continue in the Apostles doctrine what man that devotes himself to the comparing of Scripture with Scripture can imagine it and if not why not be satisfied that it was preacht by some at least of Christs Apostles to all baptized believers A third Scripture I direct the inquirers unto is Act. 8.5.12.14.15.16.17 whence first its evident from the Apostles administring and the Samaritans submission to it that the doctrine in the purport and tendency of it was first declared unlesse we shall judge the Saints at Samaria were such idiots as to act by implicit faith as men were not to do but by comparison of what they said with the Scriptures under the ministry of the Apostles themselves Act. 17.22 and to yield blind obedience to they knew not what the Apostles also justifying them in it which if they did then you that professe your selves to be yet ignorant in that service and that you know not the meaning of it may submit to it as safely though as senslessely as they from the hands of such as do which yet when all is done I am sure you may not but Secondly more evident yet if you weigh some passages of that text it self the words whereof are on this wise viz. then went Philip down unto Samaria and preached Christ to them v. 5. and when they believed the things spoken by Philip pertaining to the Kingdom of God they were baptized both men and women when they at Ierusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God they sent unto them Peter and John who when they were come prayed for them that they might receive the holy spirit for as yet he was fallen upon none of them onely they were baptized in the name of the Lord Iesus then laid they their hands on them and they received the holy spirit It s said that Philip preached Christ and spoke of the things pertaining to the the Kingdome of God and that they received the word of God which they did not surely so much as to believe what was to be done till he had preached it now can any rationall man think that he preached Christ and the things pertaining to his kingdome and the word of God and not preach so much as all the principles of the oracles of God not so much as all the first Rudiments or whole beginning word of Christ but left out imposition of hands onely among all the rest as none of the word of Christ nor of the things pertaining to his kingdome as not to be preacht no not in that juncture wherein immediately after it was to be and accordingly was so universally submitted to by them and dispenst unto them or if you say they received not that word of laying on of hands from Philip but from Peter and Iohn I answer t is true practically from the hands of Peter and Iohn dispensing it but by faith so as to believe it to be a practicable doctrine that was their duty to own from the mouth of Philip dispensing the doctrine of it or suppose that Philip spake nothing of it till Peter and Iohn came which is non supponendum yet is it likely that the Apostles that were sent to them from Ierusalem though nothing is said of that they said that therefore they said nothing to them at all yea will right reason ever receive this for truth that the Apostles were sent to Samaria upon the account of some service whether solely that of prayer and laying on of hands it matters not so long as that was one part of it at least and yet neither acquaint them whether before acquainted with it or no to what end and purpose they came and what was the end and purport of that service they onely or mainly came for he that can receive this let him receive it for my part I professe I cannot A fourth place from whence it is easily gathered that the doctrine of laying on of hands in order to their receiving the holy spirit was wont to be preached to all baptized believers is Act. 19.1 2.3 where Paul speaking to the whole company of disciples that he found at Ephesus the number wherof were then but about twelve among whom the doctrine of laying on of hands in order to the receiving the holy spirit had not been preached at the time of their baptism seems to reprove and blame the neglect of it enquiring whether they had not received the holy spirit supposing surely at least that the promise of it had been to them and prayer made for them in the usual way with laying on of hands that they might receive it but marveiling much that they being baptized believers had not been informed about these matters nor had so much as heard of the holy spirit have you received the holy â—pirit saies he no nor so much as heard of it say they no unto what then
be supreme and overcome so the lord let him for a time that he might manifest his own power the more in the overcomming him for ever in the end yea power was given him to make war by the beast that bears him even all nations of Christendom which he overcame first against the Saints and to overcome them also and so to be filled with his own inventions he gives out when any disputes against him that his desire is to be satisfyed by disputing and so perhaps he would but t is with riches more then rightousnesse with tith more then truth for in truth he seemes if he must meet with such as charge him with error in his doctrine of baptism tith forced maintenance forcing conscience as if he would renounce his opinions and practises in these points if any can prove them to be corrupt but seeks onely opportunities to spread his odd opinions of what schism and sacriledge and robbing of God it is if submission be not acted and tithes be not offered to him among the vulgar among whom his Ghostly pretences produce a kind of aweful affrightment and dread of doing any thing against what he saies being resolved before hand never to be convinced of the truth as t is in the word for that overturns him in all his preferment projects and plucks him up from all the profits of his present princely posture which is such a right eye to him that he hath not faith enough to believe that it can possibly be more profitable to him to part with though Christ himself till him tis then to preserve and perish with it His disciples are for the most part not such as the noble Beraeans that would take nothing upon trust from the very Apostles mouths but searched the Scripture dayly whether the things were so or no not onely men but honourable women too not a few but rather meet idle implicit forefather faitht men simple and weak women who try nothing but keep their Church and believe as their Church believes and as their good churchman saies led away with diverse lusts and pleasures leaning onely on their Priests understandings pinning all their Religion upon their sleeves adoring all that their Orthodox divines deliver at a venture ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth as t is in the word whose honest ignorant devotions he hath won to himself by his cunning artifice of pretended piety voluntary humility seeming zeal to the truth long prayers or rather multitudes of short prayers and praises Pater Nosters Miserere Mei's Magnificats Te deums Gloria Patri's per Iesum Christum Dominum nostrums and such like devoutries and being once gained are so carried on with the streme of corrupt custome present fashion foolish affection that no reason in the world can reclaim them he deterreth lay people as much as may be from reading expounding or too much prying into the Scripture alledging unto them the perils they may incur by misinterpretations he hath laid his foundations so firmly in the dark consciences of men women by perswading them of his own infallibity Ecclesiastical Authority his Ius Divinum in the Government and guidance of the Church as here in Britain and even of his Temporal jurisdiction too as at Rome over both heaven and earth hell and purgatory of his power in the agony of mens souls to forgive sin that men and women are becharmed into beleif of him he hath woven himself so far into their credulity that all his sayings are received as oracles all his doings as divine all his traditions as truth it self all his Administrations as Apostolical all his doctrines as Orthodox all his Arguments though confessed by himself to be weak as unanswerable and all others Administrations Actions Answers Arguments though never so consentaneous to the true sense of Scripture valued at that price which he sets upon them as if the holy chaire of Papall determination Episcopal Convention Synodical constitution could not possibly be mistaken yea the Scripture it self is but a nose of wax with him of what shape soever the CCClergy casts it into of no more authority then Aesops Fables with the Papists if the Pope say the word so as to disdate digrade it or put any part of it out of commission of no other sense then the Bishops and Synod seem to say is the sense on 't with their good Protestants so altogether Oraculous is the Pope among his the Bishop among his the Presbyter among his and even all the three several CCClergies among their three several sorts of CCCreatures that their different ipse dixits are ipso facto divine directory and discharge enough too for these different doters on them insanire cum ratione to dote to and fro by Authority so as to do and undo and do and undo and do by In a word he is too bold to be born down not so much from such things as make the righteous witnesses to truth as bold as Lions before God and men viz. the goodnesse of his cause for that is stark naughâ— and rotten nor the clearnes of his call either to his Clerical function or any actions he goes about by vertue and in persuance thereof for t is clear enough that his orders emission commission as to the external etymology of them are more from the Pope then Christ and the true Church nor any good answer of a good conscience for either his conscience is so cloudy that he cannot or so cowardly that he dares not or so resolved that he will not see or else so clear that he is condemned of himself when truth shines plainly upon his face but rather from either his great interest in or directive authority over the civil power that hath long back as well as bellyed him as in England or his having it all in his own hands and dispose as at Rome where ecce duo gladii both swords are in the Clergyes clutches so that he can quickly correct those that contradict him he is too clamorous to be silenced calling out with such a heavy noise and divine ditty against the truth and condemning it with such an outcry of Schism Schism Sedition blasphemy Heresie Heresie before he hath half heard it and so soon as ever its opening its mouths to speak that all the parish pulpits in a whole Countrey and now and then their steeples ring out in such combustion to the tune of Great is Diana of the Ephesians Act. 19 28.34 that truth hath no way wherby to silence him but to be silent her self for when she begins to declare he with his Heresie Heresie soon stops men ears he is too arrogant to be convinced he hath controuled whole nations cut of the spirit of Princes bin terrible to the kings of the Earth and devinced invincible Emperors in his time therefore may well scorn to be convinced abominate detest disdain to be directed by Russet Rabbies Apron Levites Ministerian Mechanicks illiterate Artizans
desirable then tongues which is so talkt on so it is defined to be no other then speaking to exhorration edification and comfort and also v. 31.32.33 where it s said you may all prophecy one by one and the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets which shewes t was no gift of speaking infallibly but only preaching because it s supposed that they may be out and erre in their prophecy and must submit to correction in case they do from the other prophets Obj. Ans. Ob. Ans. * which I much marvel at sith this objection supposes a continuation or resurrection of that same ordinance of laying on of hands in the last daies after a whiles waiting for administrators but the questions subscribed to are all or most of them such as suppose the Enquirers to be much in the dark and in doubt about it what kind of laying on of hands that is that 's called a doctrine of Christ Heb. 6.1 whether ever such a thing was or is ever to be dispensed to all baptized believers c. as if they could not tell almost whether there be at least appointed by Christ such a manner of administration * viz. Seeing we are denied communion by some of those Churches or by some members thereof who hold the necessity of all baptized believers to practise submit to or come under the laying on of hands Therefore we desire them to acquaint us what we are commanded to say or do that we may be found faithful in that point or otherwise to be discovered disobedient unto a command by the Word of God which is the onely director here and that which shall be our judge at the last day * which is the wise query of some also and as learned a question as if one should ask whether at the supper we must put the elements to our mouths with the right hand or the left or in baptism ask how the baptizer must handle the person baptized and where he must take hold on him when he dips him and if he have not expresse Scripture concerning such nicities and trifles as these suspend the dispensation of both the supper baptism because Christ is somwhat short in his word not expressing punctually enough how his ordinances shall be dispensed nor what is to be said and done by persons at the doing of them so distinctly as they would have him But foolish and unlearned questions avoid knowing that they do gender strises 2 Tim. 2.23 p Viz. Seeing there be many that do desire baptized believers to require that hands should be laid on them Therefore we desire of them to shew us some place of Scripture if they know of any that doth expresse such a behaviour either of the administrator or the person on whom hands were laid * for such a behaviour as to reprove their backwardnesse and summon men to shew their forwardnesse to own Christs wayes may become any administrator whatsoever Act. 22.16 * Viz. Seeing many plead laying on of hands to be practised or submitted unto as a foundation principle or a beginning doctrine of Christ and that by all baptized believers Therefore we desire to know if any of them can inform us which of all these layings on of hands forementioned is called by Christ or his Apostles the foundation principle or beginning doctrine by some text in Scripture * if it be not somewhat an improper phrase to stile wicked men in their wrathful and cruel handlings of the Saints Administrators of any doctrine of Christ that is stiled imposition of hands as to me it seems to be unlesse wee l allow the name of an Administrator also to the devil himself when he tempts the Saints and puts forth his hands against them to smite them with any mischiefs in either body or spirit as by Gods permission he did Job Job 1.12 Job 2.6.7 * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luke 21 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act 5 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act 8 17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act 19.6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act 13.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 〈◊〉 4 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. ◠2. * Viz Seeing that Heb 6.2 speaks of the laying on of hands as plural as the doctrine of baptisms and doth not speak of any one laying on of hands fore-mentioned particularly nor of any other by distinction neither of any end purpose or event Therefore we desire to know what safety it is for any man to conclude that Heb. 6.2 is meant but of one of them onely †See Mr Blackwoods last book newly extant even whilest I am writing to you on this subject stiled a soul-searching catechism p. 58 in p. 54.55.56.57.58.59 of which he treats totally of this subject * Viz. Mr. Cotton Dr. Holm◠who as is shewed above in the 139 140 141. pages of this very volume I am yet in hand with borrowes Cottons and Calvins reading out of Antiquity concerning the practise of imposition of hands to all grown persons before admission to Church-fellowship wherby to prove infant-baptism which thereby he rather breaks the neck of * Viz. Mr. Cotton Dr. Holm◠who as is shewed above in the 139 140 141. pages of this very volume I am yet in hand with borrowes Cottons and Calvins reading out of Antiquity concerning the practise of imposition of hands to all grown persons before admission to Church-fellowship wherby to prove infant-baptism which thereby he rather breaks the neck of * consisting of 3 sorts of Christ'n creatures under a 3 sold CCClergy viz. papal prelatical presbyterian * yet some Ranters are not ashamed to say they are Christ and God and there is no other God then they and what 's in them and such like blasphemies whereby they declare themselves to be that generation that are to rise in the latter daies and make the man of sin even that wicked one that shall exalt himself above all that 's called God saying of himself he is God given over to strong delusion to believe lies that they may be damned because not receiving the love of the truth that they might be saved whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming 2 Thess. 2. denying the Lord that bought them and bringing on themselves swift destruction 2 Pet. 2.2 * Viz. touching of dead bodies Num. 5.2 eating or touching the carcases of any forbidden fishes birds or beasts Lev. 11.24.31 diseases as the leprosie Lev. 13.8 running of issues Levit. 15.2 and such like * for if he that despised Moses law died without mercy of how much sorer punishment shall he be thought worthy that hath troden under foot the son of God Heb. 10.29 therefore we had need to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard least at any time we let them slip for if the word spoken by angels was sure and stedfast and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of