example more fitly if a Iew had been forced by Antiochus violently to kyss or bow the knee to Iupiters image when he resisted and testified against it none could justly call him an idolater or one of Iupiters people But if an other Iew had revolted to Antiochus religion and beleeved in his Iupiter and honoured him with hart profession and action he now might justly be called the servant of Iupiter or one of his people as the Moabites are called the people of Chemosh Numb 21. 29. So the church of Rome now fallen from true Christianity and beleeving worshiping obeying Antichrist the Popes holynes are and may justly be called his church or else Antichrist hath no temple church or people in the world Object Observe here and throughout his treatise how still he calleth that the Temple church and bodie of Antichrist which Paul expressly and purposely calleth the Temple of God And so therin note stil his shâ—fâ—s and his errours c. Answ. Loe still an urging of the bare letter as doe the Papists This is my body to prove their transubstantiation that there is no bread left but Christs very body really and properly I have I trust without shifting or errour proved the present church of Rome to be Antichrists temple church and bodie if the Pope be Antichrist And seing his mysterie of iniquitie is contrary to Christs mysterie of godlynes and Christ hath a mystical temple which is his church and bodie Eph. 2. 21. 5. 23. I would gladly know what temple church and body Antichrist hath if the church of Rome be not the same Againe he speaketh too largely that J stil so call it throughout my treatise for I have other weise written though it liked him not thus Gods true temple and tabernacle is in mount Sion in heaven Rev. 14. 1. 17. where God sitteth on a throne Rev. 16. 17. 7. 15. and dwelleth among his people where is the Ark of his covenant Rev. 11. 19. and from thence lightnings voices thondrings earthquake and hâ—yle come forth against thâ— Antichristians his enemies and vials of his wrath powred out upon the throne of the beast Rev. 16. 1. 2. 10. and on men that have his mark On the contrary the Beast which is the kingdome of Antichrist ascendeth from beneath out of the bottomless pit Rev. 17. 8. and blasphemeth this heavenly tabernacle Rev. 13. 6. and sitteth in Babylon Rev. 16. 19. upon the Dragons throne Rev. 13. 2. and fighteth against the Lamb and against the saincts Rev. 19. 19. treading under foot the holy citie Rev. 11. 2. and casting downe the place of Christs sanctuarie Dan. 8. 11. When th' Apostle therfore telleth us that Antichrist sitteth as God in the Temple of God it is to be understood of their invading and destroying of Gods church and people as the heathens of old dealâ— with Jerusalem and dwellers therin Psal. 79. Dan. 8 11. 13. 11. 36. Ier. 22. 12. 13. Law 2. 7. 9. Secondly of their own vaine ostentation whiles they wil have it called the Christian catholik church and the Pope the head of the same Ezek. 28. 2. 6. Esa. 14. 13. 14. 2 Thes. 2. 9 10 Rev. 13. 11. 14. 17. 4. 2 Cor. 11. 13. 14. 15. Thus I grant that the Temple which Antichrist invadeth destroyeth is Gods true Temple but that wherin the Beast sitteth as God which he trimmeth upholdeth and boasteth of as he doeth the church of Rome at this day is the synagogue of Satan But he procedeth Object As for the ancient Doctor whom here he citeth let us hear himself speak His words are these That which is the Temple of any idolor Divil the Apostle would not call the Temple of God Wherupon some will have in this place not the Prince himself but after a manner his whole bodie thâ—â— is the multitude of men perteyning unto him togither with himself under the Prince understood to be Antichrist And more rightly also they think it to be sayd in Latine 〈◊〉 in the Greek that he sitteth not in the Temple of God but for the Temple of God which is the church As we say he sitteth for a friend that is as a friend Augustine de Civic Dâ—â— l. 20. c. 19. Where note how farr differing Augustine is from this man that citeth him c. Answ. There is not so great difference as mine opposite would pretend First I cited not Augustine for his own judgment but for others whom he speaketh of touching the translation of the Text in the Temple of God or for the Temple Secondly he setteth down Augustines words maymed both at head and foot For Augustine beginneth thus But in what temple of God he shal sit as God is uncertaine whether in that ruine of the Temple which was built by King Solomon or in the church For that which is the temple of any idol or divil the Apostle would not call the temple of God c. Now the ruine of Solomons temple cannot at this day be called Gods temple otherweise then because it was the Temple of God of old hath now no more holynes in deed trueth theÌ„ any other place in the world And thus I have granted that the church of Rome may be called the church of God in respect that there was a church there in Pauls time wheras now it hath no more true holynes then the synagogue of Satan So we see how for advantage mine opposite baulked Augustines first words In the end he breaketh off in the midst of a period for Augustine sayth sitteth for a friend that is as a friend or if any other thing is wont to be understood by this kind of speech So he defineth not certainly of this place but leaves it doubtfull and presently after confesseth his ignorance For what is this sayth Augustine For the mysterie of iniquitie doth already work onely he who now holdeth let him hold till he be taken out of the way J confess my self to be utterly ignorant what he meaneth Thus we need not strive about Augustines words here and I grant that the Apostle would not have called it the Temple of God unless eyther it were so in deed and trueth or had been so in times past or did pretend to be so still And I think all wil likewise grant that the holy Ghost would not have called the witches spirit at endor Samuel unless eyther it had been Samuel in deed as the Papists doe contend or some thing in pretence and shew like Samuel Neyther would the prophet have sayd to the King of Tyrus Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God a proselyte in the church of Israel unless eyther himself or some of his predecessors had been there in times past Neyther would Amos have called the Israelites idol temple the house of their God unless eyther it were so in deed or in pretense which phrase when the Greek translateth according to the letter the house of
he would 〈…〉 his first covenant and so receive them againe to grace in Christ. Vnto which I now add this sixt that God called himself the God of Jsrael and them his people because of many among them that were in deed his both such as yeilded not to Ieroboams idolatrie but went to Ierusalem to sacrifice 2 Chron. 11. 16. and seven thousand in Jsrael which bowed not the knee to Baal 1 King 19. 18. and such also as erring at first in simplicitie were by the Prophets brought to repentance though the general state of the land never repented but went on in their syn til the Lord cast them out of his sight as is testified in 2 King 17. His next chief ground is the comparison of Iudah who likeweise for sook the Lord and sometime became more corrupt then Israel so that if Israel were not in trueth Gods people and church then Iudah was not Answ. I have shewed how Israel might be called Gods people still and why I judge them not to be Gods true Church For Iudah they changed not the constitution wherin they were set of God made no new face of a Church no new Temples preists c as did Israel Therfore they did wickedly in the true Church as often times greater impietie is committed in the Church then among the heathens yet the state of the church of the heathens may not be compared though the punishmēt of such as transgress in the Church and repent not shal be worse then the heathens Mat. 11. 20. 24. Secondly the defection of Iudah was not generall like Israels though sometime the scriptures speak generally when many are corrupted but even then when for their synns they were caried into Babylon there was a godly company compared to a basket of good figgs Ier. 24. 2. 5. 6. 7. which had cried out for all the abominations were marked and reserved of God Ezek. 9. 4. c Thirdly the state of Iudah was often times reformed by many good Kings as Iosiah Ezekiah Iehosaphat and others the people brought to repentance and the covenant renewed but never so in Israel by any king that there reigned from their first apostasie to the captivitie 2 King 17. Fourthly for the wicked troupes in Iudah that refused admonition persecuted their brethren killed the Prophets mainteyned idolatrie for which the godly left their synfull communion I hold them not Gods true Church or in his covenant of grace Because the covenant was alwayes conditional if men repent and beleeve as I have before proved and mine opposite himself hath granted This may suffice to his often repeated reasons which are deduced and varied from the groundes aforesayd Touching 2 Chron. 15. 3. IShewed from the Prophet Azariahs speech to Asa and all Iudah that Israel was without the true God without teaching Priest and without Law 2 Chron. 15. 1. 2. 3. and therfore could not in that estate be judged to be in the covenant of grace Mine opposite laboureth to bring Iudah it self also within this estate but that hath no colour with it The distinction of names Iudah and Israel the state of Iudah under Solomon Roboam Abijah and Asa though corruptions were come in plainly sheweth it otherweise and I leave it to the readers judgment 2. he granteth it may well be understood of the 10. tribes and sheweth good reasons for it how then doth he take away the weight of the reason that Israel being without the true God without a teaching Priest Gods true ministerie and without Law could not in that estate be Gods true church in his covenant of grace or have the true seales therof unto them He fayrly denyeth the conclusion Jt wil not prove sayth he that circumcision or the other ordinances of God had in Jsrael or in Judah were false and deceytfull signes c. Jf it would then it might be urged against Iudah also and where then was circumcision c. I answer If there were no circumcision but among them that were without the true God without his ministerie and without his Law then was there no true circumcision in the world For if we consider the first institution of circumcision Gen. 17. and the Apostles doctrine of it in Rom. 2. 25. 28. 29. 4. 11. and the doctrine of Christian baptisme now answerable to circumcision of old it is impossible that that people should have the true seale of righteousnes and salvation from God in Christ that are without God and without Christ. No colourable excuses or distinctions wil here availe◠except men can prove an absolute promise of salvation whether men repent beleeve or no whether they be in God and Christ or no Which is contrary to all the scriptures Wherfore this one testimonie is ynough to overthrow all his long plea for Israel as if they in this synfull stare unrepentant continued stil actually in the covenant of grace and state of salvation And what colour maketh he against this plaine scripture He first speaketh of forsaking God what it meaneth and how it is spoken of the Iewes in the Prophets namely of forsaking his Law Temple Worship and service and not simply of so dealing with the Lord himself as the bare words and letter it self might seem to imply For even in the defection of Israel when Ieroboam set up the calves yet stil they intended to worship the Lord that brought them out of the land of Egypt c. 1 King 12. 28. Answ. First observe how here he would not have the bare words and letter of the scripture to be insisted upon yet is it his continuall practise and onely colourable reasons For the Temple of God 2. Thes. 2. and the people of God are his mayn grounds for the church of Rome and of apostate Israel 2. He omitteth the words which I cited that Israel was without the true God c and speaketh of an other phrase of their forsaking the Lord to ease his burden which he found too heavy 3. It is granted him that by forsaking the Lord is meant the forsaking of his Law Temple Worship and service and not that they did professedly renounce God but stil pretended and intended to serve the true God what would he inferr hereupon This maketh the more against his plea for them The scripture sayth they were without the true God without teaching Priest without Law this was true eyther in their own account or in Gods not in their own account for they thought they stil reteyned the true God even as the heathens of old hereticks Antichristians and Iewes at this day perswade themselves that they serve the true God therfore they were such in Gods account Now Gods judgment is alwayes according to trueth when mans judgment erreth and deceiveth himself Thus then though Israel thought themselves the true church and to have the true God as mine opposite also thinketh and pleadeth for them yet in the Lords account which is trueth they were without the true God
is by their owne grant the man of syn of whom the Apostle here speaketh c. Therfore the church of Rome is the Temple of God also that here is spoken of I answer This argument I might wholly grant and not hurt the cause I plead for For though the church of Rome be the Temple of God which Paul speaketh of yet followeth it not that it is Gods true Temple or true Church which is the point that should be concluded seing the scriptures often speak of things as once they were though so they continue not still as also they speak of things according to the outward pretense and shew that is made of them though in deed and trueth they be nothing less The first is manifest by these and other like instances Abigail is called the wife of Nabal 1 Sam. 30. 5. though Nabal was then dead and his wife maried to David Simon is still called the Leper Mat. 26. 6. though he was then clensed of his leprosie The king of Tyrus an heathen man that lived in Ezekiels dayes is sayd to have been in Eden the garden of God to have been upon the holy mountaine of God and to have walked in the middest of the stones of fyre Ezek. 28. 13. 14. meaning that he had been in Gods church on mount Sion among the people of God although not he himself but Huram his predecessor many yeres before in the dayes of David and Solomon was the man that became a proselyte in Israel and helped to build the Temple 2 Chron. 2. 3. 16. even as if a man should speak to the Bishop of Rome at this day and tell him what he was for a Bishop in th'Apostles dayes and how now he is degenerate and become the man of syn The mountaines of Horeb and Tabor where God once gave his Law and Christ was transfigured are after still called the mount of God and the Holy mount 1 King 19. â— 2 Pet. 1. 18. because they had been for the time sanctified by the presence of God And so the Temple in Ierusalem after the Iewes had crucified Christ refused the gospel were broken off because of unbeleef and the sacrificing and worshiping in that place was ended yet is it until the utter ruine of it by the Romans called the holy place Mat. 24. 15. Thus also the Citie become an harlot is called the faithfull Citie Esai 1. 21. the wicked that hath forsaken his righteousnes is named arighteous man Ezek. 18. 26. according to their former and not their present estate And when these titles are given them it is not to justifie them at all but to aggravate their syn So for the second that things are called according to the outward appearance and pretext set upon them though they be in deed false is evident by these and the like examples false Gods which are but idols are called gods usually so one Prophet calleth those the Philistians gods 1 Chron. 14. 12. which an other calleth their images 2 Sam. 5. 21. False prophets are called Prophets 1 King 22. 6. 22 and Balaam a Soothsayer among the heathens Jos. 13. 22. is called a Prophet 2 Pet. 2. 16. The evil spirit whom the witch of End or raised up for Saul is called in the scripture Samuel 1 Sam. 28. 11. 12 15. 16. 20. by reason wherof the Papists contend that it was Samuel in deed and not the Divil urging the letter as mine opposite doth urge against me this phrase of the Temple of God The idolatrous Temple which Ieroboam made in Israel in honour of the God which had brought them out of Egypt is called the house of their God Amâ—s 2. 8. yet that it was his true house or temple I never heard of any that would affirme though it was the true God whom they worshiped therin for Baal with his house was then destroyed out of Israel 2 King 1â— 27. 28. Now mine opposite hath given us a good rule in this his last book when answering the Anabaptists he sayth The word of God is not the bare letter or outward syllables but the intendement and meaning of the holy Ghost by whom it was given Which should carefully be observed by the due consideration of the scriptures with the circumstances therof and by the conference of other places of scripture and the proportion of fayth layd togither Which whiles the Anabaptists neglict they look on the scripture partially and press the letter extreamly without consideration of the true and right meaning therof These words of his are true the more it is to be lamented that he himself would so press the letter against me and not weigh the meaning of the same by it self and other scriptures and the proportion of fayth layd togither In alleaging this text he layeth downe the words thus There shal come an apostasie or falling away wheras the Apostle sayth except there come an apostasie or falling-away first which word first may intimate that the church should fall away from the love of the trueth before the man of syn should be revealed and this is apparant by the 10. verse where the people whom Antichrist seduceth are sayd to be them that perish because they received not the love of the trueth that they might be saved Or if the word first which mine opposite leaveth out be understood before Christs coming then is it meant of the apostasie or the falling away so called by an excellencie as exceeding all other And is not to be referred to Antichrist the head onely but to Antichristians the bodie also who after other synns should fall away with Antichrist and be damned with him as in the 11. verse it is sayd God shall send them strong delusion that they should beleeve a lye shat they all might be damned who beleeve not the trueth but had pleasure in unrighteousnes So that by the whole scope of this scripture it is evident the Apostle divideth not the people of the church of Rome from the Bishop and ministers of the same as if the people should be Gods true Temple Christs true Church under his covenant and so in the state of grace when the Bishops and ministers are the Divils Temple Antichrist the man of syn and so in the state of damnation but maketh both bishops and people deceivers and deceived all of them under wrath and condemnation otherweise then my opposite would perswade For he pleading thus The Apostle speaking of Antichrist describeth him thus There shal come an apostasie c would have men think that the Bishop and ministers of the church of Rome are the apostasie and the people not contrarie to all the scope of this scripture contrarie also to Paul in 1 Tim. 4 1. where he foretelleth of some that should apostate or depart from the faith giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of Divils meaning it of the people deceived by false teachers yea it is contrary also to mine opposites own graunt who
sayd a litle before that the church of Rome is fallen into most sinfull and deep defection and apostasie and so is a notorious harlot and idolatrâ—ss Wherefore his distinction here between the apostasie the church of Rome making the one Antichrist the other Gods temple under his covenant of grace neyther accordeth with the scriptures nor with his own assertion Next this where he sayth that by the Temple of God in Israel was figured the church of God among Christians it is graunted But withall let it be noted that himself can not deney but the Temple and tabernacle in Israel was not the church and congregation of Gods people properly but a sacramental signe of Gods dwelling with them which I before confirmed by these scriptures Exod 25. 8. 2. Chron. 6. 2. Ezek. 37. 26. 27. Rev. 21. 3. Secondly he himself affirmeth that the temple at Ierusalem did primarily figure out Christ and secondarily the church both the catholik or universal and particular churches likeweise particular Christians and in several respects both their bodies and their soules and consciences Vpon which graunts of his it foloweth that there is no necessarie consequence of this his proposition Jf the Pope of Rome with his hierarchie be the man of syn spoken of in 2. Thes. 2. then is the church of Rome the Temple of God there spoken of for he understanding by the church the people as in 1. Cor. 3. 16. 17. 2. Cor. 6. 16. Eph. 2 21. and yet granting that the Temple in Israel was not the people all may see the weaknes and insufficiencie of this inference that because the Pope of Rome sitteth as God in the Temple of God therfore the people of the church of Rome are that Temple of God there spoken of consequently Gods true church For why now may we not as well if not much better say that by the Temple of God is understood the doctrine and profession of Christ the true Temple or as in my former †book I shewed thus As the Temple was an outward signe of Gods presence with his people and of his inward dwelling in their harts * by saith and by his spirit unto their salvation so Antichrists temple is an outward shew of his presence with that seduced people in whose harts †he dwelleth by Popish faith and by his spirit of errour carying them to damnation But as Antichrist shal not professedly deny the true God or Christ though in deed he falsly * sheweth himself that he is God so shal hâ— not professedly deny the Temple or church of God but falsly vaunt his adulterous synagogue to be the same Vnto this exposition mine opposite hath given no answer and it being according to the scriptures trueth of the thing in controversie I leave it to the prudent reader whether the outward shew and profession of Christ and Christian religion be not the first thing here intended of th'Apostle by the Temple of God And this is further confirmed by Rev. 11. 1. Where the Temple Altar and Worshipers are three distinct things and the people are the worshipers there spoken of neyther the Temple nor the Altar of which place we shal treat anone Then wheras he granteth that the Temple in Ierusalem did primarily figure out Christ how is it that he wholly neglecteth the primarie thing figured and insisteth upon the secondary the church or people of Rome Seing it is knowen how the Pope pretendeth him self to be Christs vicar and deputie on earth and to be the servant and worshiper of Christ in heaven and may we think that th'Apostle in warning them of the mysterie of iniquitie would not imply the chief point of the mysterie that Antichrist should in pretence sit for Christ and in his sted as his vicar generall on earth Thus to sit in the Temple or for the Temple of God may well be understood that Antichrist should sit for Christ a pretended friend but in deed an adverse foe Now for that which the Temple secondarily figured namely the church catholik and also particular and so mens consciences he wavereth in his application He sayth this terme the church of Rome is taken eyther particularly which he applieth to the Laterane church in Rome the Popes parish church or more generally for all other such Christian churches as are come under the Popes jurisdiction c. This later I hold to be most proper here for what needed there such warning to the Thessalonians other christian churches through the world if a Bishop of the Lateran parish a corner in Rome had exalted himself above God therin onely and had not usurped also a pretended Christian power over all And the complement of the prophesie is an evident exposition of it for who knoweth not that the Pope scorneth to be Bishop of the Lateran parish onely it is a jurisdiction over the catholik church throughout the earth which he chalengeth And now what proof bringeth mine opposite that the church of Rome as God constituted it is taken generally for other Christian churches under the Popes jurisdiction None at all neyther can he bring any jote of Gods word for the same Againe what proof maketh he that the catholik Romane church wherin the Pope sitteth is the true church of God None but this J suppose these men themselves being better advised wil not deny them to be the churches and Temple of God But he should have shewed if it had been possible for him that the Romane church is by divine institution the catholik or universal church which because I assure my self it can never be doen I conclude that this Romane catholik church is a fiction of the Popes braine and a meere idol like himself and is no otherweise the Temple of God then the Pope is Christs universal vicar namely in lying words and vaine ostentation And so the maine ground for the Temple of God wherin Antichrist sitteth to be the true church of Christ is overthrowne As for the Popes Laterane parish I both deny it to be Christs true church and that it onely is the Temple of God wherin Antichrist should sit His proof of the former is this Jf we understand it of a particular church as the Apostle wrote his epistle to the church of the Romans how shall we soundly deny it eyther to be the Temple of God or Antichrist to be set therin Thus have we suppositions and questions in sted of proofes To his demand I answer it is the Temple of God in pretence not in trueth even as the Pope is a bishop of Christ in pretence but in deed is Antichrist the man of syn as mine opposite granteth The church that was in Rome in Pauls time wil no more justifie the Popes synagogue there now then the Christian ministers which were then in that church Rom. 12. wil justifie the Antichristian prelates that there reigne at this day Secondly the Laterane parish at Rome is of the
can be transformed as the ministers of righteousnes 2 Cor. 11. 14. 15. is it such a marvel that he should transforme his temple and church into the Temple of God and church of Christ and yet as he is a Divil stil notwithstanding his transformation so his Temple coÌ„tinueth stil the Temple of the Divil and church of Antichrist how ever they are disguised with other names and habits And to help a litle to the discerning of both these opposite mysteries of pietie and impietie wee are to know that Christs Kingdome beginneth in the kingdome of Satan and is perfected in the Kingdome of God and Antichrists kingdome beginneth in the kingdome of God and is perfected in the kingdome of Satan For the god of this world having blinded the eyes of infidels who are dead in synns and walk according to the prince of the power of the aier Christ by his Ministers sent into the world and by his word of trueth the gospel causeth light to arise unto them openeth their eyes and turneth them from darknes to light and from the power of Satan vnto God that they may receive forgivenes of synns and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in him and thus God delivereth them from the power of darknes and translateth them into the kingdome of his beloved son Then cometh Satan by Antichrists which are his ministers privily crept into the church and by the word of lying which is Antichrists gospel he darkneth the mindes of them that have not received the love of the trueth and turneth them back againe from God and by damnable heresies privily brought in draweth them even to deny the Lord that bought them and so bring upon themselves swift destruction Then doe they goe out from the church blaspheme the way of trueth and togither with the Beast doe warr against Christ whom yet in name and pretense they would seem to honour and serve so accomplishing the mysterie of their iniquitie unto assured damnation if they turne not againe unto God This thing not being observed how Christ beginneth in the world and draweth men out of it into his church and Antichrist beginneth in the church draweth men out of it into the world againe as the Dragons taile draweth the starrs of heaven â—â—fteth them to the earth Rev. 12. 4. mine opposite thought it absurditie and contradiction in me for writing thus When th Apostle therfore telleth us that Antichrist sitteth as God in the Temple of God it is to be vnderstood first of their invading and destroying of Gods church and people as the heathens of old dealt with Jerusalem and dwellers therin secondly of their owne vayne ostentation whiles they will have it called the Christian catholik church and th Pope the head of the same Vpon this he thus inveigheth What have we here Doth himself now by the Temple of God vnderstand Gods church and people yea such as was answerable to Ierusalem and the dwellers therin of old why then hath he so eagerly oppugned us hereabout c. Answ. I oppugne the present church of Rome which Antichrist destroyeth not but buildeth and adorneth as an alluring harlot the Christian church which was in Rome of old that hath he invaded and destroyed long since for they then were Saints such as he hateth these now are worshipers of him and of idols Divils and are an habitation of Divils So there is as much difference between the church of Rome now and the church then as between the Bishop of Rome now the Bishops then they were Christs ministers this now is Antichrist as mine opposite himself confesseth And what cause hath he to insult as if he had got the victorie Let wise men judge But he proceedeth Obj. Where can he shew in the scriptures that sitting is put for invading or destroying c. Otherwhere stil he teatheth that by sitting is meant abiding continuing dwelling c. What if I cannot prove that sitting is put for invading or destroying if I prove my assertion by other words of the text shall it not suffice The words Eiston Naon into the Temple may imply by a figure his invading and the person that invadeth being an enemy a theef a wolf implyeth his destroying for our Saviour sayth The theef cometh not but for to steale and to kill and to destroy 1 Joh. 10. 10. The scripture often wanteth words easy to be understood so here Paul sayth of Antichrist that he having entred into the Temple of God sitteth as God And if they regard not my exposition they shall have his on whom they so much rely Mr. Iunius I mean who so explaineth it saying The testimonie of signe is this that Invading the temple of God he shal sit as God Jun. Animad vers in Bellarm. Controv. 3. l. 3. c. 14. not 18. But what if I confirme it by the word sitting which he thought so unlikely In Esai 14. 13. the Prophet upbraideth the king of Babylon thus Thou hast sayd in thine hart J wil ascend into heaven c. J wil sit also in the mount of the congregation in the sides of the North meaning mount Sion where Gods temple was But this is meant of Nebuchadnezars invading of Ierusalem to spoile the same as the historie sheweth 2 King 25. and in him Antichrists tyrannie against the church was lively figured As for sitting to mean continuing though it doth so often times yet not alwayes Christ sate upon the mount of Olives Mat. 24. 3. the disciples sate in the house Act. 2. 2. yet dwelt they not or continued long there And when the Babylonian invaded mount Sion to sit there he continued not there but having spoiled the citie burned the Temple and captived the people he returned into Babylon 2 King 25. so Antichrist spoiling Christian churches returneth to his whore of Babylon his proper habitation which he wickedly boasteth to be the Sion Temple and church of God Wheras mine opposite expounded the Temple of God to be the church and shewed not whether he meant a church particular or general and catholik I sayd for a particular church it wil not agree with the prophesies of Antichrist whose citie or church is so great as peoples kinreds tongues nations doe dwell in the streets therof Rev. 11. 8. 9. He gainsayeth me thus First Still he calls that Antichrists church which th' Apostle calleth the Temple of God Answ. It is his own interpretation that the Temple meaneth the church and that he that sitteth in it is Antichrist and sitting he wil have to be continuing and why may not I call that church wherin Antichrist sitteth continually as God Antichrists church yea though it were indeed Gods church as he supposeth Seing the citie wherin Christ did but dwell was called his owne citie Mat. 9. 1. And that which God sayth in my house and in my kingdom 1 Chron.
Sion as whileere he sayd were in Babylon And for his figurative applying of the Temple here to the people or church it is amyss it should be applyed to God himself For so the Lord sayth by the Prophet though I have scattred them among the countries yet wil J be to them as a little Sanctuarie in the countries where they shal come Ezek. 11. 16. So the Lord not the people was the Sanctuarie or temple in Babylon 3. Stil they are acknowledged of God to be Sion his people c though in Babylon Answ. So I alwayes and stil acknowledge God to have his people in Babylon the church of Rome But it should be proved if it were possible that Babylon is Sion or the church of Rome to be the church of God 4. The Lord calleth them from thence by diverse prophets c. 5. Being so called they did not all come togither at once c. Answ. These things are true and so for the Lords calling of his people out of Babylon now But it is not yet concluded not ever wil be soundly that the Babylonians are Gods people except the elect which belong to mount Sion though-actually in Babylon Obj. There wil be of Gods people yet called from thence even then when this Babylon the citie of Rome shal be burnt with fyre and cast down never to rise any more Rev. 18. 4. 8. c. Answ. This conclusion is partly true and partly implieth error It is true that there shal be of Gods people called out of Babylon til she be utterly cast down But the errour implied is that he maketh Babylon the citie not the church of Rome and seemeth also to restreyn it to the citie properly and to the burning of the material citie and houses therof Wheras this Babylon is the great Whore who though her cheif â—ear is in Rome yet her ecclestaâ—â—ical jurisdiction reacheth over peoples and kinreds and tongues and nations And when the tenth part of that citie fell it is not meant of the tenth part of the houses in Rome but of people in that catholik church And when God calleth his people out of Babylon it is not meant out of Rome onely or Italic but Spaine also and all other places where Poperie reigneth Neyther is it meant in regard of civil politie as if the subjects in Italie Spaine and other lands might not remaine in those comon wealthes still but they are called out from the heresies idolatries and extravagant jurisdiction of the Romish church So the civil bondage of the Iewes in the old Babylon typed the spiritual bondage of Gods people in this new Babylon the church of Rome and out of it are men called not out of the civil state or material place For who will deny but Christian churches may dwel in Spaine Italie yea and Rome it self if the magistrates wil suffer them and yet not disobey this precept Come out of her my people It is a doctrine of grace and necessarie unto salvation to come out of the church estate of this Romish Babylon but to understand it of the CoÌ„mon wealths estate and to call men out of it were a doctrine of rebellion contrarie to Rom. 13. 1. 1. Pet. 2. 13. 14. Wheras I concluded Gods covenant of grace is not therefore with her at all for she is appointed to damnation 2 Thes. 2. 8. 12. Rev. 18. 8. 21. but the elect that obey Gods voice calling them out of her them hee will receive into covenant he will be a father unto them and they shal be his sonns daughters as he hath promised 2. Cor. 6. 17. 18. He replyeth As if they were not already under the covenant of God being his people or as if they could be the Lords people and yet not be under his covenant The Jewes knew better when they were in Babylon and therevpon prayed as in Esai 63. 17. 18. 19. 64. 7. 8. 9. Returne to the tribes of thine inheritance c we are thine c. O Lord thou art our father c. Answ. The people of God in Rome being his elect are under his covenant in regard of his electioÌ„ which was before the world began but until they be called come out they appear not unto men to be under the visible covenant of Gods church whereof Paul speaketh in the place alleaged 2 Cor. 6. That the godly Iewes in Babylon figured Gods elect I before shewed from Rom. 11. 4. 5. 7. and mine opposite gainsayeth it not That God calleth the elect his people even before they know or obey his voice was shewed him also heretofore when God sayd to Paul of heathenish Corinth J have much people in this citie Act. 18. 10. yet Paul knew not who they were till after they beleeved by his preaching So Christ sayd Other sheep J have which are not of this fold Ioh. 10. 16. speaking of the elect gentiles whiles yet they were not sheep actually before men but wild beasts of the wood His comparison from Esai 63. if it be referred to the Martyrs which the church of Rome hath imprisoned killed banished for the trueth is fit and I acknowledge them visibly under Gods covenant But referred to them that are one with the church of Rome in her faith and religion it is very unfitt For those people of God in Babylon were in civil bondage but in freedome of spirit and not servants to syn such were Daniel Ananias and other saints But these of the Romish church religion are in spiritual bondage to Antichrist and so partakers of his synns and in state of death by mans judgement till they obey their calling and come forth though God knoweth them before to be his people by election of grace By this which hath been sayd the wise may discerne what weight there is in Rev. 18. to prove Babylon the present church of Rome to be the church of God because out of her God calleth his people And let all men take notice of the mayn ground of his errour that he would have Babylon now to be the civil state or material citie when in deed it is the ecclesiastical or church For God calleth not peoples out of their civil states it is a doctrine of rebellion so to interpret it and contrary to Rom. 13 but from their synfull ecclesiastical estate All civil states though governed by Popish yea or heathenish magistrates are sanctified to Gods people Act. 25. 10. 11. Rom. 13. 1. 2. c. 1 Pet. 2. 13. 14. 17. they may lawfully continew under them have the use and benefit of them they are all of God and none of them from the bottomless pit or of the Divil as is the Beast the Empire of Antichrist Rev. 17. 8. from which God calleth all his people Of comparing the church of Rome with Israel MIne opposite laboured to strengthen his former reason froÌ„ Rev. 18. by saying And so Jsrael is often called the Lords people in the
time of their apostasie 2 King 9. 6. c. I answered the Question was not hereby prooved For 1. The Antichristian church is Babylon Rev. 16. 19 and 18. 2. and out of her that is Babylon are Gads people called Rev 18. 4. Now to prove her Gods church they flee to Jsrael wheras the Gentiles were her true types Rev. 11. 2. 9 18. though all the wickednes and hypocrisie of apostate Israel is also found in this Romish Babel His reply is Let the reader judge whether the point in hand touching that phrase of Gods people to imply the covenant of God be not proved by the example of Jsrael Ans. I leave it also to judgment whether the Question touching the church of Rome be proved hereby As for the phrase of Gods people in that church I never denyed it to imply the covenant of God to some visibly as the Martyrs of Christ killed in that church to other some according to the election of grace which shal appeare when they obey theyr calling and are come out of her as before I shewed Moreover he sayth the question was about the Temple of God 2. Thes. 2. wherabout he alleaged that terme and estate of the people of God Rev. 18. 4. but J flee to Babylon c. Answ. A plaine evasion The question was about the church of Rome as before I shewed from his own graunt To justifie her to be Gods church he alleaged 2 Thes. 2. for one proof Rev. 1◠for an other Rev. 18. 4. for a third and now the state of Israel for a fourth His other repetitions I have answered before I alwayes distinguished in Rev. 11. between the Gentiles the Antichristians and the holy citie and court which they have destroyed troden under foot and stil doe Neyther have I denyed but the idolaters in Iudah and Israel were types of Antichristians in part but this I sayd and still say that the more full and perfect type of them is by the holy Ghost shewed us to be in the Sodomites Egyptians and Babylonians Rev. 11. 17. 18. As the Priests of Aaron were types of Christ but Melchisedek was a more full and perfect type of him as the Apostle proveth in Heb. 7. Againe if that which he striveth for were granted him namely that Israel in apostasie typed out Antichristians and that Israel was notwithstanding a true church yet wil it not follow therefore the Antichristian church of Rome is a true church also For the apostasie and idolatrie of Rome is farr greater then Israels as I have elswhere shewed and can easily confirme against any that shall gainsay it 2. Mr. Io. himself maketh Antiochus and his captaines which were of the worst sort of heathens to be types and figures of the Pope and his hierarchie which are the Bishops priests and Deacons of the church of Rome as before we have seen Yet would he not admitt of this conclusion therfore the Bishops Priests and Deacons of the church of Rome are heathens as was Antiochus So his reasoning for Israel though it were true will be no sound proof for Rome Types figures and similitudes hold in some things not in all and it is a very easy thing to deceive men by figures similies allegories But the plaine doctrines in the scripture they are a sure ground and if any doe wrest a type or similitude against them it is to be rejected what colour soever it hath Now mine opposite reasoneth not from these doctrines which would soon end the strife For the scripture plainely sayth that Antichrist the man of syn is the son of perdition and all that beleeve his lyes and folow him are damned 2 Thes. 2. 3. 10. 11. 12. That Antichrist is a lyar denying both the Father and the Son 1 Ioh 2. 22. they that are of God doe overcome him they that are of the world hear him Hereby is knowen the spirit of trueth and the spirit of errour 1 Joh. 4. 3. 6. They that belong to the Lamb Christ on mount Sion have his Fathers name written on their foreheads Rev. 14. 1. and worship not the beast nor receive his mark Rev. 20. 4. but they that belong to Antichrist and have not their names written in the book of life doe worship the beast and receive his mark and shal be tormented for ever Rev. 13. 8. 16. 14. 9. 10. 11. But the church of Rome beleeveth Antichrists lyes worshipeth the Beast and his idols receiveth his mark and is partaker of all his abominations Who now without open injurie to the word of God can make this people the true church of Christ and in the visible covenant of grace On the other hand my Opposites reasons are drawen from that figurative phrase the Temple of God 2 Thes. 2. and the type of apostate Israel and an objection cast in the way to stumble at that else we must be baptised againe as if men that can not tell how to avoyd an inconvenience must run into a mischief to justifie those whom God cōdemneth And upon these and the like grounds are his reasons framed as may be seen throughout his work with some few props of humane authoritie to undershore them Though this brief answer might serve unto all his discourse about the state of Israel yet for to help the weak reader that might stumble at some things layd in his way I wil annex a few moe observations Vnder his wonted title of Errours evasions contradictions c wherwith he chargeth me this is 1. That the Temple of God 2 Thes. 2. 4. is no more Gods temple then Ieroboams idol temples in Jsrael and Bels temple in Babylon yet also J sayd it was to be understood of Gods church people invaded and destroyed by Antichrist c. Answ. This his tautologie I have before answered and cleared my self both of errour and contradiction For that Antichrist should destroy Gods temple and church I proved by the example of the Babylonians burning the Citie Temple of God and captiving his people and by the measuring of the new building Rev. 11. That this being doen Antichrist should have an other Temple and church of his own frame which he should call Gods and Christs I shewed by the Beast arising from the sea and from the earth with hornes like the Lamb Christ Rev. 13. which beast is a kingdom spiritual or ecclesiastical politie a great whore Rev. 17. by Antichrist adified adorned mainteyned which stil he pretendeth to be the ancient catholik church and temple of God Now further for Ieroboam that drew Israel into syn he confesseth that he was a type of Antichrist though he sheweth not wherin But Ieroboams syn was in making a new House or Temple and a new altar to sacrifice in unto God and new priests with new signes as Calves to worship God by 1 King 12. In these things then he must be a type of Antichrist who accordingly if he answereth to his figure must erect
sitteth as God in the Temple of God carrying them to destruction Whereas to prove the Temple of God 2. Thes. 2. which he expoundeth the Church of Rome to be the true Church he alleaged Zach. 6. 12. 13. Eph. 2. 11. c. 2. Cor. 6. 16. Rev. 11. 19. I shewed how he misapplied the Scriptures he repeateth his former answers which I have formerly resuted And now he addeth But to put him from his shifts let him tel us plainly when Paul sayth The Temple of God hath not agreement with Idols 2. Cor. 6. 16. if yet there be idols set in the Temple of God as was in the time of Manasseh and Antiochus whether now it ceased to be the Temple of God or not The Scripture sheweth it is the Temple of God notwithstanding 2. King 21. 7. Ier. 50. 28. Ezek 8. 5. 10. 16. Dan. 11. 31. 38. Answ. I tell them plainly that that Temple of God which the prophets speak of had no agreement with idols though the wicked set up idols in it by force But the Church of Rome which these call the Temple of God hath agreement with idols if images of silver and gold wood and stone a wheaten god in the Masse and the man of syn which sitteth as God be idols For these idols the Church of Rome worshipeth and serveth most synfully but the Temple of God which the Prophets speake of never worshiped the Idols set up in it nor had accord with them But this is a shift of shifts and a notorious sophisme in mine opposite to reason from the materiall Temple of God then which onely suffered that abuse to the spirituall Temple the Church or people now which are voluntary agents worshipers of Idols By which false argumentation he might even as well conclude that if the Papists should turn flat Pagans of Antiochus religion and serve his idols and be of his faith yet they should continue the true Church and people of God notwithstanding because the Temple then continued Gods true Temple notwithstanding all that Antiochus did thereto The next point touching their baptisme I will anone treat of in particular For his objection of salvation now had in the Church of Rome c. it was his second main argument for that Church which I have before answered he after his manner repeateth againe and againe the same things so lengthening his work I referr the reader to that answer I gave before Other things whereby I convinced his doctrine to beat the path for all licentiousnes contrary to the plaine Scriptures which shew that he that committeth sin is of the Divil and we know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not c. 1. Ioh. 3. 8. 5. 18. whereas if that he plead for be true men may be as prophane as Esau filthy in life as Sodom idolatrous and sinfull as the Aegyptians and Babylonians and yet if they wil call themselves Christians and be outwardly baptized c. they shal be justified as Gods true Church they and their seed in his covenant of grace c. which is to strengthen the hands of the wicked that he should not returne from his wickednes by promising him life Ezek 13. 22. These and other like things he passeth over without word of answer It is ynough for him to cry the Temple of God the Temple of God and to insist upon phrases which may diversly be understood Whereas the sound plea should be from the doctrines of faith and sanctification of life according by which the Apostles teach us to discern true Christians from false And who that seeketh after the truth would not rather insist upon these main grounds taught by our Saviour and his Apostles Verily I judge this pleading for Rome to be an exceeding great sin because it by consequence overthroweth both faith and holines seeing misbeleevers and most synfull idolaters as ever were on earth are justified to be Gods true Church notwithstanding and in his covenant of grace contrary to the whole Testament of Christ. It is to make a wide gate and broad way into heaven and will make men secure in all syn if they that serve the Man of syn himselfe worship his idols beleeve in his heresies and walk in his wicked works which hope to merit salvation by them in heaven may be sayd to be true Christians and in the state of grace Of the state of the Heathen WHereas I sayd J held it presumption for any to limit God by how smal meanes or measure of faith and knowledge he will save a man Who dares den but God had many elect among the heathens after he had separated Jsrael from them Yea God expresly sayd when he made Israel his peculiar people that yet all the earth was his Exod. 19 5. which are the words of the covenant generally Wherefore we leave Gods secret counsels to himself as he willeth us Deut. 29. 29. and doe consider onely the visible state of Churches by the rules of Gods law and promises To this mine opposite sayth What is it that he meaneth hereby Jf by the covenant he mean the covenant of grace for salvation whereof we treat and think that all people of the world in all ages and places of the earth are under it what differeth this from the opinion of the Anabaptists and Armintans touching general redemption Jf he speak not of the covenant of grace which is for salvation all may perceive he speakes not to the point in hand Answ. My meaning is plaine that God had his elect among the heathens as he bath in the Church of Rome and he could not but see what I intended By the covenant generally with all nations I mean the same that himself alleaged whileare from Keâ—kerman of the Church largely taken which he explaineth the company of all those which professe Christian religion or the name of Christ in what manner soever And thus sayth he are all heretikes schismatikes and Arians Papists Anabaptists and such like referred to the Christian Churches So if he understood himselfe he might understand me when I spake of the covenant generally For such large Churches as he describeth I hold all nations to be when God made his speciall covenant with Israel Noe was a Christian and had the covenant of grace in Christ to him and to his seed as absolutely as any Christian Church in the Apostles dayes though the mystery of the Gospel was not then so clearly revealed * as it was afterward by the Apostles But for the substance of the covenant namely Christ and faith in him with obedience it was given to Adam and his seed to Noe and his seed Heb. 13. 8. 11. 1. 2 3. 4. 7. c. And this covenant of grace in Christ confirmed by sacrifices as to us now by the sacraments Which sacrifices all nations kept the first thousand yeers after Noe which was till after Moses death as well as the large Christian
Elias prayer against Israel and Gods answer J have reserved to my self 7000. men who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal Even so then sayth he at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace c. By this we are taught 1. That if a few or any one of a people be reserved of God though the multitude be cast away yet it cannot be sayd absolutely that God hath cast away his people And this may lead us to understand why God called Israel his people in their apostasie because some he kept from falling into it some he brought out of it by repentance 2. That those are in deed Gods people whom he foreknew the rest are cast off Now those which are foreknowen of God are described thus that he also did predestinate them to be conformed to the image of his sont them he also called them he also justified them he also glorified Rom. 8. 2◠〈◊〉 Thus are we led to judge who are Gods people when we see their calling justifying and gloryfying that is their sanctification â— Cor. 3â— â—8 by which iâ— charitie we are to judge of their predestination and estate in grace 3. That as the remnant of the Iewes which imbraced the gospel were the election of grace that is the people whom in charitie we should judge to be elected of God according to his grace and the others are blinded hardned cast off til God give them repentance so in Israel they that kept themselves from the coÌ„mon idolatrie of Baal inwardly and outwardly and reteyned the true service of God were his election of grace and to be judged his true people the others that synned in Baal were dead til God gave them repentance unto life Thus the Apostles exposition and application of those 7000. in Israel may help us to judge of their estate aright And not because circumcision was unto them the seale of grace and of forgivenes of synns to conclude that therfore it was likeweise to them that served Baal for so we should prostitute Gods grace and the seals therof to such as God condemneth and rejecteth Fiftly he instanceth the worship of Baal by Iudah Ier. 7. Judg. 2. c. Wherto I answer as before that Iudah in her constitution remayned a true church though corrupted Israel being a false church as hath been manifested Neyther was the defection universall and open as in Israel As for such in Iudah as so fell from God and would not be brought to repentance the Prophet telleth them they trusted in lying words when they sayd The Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord c. Ier. 7. 4. 8. the Lord threatneth to cast them out of his sight and forbad his Prophet to pray for them Jer. 7. 15. 16. So their circumcision became unto them uncircumcision Rom. 2. 25. To this he objecteth Though mans idolatrie c may make Gods sacraments improfitable to himself yet can they not make them lying and deceitfull signes but that in the Lords ordinance they are unto all and therfore also unto them his true signes and faithfull seals on his part of forgivenes of synns and life eternal For shall the infidelitie of man turne the truth of God into a lye God forbid Answ. I have before answered that all Gods ordinances are in them selves and on his part holy faithfull and true They are true seals of forgivenes of synns but to such as are worthy partakers of them in faith otherweise they seale judgment unto men 1 Cor. 11. 27. 28 29. And it is not his ordinance that open and obstinate idolaters and wicked men should administer or receive them Ezek. 44. 9. Numb 15. 30. 31. Levit. 7. 20. Psalm 〈◊〉 1â— 17. That men may turne the truth of God into a lye the Apostle plainly teacheth Rom. 1. 25. so may they the truth of his ordinances into lyes But the truth of God as it is in himself or his faithfulnes is unchangeable if men beleeve not or sanctifie him not they perish by the judgment of God which is according to trueth and his faithfulnes suffreth him not to save such unless he make them first new creatures and beleevers Joh. 3. 36. 1. Joh. 5. 10. 12. Sixtly he expoundeth Israels death in Hos. 13. 1. to be by the exposition of sundry writers not death in syn but slayn for their synns or their estate overthrowen or neer utter destruction c. Answ. Both may be true that first they were dead in syn and after destroyed civilly for their syn Gods judgmeÌ„ts are according to mens deserts he destroyed not the Amorites Egyptians and other nations til their iniquitie was full Gen. 15. 16. Wherfore to condemne the exposition which I gave because an other consequent folowed upon it as the ruine of Achabs house or the like is no fitme argument And to his many expositors whom he citeth I oppose one greater then all even th'Apostle in Rom. 11. before spoken of who sheweth the election of grace to be in the 7000 that worshiped not Baal and not in the multitude of the Baalists And if they were not of the election of grace then were they dead in syn though he and many say the contrary Finally he alleageth the sayings of the Prophet before and after The Lord found Iakob in Bethel and there he spake with us c Therfore turne thou to thy God c. Hos. 12. 4. 5. 6. 9. And yet am J the Lord thy God from the land of Egypt and thou shalt know no God but me I did know thee in the wildernes c. Hose 13. 4. 5. Answ. I have before shewed that the prophets speak to Israel as a corporation or body which after a sort continueth one and the same through many generations when yet as touching their particular persons or generations they are different contrary as godly fathers in the state of grace and life may beget wicked children without grace and in state of death Ezek. 18. 9. 10. 13. 14. 17. 18. c. So the King of Tyre had been in Eden the garden of God a proselyte in the Church Ezek. 28. 13. not that heathen king then living but his predecessor Huram long before 1. King 5. So Paul speaketh of the Iewes cast away of God as the same people till their last calling Rom. 11. And I doubt not but a man preaching to convert them at this day might apply unto them the like sayings I am the Lord thy God from the land of Egypt thou shalt know no God but me J led thee in the wildernes c. But alwayes in such general phrases the promises of grace belong onely to such as beleeve and turne to the Lord the others that remaine hardned shall perish And hitherto of his exceptions against the scriptures which I cited although as I shewed if they had continued Gods true church in the land yet wheÌ„ they were for obstinacie in their synns cast
their God and the Chaldee paraphrast as ancient as the Apostles age expoundeth the house of their idols they contradict not one another seing the same thing may be Gods in shew and the divils in deed and trueth for even Satan himself is transformed into an Angel of light 2 Cor. 11. 14. Obj. When the Apostle describeth the mysterie of Antichrists iniquitie would he teach the church that the place of his sitting is the Temple of God if he meant that it were in deed the synagogue of Satan and the temple of Antichrist For that Antichrist should sit in the temple of Antichrist and synagogue of Satan what mysterie is there in it All the world would easily perceive that these agreed very well and most fitly togither But for Antichrist to sit in Gods temple and Christs church this is in deed a mysterie Answ. The mysterie of iniquitie began in the true church but continued not therein alwayes for when it was discerned the church eyther cast it out or soon degenerated into a synagogue of Satan if it accepted Antichrist for God as the Church of Rome doth at this day Which I further manifest thus 1. The Apostle sayth As ye have heard that Antichrist shal come even now are there many Antichrists c. They went out from us but they were not of us for if they had been of us they would no doubt have continued with us but they went out that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us Who is a lyer but he that denyeth that Jesus is the Christ he is Antichrist that denyeth the Father and the Son Whosoever denyeth the Son the same hath not the Father 1. Joh. 2. 18. 19. 22. 23. This scripture teacheth us first that all hereticks departing from the faith of Christ are generally Antichrists though they reteyn the name of Christians still as did the hereticks in th'Apostles time 2. That such are gone out from the church and are in deed none of it though they pretend to be the true church as all hereticks have doen. 3. That both teachers and people departed from the faith and church of Christ are comprehended under the name of Antichrists and not the Bishops onely 4. That whosoever is Antichrist especially the great Antichrist he denyeth the Son Christ and consequently God the Father Now let us apply these things to the Bishop and hierarchie of Rome whome mine opposite granteth to be the great Antichrist If the Pope and his hierarchie be Antichrist then are they none of the Apostolik church but gone out of the same but they are Antichrist by my opposites owne confession Therfore they are none of th'Apostolik church The Pope and his hierarchie are both in and of the church of Rome the heads teachers and principall members of it of the same faith religion and worship but they are not in or of the Apostolik christian church as before is proved therfore the church of Rome is not an apostolik Christian church If the church of Rome denyeth both the Father and the Son then is it Antichrist as the Apostle sayth and so no true Christian church But the church of Rome denyeth both the Father and the Son therfore it is no true Christian church If the Pope his hierarchie deny both the Father and the Son then the church of Rome also denyeth them for they beleeve as the Pope and hierarchie beleeveth have one and the same religion with their preists But the Pope and his hierarchie deny both the Father and the Son otherweise they are not the Antichrist as mine opposite sayth they are therefore the Church of Rome also denyeth both the Father and the Son Now seing it is thus how is it possible that it should cōtinue the true Church of Christ otherweise then by lying pretext and ostentation And this is the mysterie of inquitie if men could comprehend it that the Bishops and people of Rome being at first Christs true church departed by degrees from the faith worship of God til they came joyntly to beleeve lyes and to worship creatures idols and divils Rev. ◠30. and became a Beast or Antichristian kingdome yet with two hornes like the Lamb Christ Rev. 13. blaspheming Gods Tabernacle them that dwel in heaven that is the true church they pretend themselves to be the onely true church of Christ and that all other are hereticks they pretend succession even from th Apostles dayes without change of religion and so they sit in the temple of God or for the Temple as if they none but they were the Temple and church of God the Pope being the head of this sinfull corporation of this Beast or kingdome and exalting himself above God Christ whiles yet he calleth himself Christs vicar and the Servant of the servants of God and by strong delusion keepeth his people in beleef of lyes that togither with him they all might be damned who beleeve not the trueth but have pleasure in unrighteousnes as the Apostle sayth 2. Thes. 2. 12. Now where he objecteth what mysterie is there in it that Antichrist should sit in the temple of Antichrist I answer it is a great mysterie in that it is doen by him and his under the name and shew of Christianitie and as the Apostle sayth after the working of Satan with all power and signes and lying wonders and with all deceivablenes of unrighteousnes 2. Thes. 9. 10. And where he further sayth but for Antichrist to sit in Christs church this is in deed a mysterie I answer it is in deed a contrarietie and impossibilitie not a mysterie for no man can serve two masters Mat. 6. 24. of whom a man is overcome of the same is he brought in bondage 2. Pet. 2. 19. to whom men yeild themselves servants to obey his servants they are to whom they obey Rom. 6. 16. Now the church of Rome yeilding unto and obeying Antichrist cannot be the servants of Christ if th' Apostles doctrine be true And after mine opposites manner of reasoning an other man might say seing Christianitie is the mystirie of godlines 1. Tim. 3. 16. as Antichristianitie is the mysterie of iniquitie 2. Thes. 2. 7. Christ must sit in the Temple of Satan as Antichrist sitteth in the temple of God for for Christ to sit in the Temple church of Christ what mysterie is there in it but for Christ to sit in Satans temple and Antichrists church this is in deed a mysterie Were not this think we good reasoning to put darknes for light and light for darknes Christ into Antichrists place and Antichrist into Christs for to finde out a mysterie But they that have their eyes opened to read the mysterie that is not onely in the Pope but on the forehead of the whore of Babylon his church will soon espie this fraud though others are bewitched with her painted face For as Satan can transforme himself into an Angel of light and his ministers
and without Law So mine opposite hath the Israelites own erroneous judgment to help him I have the Lords judgment his Prophets against both him and them He then referreth us to his former book where he shewed diverse respects how on their part they brake the covenant but the Lord brake it not on his part but called them to repentance c. To which book of his I gave answer and have in this also before shewed how he yieldeth me the mayn ground namely that the covenant of grace is conditional onely if men repent and beleeve Which seing the scripture witnesseth that Israel did not 2 King 17. 13. 14. 15. 16. they remayned still without the true God without teaching Priest and without Law til the Lord cast them out of the land and scattred them among the heathens which were without God and without Law before them And now what could their circumcision Passover sacrifices c availe them but seale up their further judgment who had rejected the true God but falsly reteyned and abused the signes of his favour to their condemnatió Touching Ier. 3. 8. GOD testifieth of adulterous Israel J put her away and gave her â— bill of divorce Ier. 3. 8. Then was she no longer his wife nor he her husband but the covenant of her spirituall mariage was disanulled even on Gods part also Yet the Israelites kept circumcision the signe and seale of his covenant but by usurpation not by right so it was in their abuse of it no true signe or sacrament unto them To this he answereth that the Prophet spâ—kâ— this in Josiahs dayes at which time Jsrael was caried captive into Assyria So this place is not to the point of the question of their state from Ieroboams time all the while they abode in the land Answ. First he takes it for granted that by the bill of divorce is meant their putting out of the land which though I should grant him as I will not deny it but leave it to further consideration yet it is to the question in hand touching their circumcision which they stil reteyned and were upon repentance received to the Passover without any new circumcising in the flesh Ezr. 6. 21. and he himself urgeth this very place of Ezr. 6. against the Anabaptists to prove they need not baptise againe the same by as good right doe I urge against him Yea and suppose that I erred in judging of their estate while they were in the land yet this their estate after is ynough to prove my cause namely that Circumcision and so baptisme usurped by false churches or by them that are no church as Israel now were no people need not be repeated Wheras he pleadeth if Rome be not the true church have not the true baptisme we are to be baptised againe Now that in Ezr. 6. was many yeres after Israels captivitie or divorce for it was after Iudahs captivitie and returne after 70. yeres When Gyrus to whom the Lord God of heaven had given all the kingdomes of the earth proclaimed the peoples returne throughout all his kingdome At what time as those that had been caried to Babylon returned Ezr. 2. to the number of 42. thowsand and moe so after in Darius dayes Ezr. 6. when the children of Israel which were come out of captivitie kept the Passover with joy for that the Lord had turned the hart of the King of Assyria unto them all such as had separated themselves unto them from the filthynes of the heathen of the land to seek the Lord God of Israel did eat with them Ezr. 6. 21. So they of Israel that had been captived in Assyria and returned to the Lord were received without any new circumcising as they were also before in Ezekias dayes 2 Chron. 30. Which example being in the dayes of Ezra and other prophets written in the scriptures for our instruction is a sufficient ground for us now to doe the like whom the Lord hath brought out of the Antichristian Babylon and Assyria that we may eat the Lords supper and injoy other his ordinances without any new baptising with water The bill of divorce he expoundeth to be the putting of them out of the land of Canaan as out of the Lords house or presence from Hos. 9. 3. 15. 17. 2 King 13. 23. A woman divorced is termed hee sayth one that is cast out or thrust forth out of her husbands house Ezek. 44. 22. Thus some think excommunicats to have a bill of divorce c. and then also they are not to be esteemed as put out of the covenant of the Lord but from his house and family til they repent So as upon their repentance they ought to be received againe into the Lords house without any new baptising of them againe which yet should be if they had been put out of the covenant of the Lord. For baptisme is the signe of our entrance thereinto c. Answ. By this it appeareth he takes the bill of divorce for no putting out of the covenant but out of the house out of the land of Canaan onely Which if it be so then the mariage of Israel was no taking into the covenant but into the land of Canaan And this agreeth well with the Anabaptists who hold that Israels covenant was not the covenant of grace but a carnal covenant promise of the land of Canaan It is knowen that the bill of divorce disannulleth the covenant of mariage as appeareth in the Law in Deut. 24. First by the name Câ—rithuth that is Cutting-off secondly by the libâ—â—ty thereupon following that she may marry another man thirdly by the just cause therof which is whordome Math. 19. 9. fourthly by the consequent therof that a man having so put away his wife for whordome he also may without danger of adulterie marie an other woman which cannot be unless the covenant of mariage be disanulled Mat. 19. 5. 9. Fiftly it is confirmed by the copie of the bill of divorse used in the common wealth of Israel as appeareth by their ancient records in these words Jn such a day of the week c J N. the son of N. have voluntarily c dismissed left and put away thee even thee N. the daughter of N. c. which hast been my wife heretofore but now J dismiss thee and leave thee and put thee away that thou mayst be free and have power over thyne own soule to goe away to be maried to any man whom thou wilt c. Sixtly it is testified by the Apostle writing to the Israelites the strangers scattred throughout Pontus Galatia c 1 Pet. 1. 1. and saying to them Which in time past were not a people but are now the people of God which had not obteyned mercie but now have obteyned mercie 1 Pet. 2. 10. Wherby it is evidently proved that their divorce was from the Lord and from being his people or partakers of his mercie in