they were asserted as will appear in its place I pass your Epistle and come first to your five serious Questions 1. Qu. Whether such an uncharitable censorious proud disdainfull inveterate calumniating spirit as works in this man and others of the same lump doth ever shew it self in Scripture Ans 1. If not then you have declared your self to be as far from the spirit of a Christian upon the same account as the Collier whom you so much reproach witness this very question propounded and almost every page in your book witnesseth it but I desire not to scrape them up together And secondly The truth of those titles mentioned by you pag. 6. I leave to the Reader to judge and if I am become your enemy for telling you the truth I am contented through mercy to pass under your censure Your 2. quest Vpon what ground think you should he and men of the same temper and spirit with him use such bitterness against the Ministery c. Ans 1. We never used such bitterness against the Ministery of the Nation as they have against us We never desired to get an Ordinance from both Houses of Parliament to have them burnt in the forehead with the letter B. to have them imprisoned without Bail or Main-prise c. Though this is no ground to retort bitterness again in way of revenge but rather to pitty them 2. It is not their persons but their destructive Principles against which I write the Lord who knoweth all things knoweth that I lye not I should rejoyce in their conversion and do not question but that there are many that are honest and godly of them yet in Babylon and their duty is to come forth and till then blame us not for our dealing faithfully though sometimes ruggedly with them And I would have you to know that it is not a power to persecute them we look for no I had a thousand times rather Thomas Halls desire were granted to him that I with my books were burnt together then to have a hand in the personal persecution of Tho. Hall your self or any other for any principle or practise you hold in Conscience though it be known to me that it is contrary to truth Your 3. Quest Whether this open enmity against the Ministery of England which these men proclaim to all the world inveighing against them as Antichristian be not a thing abhorred of all gracious hearts For proof of this you produce Mr. Tho. Goodwyn Mr. Philip Nye Mr. Sidrach Simpson Mr. Jeremiah Burroughs Mr. William Bridge Apol. Nar. p 6. Ans The honesty of these men I question not Yet first what they say proves not the truth of what you desire for it is not the testimony of men but of God in the Scripture that will justifie both Ministry and Church And if that would do it I could produce others of the same way I suppose none will deny but that they were equal with them for godliness and learning who say the contrary Ainsworth Smith Robinson You seem to propound a strange Querie pag. 14. Whither would these men transport and carry you Not only off from Presbytery but Independents c. Ans In the light and power of truth we would carry them to the Lord Jesus that so they might know and obey him and worship the Father in him in spirit and in truth and this is the utmost that we desire And truly this is that which is my principle and practise 1. That we are justified freely by grace And 2. that this Justification where it is in truth enjoyed works over souls to a holy and humble walking with the Lord and obedience to him in all things That it is the duty of Believers according to the command of Christ and practise of his servants in the Primitive times to be baptized and so come into Church fellowship walking as with the Lord so one with another in love performing all duties of brotherly love as becometh souls made one in so high and heavenly a calling And hither it is we would transport and carry every soul that knows the Lord and this is a journey that you who call your selves Ministers cannot endure to undertake nor suffer those that would Your 4. Question is Were such things heard of in former times among the old Puritans c. Ans They were not sensible of those delusions in that way which now appear and many of them are made sensible of it and are departed from it Gods people cannot but depart out of Babylon when once they see themselves there and hear the Lords voice saying Come out of her my people partake not of her sins lest you partake of her plagues Those that have seen themselves in Babels confusion in respect of worship being delivered cannot but discover and lay open to others the mysterie of that iniquity though all the men and Ministers of the world dislike it c. Your 5. Question Hath it not been an old trick of such as have designed the shaking of the Christian faith first to begin with the faithfull Ministers c A. Though it hath been the design of the enemies of truth so to do yet 1. That justifies not you to be the godly Ministers And 2. The servants of the Lord may not neglect their duty in reproving sin where they find it because enemies to truth oppose the Ministers of Christ And 3. We give grounds from Scripture for what we say and do Justifie your selves to be the Ministers of Christ by your works according to Scripture and we have done till then forbear giving such language as you do to the servants of the Lord for their impartial publishing and professing of truth You 'll one day be ashamed of it So you say you come to his Errors which are many His first Error That the life of Ministers and Schollers educated in Schools of Learning is an idle life Ans 1. There are no such words in my book neither is there any truth in what you say but that which I say is that God hath always in all ages made use of men of Callings to be the Ministers of his mind unto the people and I desired you to produce any example in the Scripture that God made choice of any to be the Ministers of his mind unto the people who were bred up idly all dayes of their life without a Calling I do not say that the life of the Ministers of Christ is an idle life no I know the contrary but that which I say is that you can produce no example of any that were bred up idly without a Calling called to be Ministers yet you will have Idlers and none but them by your wils and God must have them or else he must have none at all You say o confirm this he sayes A Calling is that in and by which men in the sweat of their face get their living You answer O brave definition of a Calling c. Ans I wonder you
and errours the rest of them Inventions falslely charged by him 1. That Infant-Baptism came from the Pope and the Devil The truth of this assertion I refer the Reader to what I have said before and there you will see the Pope very probably that brought it in Higinus in the second Century 150 years after Christ 2. That Christ hath abolished the Law that is as to Believers as a dispensation in the hands of Moses see 2 Cor. 3. 11. 13. And the pure Gospel is the only Rule What son of Belial dare to deny this for the Law is brought forth in Gospel and as given forth by Christ is the pure Gospel Rule therefore though the substance of the old Command yet is called new because given forth upon the new and true account 1 Ioh. 2. 7. 8. 3. A Socinian his Tenet is that all gifted persons may preach without Ordination This is according to the truth of Scripture 1 Cor. 4. 31. 34. Where all that have gifts may prophesie none exempted except women 4. He is a Familist approving of dreams c. Answ That is false I do not approve them yet neither do I altogether deny but God may manifest himself in that way if he please not that it is my experience neither would I limit God Against Vniversities Arts Sciences not in themselves upon the humane account but as they are set up in the room of the Spirit of Christ so the wisdom of the world is foolishness with God 5. He is an Antiscripturist denying the truth of Scripture c. Answ Another most abominable falshood who will be the lyar anon Thomas Hall but you prove it learnedly 1. Because I approve of such who will not permit you to draw any consequences from Scripture because you have so much abused them with your consequences 2. Because minding some of your consequences I conclude that they are as true as Scripture if the people would but believe it You infer then that these consequences must be true or the Scripture is false I say and I supposed that you had had wit enough to understand that I spake in your language or in your sence that you account these consequences as true as Scripture if the people would believe you 3. He saith that in his general Epistle to the Saints chap. 10. p. 28. the Scripure is not sufficient to teach the knowledge of God I Query of any one who knows the Lord whether the Scripture without the Spirit of Christ doth or can teach any one true and saving knowledge and that some make too much of it that is such as Thomas Hall who think it able without the Spirit of Christ to teach the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ and if you could have told all you might have seen and said that I say there likewise that many make too little of it and that the substance of my Discourse there is to hold forth the truth and authority of the Scripture in the light of the Spirit that so souls by the teaching of the Spirit of Christ may come to a right understanding of them and that indeed its your selves that truly teach people to deny Scripture I own the truth of it and say that whoever denieth it must deny God Christ and all Religion and the truth is that your self it is that disowns it and reproacheth it too further then it stands with your own will 6. You say He is an Arian and Anti-Trinitarian denyes the Father Son and Holy Ghost are three distinct persons c. Answ I deny not the Trinity Father Son and Spirit but I deny any person in the Godhead at all that is a word or title given only to man and the Scripture you mention Heb. 1. 3. I am not altogether so ignorant of it as you would have me it is substance and not Person and this you know and abuse it not ignorantly but wilfully The same word Heb. 11. 1. is rendred substance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 faith is the substance of things hoped for not the Person that would be nonsense you must produce some Scripture where that Prosopon which signifieth Person is attributed to God or that Hypostasis is attributed to man before you can have any colour to call God three Persons or one either for he is a Spirit and will be worshipped in Spirit and Truth 7. He is an Anti-Sabbatarian he is all for a Spiritual Sabbath Answ Because I write of a spiritual Sabbath doth it therefore follow that I am an Anti-Sabbatarian have you ever seen any thing written by me against the Sabbath have you not cause to blush at your weakness or wickedness because I discover the spiritual Sabbath therfore you say I am against the Sabbath 8. An Independent as to man and creatures in the things of God but only on Jesus Christ and is this such a dangerous thing to be off from every thing save Jesus Christ 9. Arigid Separatist Answ Never too rigid in separating from Babylons false ways and worships which is no other then the Synagogue of Satan a Cage of every unclean and hatefull Bird I say it again for all your anger I must be faithfull I may not pittie or spare you for that will ruine you 10. A Perfectist see his Generall Epist to the Saints ch 15. p. 52. Answ No other then is the duty of every Saint to be that is pressing after perfection I there declare that perfection is not attainable in this life till the body of flesh is dissolved nor till the Resurrection neither I say no more of this but refer the Reader to the Epistle it self where you may see how the Hall hath stored up lyes to reproach the innocent 11. He is an enemy to all Learning he oft calls it the language of the beast c. Answ Keep it in its place and do as much good as you can with it but let it once get in the room of the Spirit then it puffs up with pride then it s but the language of the Beast of the fleshly man the smoak of the bottomless pit of mans wisdom and that which must be destroyed That the Spirit and Scriptures are sufficient for the Ministers calling c. At this you seem to rage extreamly as if this were such a dangerous Heresie that deserves no less then a stake a faggot and a fire could Tho Hall have his will let the Understanding judge I am sure I have heard one of your brethren more famous then ever your self in the eyes of the people assert this that the Scripture was sufficient for the Ministers calling c. who left out the Spirit of Christ but it seems your abilities depend upon your good old books Popish Fathers c. 12. He is against Magistrates Answ No such thing only my desire is that Magistrates should not rule where its alone Christs Prerogative I desire to give to Caesar that which is his and to God that which is his 13. Against Ministry Ans
men who seek themselves yet God hath hitherto so kept and carried me that I may say truly I have endeavoured to keep a Conscience void of offence both before God and men And as to those Principles of Truth by me owned although judged by men yet my judgement is with the Lord and he knows the way of his People but the way of the wicked shall perish Though I pass under the censure of Tho. Hall whom nothing but Fire and Fagot can satisfie and under the ignominious reproaches of Feriby Sanders and a thousand more yet none of these things trouble me and let none think that I am besides my self because I thus profess and write for if I am it is to the Lord and for your sakes for whom my desire is that you may be made partaker of the truth and that as it is in Jesus not after the will of men but of God I have presented to thy consideration these two things First the insufficiency of all those grounds produced for Infant-Baptism wherein its weakness and inconsistency with the Gospel will appear and the continued practice of the baptizing of Believers cleared and vindicated 2. A brief Reply to John Feriby and Richard Sanders wherein you may finde a farther confirmation of the truth asserted in the Pulpit-Guard Routed viz. the lawfulness of the Preaching of Gifted Brethren I have likewise three things to desire of the Reader 1. To read and judge Read and consider what thou readest for I have endeavoured to compose much in few words and that because I judged it to be for thy profit large Discourses being sometimes not so usefull therefore I say be content to spare a little time to consider and contemplate upon what thou readest and happily thou mayest come to see all those strong Guards broken and disperst as the morning dew before the Sun 2. Read with patience and be not troubled at that which may seem to thee to be harsh language or contrary to thy understanding and this I assure thee considering the Spirits of those men with whom I have had to deal I have passed through with as much moderation as possibly I could without betraying the Cause and giving but a word of reproof to an insulting adversary 3. Read and judge impartially lean not to the right hand or to the left for affection sake but desire the Lord from an impartial unbyast heart to lead thee into the truth resolve not to follow the traditions of men or Churches but the written word of Truth which is able to give thee direction as a rule of life through the blessing of the Spirit of Jesus and to make the man of God perfect throughly furnishing him to every good work Tho. Collier THE Font-Guard Routed SIR IT S faln to my lot once more to encounter with you and why to me more then to others because not only the Truth of Jesus his Honour and his servants in the profession of it lieth at stake but my self likewise in a special manner being not only concerned in the case in hand but likewise being deeply aspersed by your Libellous Tongue and Pen in your succeeding word to one Collier to which I shall reply in its time and place But Sir by the way it seems you are become an absolute Souldier a grand Captain Leader But what 's the work To guard Pulpits and Fonts forsooth I suppose you 'l be cautious of suffering much in defence of your Cause if you had intended it you would not have set your guards about that which none intends to take from you that I know of But is it truth in good earnest that your Font is affronted 1. I wonder you had not had more wisdom and forecast in you at first and have set your Guard round about your Kirk so one might have served for the whole and have saved you much labour and expence of time but I suppose your wisdom lay in this You guarded the Pulpit first that so being routed there you might have a fair retreat to the holy Font and when routed there you might sound another retreat but whither I know not unless to the high Altar viz. the Communion Table so called or into the Belfrey to secure the holy baptized Bels In Pope Johns time the 14. began the vile superstition of baptizing Bels Simpsons History of the Church Cent. 10. Or to take the Church doors c. But whither am I wandring I say no more of this but leave my name sake Tom to his own choice 2. I wonder that a wise man as Tho. Hall should have so little wit or so much idle time to set up such a strong guard in defence of that which none intends to take from him we baptize in Rivers not in Fonts we do not intend to take them from you no we know not what to do with them unless c. But 3. Did you ever read in Scripture of the Font or of baptizing in the Font I know you have not I remember I have read in the Popish Histories of the holy Font in the first institution of Infants baptism from thence you had both as in its time and place I shall let you see Now to your Arguments for that is it I intend to fall upon letting pass all other things for if I rout you there as I doubt not in the strength of Jehovah whom I serve in my spirit but that I shall rout you in all your twenty Arguments so the Commands of Christ and practise of the Apostles may stand clear before the sons of men and the Churches practise in baptizing Believers vindicated in opposition to all gainsayers Now to your first Argument Page 8. From the Covenant of grace which God made with the Faithfull and their Seed they are confederates say you joyned together in the Covenant of God c. Your first Argument is this Page 9. To whomsoever the Covenant it self belongs to them also belongs the seal of the Covenant But the Covenant belongs to Believers and their Children Ergo The seal of the Covenant belongs to them also I answer First your Minor is denyed That Children of Believers are in the Covenant of grace and here lies the ground of your miscarriage ignorance and error in this particular We will therefore come first to consider the Covenant it self which is the foundation on which you stand Gen. 17 7 10 11. This Covenant it self is wholly outward and it consists of two parts the one on Gods part to be performed the other on Abrahams and his childrens part That on Gods is in ver 7 8. I will be a God to thee and to thy seed after thee and I will give unto thee and to thy seed after thee the Land of thy sojourning all the Land of Canaan for an everlasting possession and will be their God This Covenant is outward and consists of an outward promise The Land of Canaan c. and is not in it self the everlasting Covenant of grace
Joh. 4. 24 God is a Spirit and they that worship him must worship in spirit and in truth and such the Father seeks to worship him Jesus Christ came forth from the Father for that end that he might gain a spiritual people to worship but your great work is to get in a natural people a carnal people the fleshly seed so contradicting the end of God in giving Christ upholding the Covenant made with Abraham and Moses so denying Christ to be come in the flesh I will not say at present for your own ends and interests The force of your first Argument being thus untwisted and its weakness and invalidity laid open I need not trace you in your Parallels what I have already written puts an end to your Parallels as far as you imagine they tend to uphold the strength of your Arguments I shall present another Parallel from what I have declared leaving it to the judgment of the judicious Reader to consider 1. The Covenant made with Abraham was an outward covenant and promise of the Land of Canaan Gen. 17. 10 11 12. 1. Ours is a spiritual Covenant and promise of in Jesus Christ the true spiritual Land of rest Heb. 4. 4. to 8. 2. That was made with Abraham and his natural seed Gen. 17. 7 8. 2. Ours is a Covenant made with Christ and all his spiritual seed Isa 59. 21. Gal. 3 29. 3. Circumcision was the seal of that Covenant Rom. 4. 11. 3. But the Spirit of grace is the seal of our covenant Eph. 1 â—3 4 30. 4. That was a Covenant that many most of those in it missed of eternal life Rom. 2. 27. 4 Ours is a covenant sure stedfast eternal everlasting to those once truly in it Isa 55 3. Jer. 31. 31 32. Joh 10. 28 29. 5. That was a Covenant that might be broken and had an end as all types end when the substance comes 5. Ours is a Covenant that cannot be broken nor shall ever have an end being the substance it self of the type Now to your second Argument from Circumcision The second Argument p. 13. Such as were circumcised under the Law may be baptized under the Gospel But the Jews with their Infants were circumcised under the Law Ergo Christians and their Infants may be baptized under the Gospel You confess that your Major is questioned as well it may be so I could give you several Arguments which you would not like as well grounded as this of yours but I forbear For proof of your Major 1. You say They are under the same Covenant That is denied and rased in my Answer to your former argument It is neither the same Covenant nor the same seal an outward seal to an outward Covenant an inward seal to an inward Covenant 2. You say There is the same reason for the one as for the other our children are born in original sin as well as theirs have the same need of the seal Oh unimaginable blindness was Circumcision or Baptism either ever given to seal up the pardon of original sin If it was then it must be pardoned or not pardoned if pardoned then sure else it is but the putting a seal to a blank But the truth is they were never given either of them upon that account or for that end to seal up the pardon of original sin And whereas you say there is the same reason for the one as for the other it is denied for the command of God is the reason of the one and of the other God commanded Infants to be circumcised he hath commanded Believers to be baptized and 't is reason that he should be obeyed as in the first so in the second it 's an unreasonable and wicked thing to contradict by contrary actions the commands of Christ 3. You say If Baptism succeed in the place of Circumcision then Baptism belongs to those to whom Circumcision did belong But Baptism doth succeed in the place of Circumcision Ergo c. I answer your Minor is denied 1. There is no Scripture that saith that Baptism was ordained in the place of Circumcision it 's your own invention never mentioned by the Apostles of Christ The Scriptures you mention Act. 2. 38 39. Col. 2. 11 12. have not the least hint in them to the thing in hand and are abundantly abused and wrested to that for which they were never intended as will appear 2. You confess that Baptism was in force before Circumcision was abolished Circumcision and Baptism stood both in force by a Law for some years at least 3 or 4 years Now if Baptism had come in the room of Circumcision then Circumcision must have ceased when Baptism came But Circumcision did not cease when Baptism came Therefore Baptism came not in the room of it If it be objected that Paul circumcised Timothy after the ascension of Christ I answer that was because of the Jewes for their weakness but it was in being by the Law of God untill the death of Christ So then I reason thus That which put an end to Circumcision came in the room of Circumcision but Christ put an end to Circumcision therefore he is come in the room of Circumcision That it was Christ and not Baptism that put an end to Circumcision is cleer Rom. 10. 4. Gal. 5. 2 3. So that Baptism did not put an end to Circumcision but Christ did therefore Baptism came not in the room of Circumcision 3. It could not come in the room of Circumcision to them that never had Circumcision but women were never circumcised the Gentiles were never circumcised and it could not come in the room of Circumcision to those which never were circumcised But you will say that women were virtually circumcised in the men c. And why are they not baptized virtually in the men too if you will take your rule from Circumcision let them be baptized in the men too 4. There is no parity but a disparity between Baptism and Circumcision as your self in some things have noted 1. In the action 2. in the time 3. in the subject 4. in the end First in the action that was the cutting of the foreskin of the flesh which occasioned blood this of Baptism a dipping into or under water Secondly for the time that was to be done at eight dayes old this of Baptism when the party desireth it professing faith and repentance to the satisfying of the Church be when it will Thirdly for the subject that was the Male only this of Baptism is to be administred on both men and women professing faith in our Lord Jesus and repentance towards God Fourthly for the end that is far wide as will appear in this ensuing Parallel 1. Circumcision set forth Christ to come 1. Baptism declares Christ already come 2. Circumcision represented the circumcision of the heart the cutting off of sin and self c. 2. Baptism declares the washing away of the guilt of sin and death and burial with
The second family is Act. 16. 15. Lydia and her family there might be Infants say you Querie 1. whether Lydia was a maid widow or wife Ans It is generally concluded on all hands that she had no husband for if she had he had been mentioned for alwayes the man bears the denomination where there is any and not the woman If it be objected he might not be baptized therefore not mentioned I answer the houshold were baptized therefore the husband if any and he must have born the name being the chief So its cleer there was no husband then where is your probability for Children Secondly the houshold of Lydia were brethren capable of comfort therefore not Infants v. 39. The third family mentioned is the Jailors Act. 16. 31 32 33. You say pag. 43. That he believed and presented his houshold upon his faith and they were baptized Ans Consider a little better of this Scripture 1. The Jailors houshold were such as were all capable of hearing the word v. 32. And they spake unto him the word of the Lord and to all that were in his house 2. They were such as with him rejoyced believing in God v. 34. And when he had brought them into his house he set meat before them and rejoyced believing in God with all his house So that they first hear secondly believe thirdly are baptized Where is your probability for Children now The fourth houshold is Crispus Act. 18. 8. The text is clear He believed in God with all his house The fifth is Stephanus 1 Cor. 1. 16. This houshold was such as were addicted to the ministry of the Saints 1 Cor. 16. 15. therefore not Infants But it seems you do not like to have these two Scriptures joyned together because the one so cleerly explains the other 2. You say that those that were of years might minister when Infants were only baptized I wonder what you mind by only were the Infants only baptized and those that did minister to the Saints not baptized That seems to be the probability and as like as the other But the text saith Ye know the houshold of Stephanus viz. the same houshold as was baptized You will distinguish for your own end when he saith the houshold that is say you those that were of years But you will permit no such distinction to us were not the Scriptures through mercy made cleer but it must be all the houshold not the major part for the whole Yet here you can presently divide or distinguish for your own ends when there is no place for a distinction These things thus considered let the Reader judge impartially the weight of your probability for precept promise or president as you have summ'd it up in the conclusion of this Argument The eighth Argument p. 44. Elect Infants may be Baptized Some Infants are Elect. Ergo Some Infants may be Baptized 1. I deny your Major though you are pleased to say it s granted by Mr. Tombs you abuse him he saith if that it were made known to us by their sanctification which is not so that Baptism was never administred upon this account viz. of Election but Believing so that though some Infants are Elect yet none are to be baptized upon that account only God having given us a visible rule to walk by and not to walk by such invisible rules which is known to God alone You confess page 45. That Election is a secret thing and that it belongs to God how dare you then to forsake that rule Christ hath laid down in the Gospel and dig after Gods secrets But were it truth what you say That elect Infants might be baptized if we knew them you do not know them therefore you cannot baptize them God hath given us a surer way 2. Should it be granted by way of concession if elect infants might be baptized will you therefore baptize all that 's the way to be sure indeed to catch the Elect but take heed of inventing and maintaining a way which never came into the heart of Jesus Christ to command look rather at things revealed and leave secret things to God The ninth Argument All Disciples ought to be baptized Infants are Disciples Ergo. The Major you say none will deny the Minor is denyed you say it s proved divers wayes 1. Those which the Scripture cals Disciples they are Disciples but the Scripture cals Infants by the name of Disciples Acts 15. 10. Why tempt ye God to put a yoke upon the neck of the Disciples And Circumcision is the yoke whereof the Apostle is speaking and they on whose necks this yoke lay were ordinarily Infants But were these Infants mentioned in this Chapter or was it not the Church of Antioch that was troubled with legal Teachers As a Child almost an Infant one of those you are pleading for might understand a simple and weak Argument to prove Infants Disciples there was circumcising others besides Infants when they came to be Proselytes And the Jews calling themselves Moses Disciples John 9. 28. because they owned Moses Doctrine as they thought in opposition to Christ therefore you say Infants were Moses Disciples a goodly conclusion A Disciple is one that is doctrinated or taught the principles of Moses or the principles of Christ this are not Infants therefore none of the Disciples of Christ 2. You say you prove it thus To belong to Christ is to be a Disciple of Christ Infants are said to belong to Christ Ergo. The Major is denyed For though all true Disciples belong to Christ yet all that belong truly to Christ are not Disciples All the Elect belong to Christ before they come into the world nay before they are conceived yet they are not Disciples Saul belonged to Christ before his conversion yet Saul was not a Disciple before but an enemy a persecutor of the Disciples and the truth is that no man is a Disciple before he receive the doctrine of Jesus Christ you make up strange Disciples for the Lord such as we never read of in Scripture you catch them in their Cradles to make them Disciples but they are never the rather for that the Disciples of Christ The Church of Ephesus belonged to Christ before their conversion yet see what Disciples they were before Ephes 2. 1 2 3. And likewise the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 6. 9 10. 11. And this I dare be bold to affirm That there is never a man or woman that is a Disciple indeed but knows a time when he was not a Disciple and yet now can see and say that he belonged to God before he was a Disciple Your Minor I question not but that some Infants belong to Christ 3. You say They are capable of Gods own teaching c. That is not questioned what capacity but what they are and what it appears they are taught when they are grown up to manifest it their capacity makes them no more Disciples then Sauls capacity made him a Disciple before he
ingrafted and bears them up and makes fruitful Whereas you say That by ingraffing in is meant admission into visible communion I say it is not only that but first faith and then admission into visible communion And one word by the way what visible communion are Infants capable of if they may some of them be capable of invisible union and communion with Jesus Christ yet where is their capacity of visible communion with the Church which consists in communicating of experiences in Ordinances fellowship in breaking bread and prayers where is your visible communion of Infants Sir You seem to answer an objection p. 63. Paul speaks of an invisible Church For my part I own no such objection for I know no invisible Church here upon earth for a Church of Christ is a company of believers walking in the visible profession of truth and there should be none in that profession but such as are believers indeed and if any come into the outward without the inward grace they must be plucked up Therefore I own not that distinction of visible and invisible The invisible Church are those out of sight that are departed the visible are those living in the visible profession of truth and these are they which are graffed in Rom. 11. Those that are graffed in truly shall stand and thrive the root Christ bears them They that are but in shew shall fall the root will not bear them because not graffed in by the heavenly Father In all this here is no room for the natural seed I leave it to the Reader to judge The fifteenth Argument From 1 Cor. 7. 14. Else were your children unclean but now are they holy From hence you argue They that are holy with a Covenant-holiness may be baptized But Infants born of one believing Parent are holy with a Covenant-holiness Ergo Such Infants may be baptized Your Major hath been often denied for it s but the substance of what you have often said before and therefore in substance I must answer what I have answered before there is no such thing mentioned in all the New-Testament as a federal holiness viz. an external Covenant-holiness without an internal this being the substance of what you say pag. 65. you confess children only by nature that there is no difference between the childe of a Christian and the childe of an Infidel Yet consider him as believing so he and his are holy he is holy spiritually but are his Infants so too no you confess pag. 62. This caution must be remembred that the holiness you speak of is not personal inherent holiness for this cannot be transmitted to posterity but t is a federal external Covenant-holiness Pray Sir the next time let me know where in the New Testament this same external holiness without the internal is so much spoken of or commended The Lord loveth truth in the inward parts and condemns hypocrisie and hypocrites he condemns the form without the power he owns no Jew but the spiritual no seed but the spiritual the axe is now laid to the root of the Tree every Tree that bringeth not forth good fruit must be cut down Mat. 3. and yet you are all for an outward holiness without the inward which is indeed and truth an abomination unto the Lord. But to come to the Scripture you pretend to ground your Argument from You say The Anabaptists have invented an evasion to avoid the force of the Text that say they it s a matrimonial holiness that they are legitimate and no bastards c. Which I affirm is the truth of the Scripture and shall 1. give some brief answers to what you assert And Secondly set down my reasons for what I affirm 1. You pretend the many absurdities that will follow if it be meant of a civil holiness 1. Then the children of Turks and Pagans born in Matrimony should be holy Answ and why not upon a Matrimonial account more holy that is more lawfull then those born of fornication And whereas you say they are dogs that are without c. It is true that is comparatively to the true Church and Spiritual Seed so are not only Turks and Pagans but most of your Church-members who do the same if not worse works then they only you have perswaded them into an outward Covenant as you and they imagine but that helps not the business 2. It s sin to wicked men what ever they do yet their civil actions are better to them as eating drinking plowing Marriage lawfull procreation of children then the contrary evil actions the Apostle saith that marriage is honourable among all Heb. 13. 4. If among all then among Turks and their children are civilly holy lawfully begotten according to a civil institution though nothing be truly and spiritually holy but to those in Christ it s a Law God hath written in the hearts both of Turks and Indians that they are more conscientious in defiling of the Marriage estate then many of those you call Christians 2. You say The Apostles reason would have no weight with it for their children were legitimate before conversion so he should allow them no more priviledge then meer Infidels have c. The Query is not what they were before conversion but one being converted and the other not the doubt ariseth whether or no the Believer must put away the unbeliever if he or she must do so then the children must be gone too both before and after conversion and this was a Priviledge to the Believer not to be compelled to part with his children though unbelievers had the same in being yet it was not to them such a priviledge for mercy is mercy to a Believer indeed he sees every thing sanctified to him which the unbeliever doth not 3. You say Then all bastards are unholy and must be damned Here is a simple one indeed coming forth from so wise and deep a head as Thomas Hall's 1. Must all be damned of necessity without the holiness you are pleading for 2. Do we or the Scriptures say that Bastards must be damned do you know from whence you have drawn that conclusion your self that Bastards must be damned if that be not a federall holiness but a marriage holiness that their children are legitimate then bastards must be damned Is this your Logick I leave it with you 4. You say The word holy is never used in all the Scripture for legitimation but generally for a thing separated from common use to Gods service c. 1. Thomas Hall shall confute Thomas Hall by and by see pag. 67. he saith That the sanctification of the unbelieving husband to the believing wife is not in respect of his personal condition but in respect of his conjugalrelation though he continue unclean towards God yet to his believing wife in a way of marriage he is sanctified that is he is holy for so the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth and in essence it s the
same as is said of the child 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but now are they holy so that first you say holiness is never used in all the Scripture for legitimation but generally for things separated to Gods service yet here you confess holiness is attributed to the unbeliever upon the Marriage account in way of Marriage he is sanctified c. And the Infants or children are sanctified with the same sanctification in the same way and this I take to be the jenuine signification of this Scripture I shall now give my reasons for it 1. There is no such thing in the Gospel as an external federal holiness it s a meer invention of man as I have often cleared 2. This interpretation viz. That they were lawfully begotten 1. reacheth the thing in hand most sutable for as Mr. Hall confesseth the Apostle is giving satisfaction to them concerning a scruple or doubt about mixed Marriages from Ezra 10. 2 3. Nehem. 13 23. And he satisfieth them that the Believer need not put away the unbeliever as the Jew did the Heathen for God had sanctified the unbeliever to the believer else were your children unclean that is your children must depart as those did Ezra 10. and Neh. 13. But now are they holy that is holy as the unbeliever is holy sanctified as the unbelieving husband is sanctified This is sutable to the thing in hand they are sanctified as every creature of God is sanctified to the believer 1 Tim. 4. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is sanctified by the word and prayer so is the unbeliever and children sanctified to the believer that he may comfortably injoy them 3. It can be no other sanctification then that of the unbeliever and that is granted by Tho Hall to be but a Marriage-Sanctification and the childes holiness can be no other for it flows from it the unbeliever is sanctified else were your children unclean but now are they holy He doth not say the Believer is sanctified else they were unclean and that must have been the words to have made any thing for your federal holiness but the unbeliever is sanctified c. It being thus cleared that the holiness of the childe flows from the Sanctification of the unbeliever then its the same with the unbeliever but it flows from it therefore one with it and this is concluded that a cause cannot produce a more excellent effect then it self the unbeliever he is sanctified saith Tho. Hall in way of marriage then I suppose its clear that the childs sanctification flowing from hence can be but of the same nature these things thus considered I leave it to the judgment of the Reader The sixteenth Argument From the many dangerous errours and absurdities that will follow this tenet 1. Then Christians Infants shall be losers by the coming of Christ c. Ans No losers at all for what advantage is it to be in an outward Covenant and to have that which you call a Seal and not to be in the grace of the Covenant but to be children of wrath as much as heathens as you confess pag. 10. a mear cheat a seal to a blank and the truth is you cannot devise a greater cheat for Infants then to tell them they are in the Covenant of Grace yet children of wrath as well as heathens in it yet out of it and by this are the nations cheated into a Form of Godliness thinking themselves in a Covenant of Grace and in a moment go down to Hell 2. You say Then grace should be larger then then it is now c. Answ No such thing the Covenants considered that was a Covenant of the land of Canaan which belonged to all the Seed therefore they were all circumcised as a sign of their obedience and all partaked of the Promise which was but a Type of the Gospel Covenant ours is a Spiritual Covenant of the Spiritual Land the Lord Jesus and belongs to none but the Spiritual Seed and to them its more excellent and more large and as sure if not more sure then that was to the natural Rom 4. 16. That was large and sure to the natural this large and sure to the Spiritual seed 3. You say Then there would be no difference between the childe of a Christian and the childe of a Pagan c. Then Dogs and Swine shut out of the new Jerusalem Rev. 22. 15. Answ And is there any difference by nature think you unless grace make a difference doth your federal holiness and baptism make such a difference doth it receive them into the new Jerusalem when you confess them children of wrath as well as the children of heathens are notwithstanding your federal holiness Do not you by your pretended outside holiness rather shut them out of the new and true Jerusalem and dare you say Turks Tartars and Heathens are all shut out from thence May there not be a time when grace may reach them too And may not Infants when grown in years have the means of working faith and that in a more hopeful way when dealt faithfully withall and not deluded with a shadow without the substance by which means they may through grace come to attain an interest in the new and true Covenant 4. You say Then they are without Christ without hope without God c. Ans And are they any better in your fained Covenant unless they have an interest in truth in Christ and in God Which is best to be without Christ and thinke they have him or to be without Christ and know it And who are likeliest to abide longest without Christ those who are deluded and cheated with something like Christ yet not him or those who are left as they are in their natural condition that so they may have nothing to delude themselves withall but seek after the true God in the use of means God making them sensible of the want of it 5. You say Then they are the Devils children Ans So they are notwithstanding your federal holiness if they do his work Joh. 8. 44. All you plead for changes not the nature but the name a sad delusion 6. You say This robs Christ of his glory then the first Adam was more powerfull to destroy then Christ to save c. Ans It is that makes for the glory of Christ it 's the fulfilling of his will and mind But you dishonour him in calling his name upon a company of people that do not know him nor honour him in their conversation It seems you are an Vniversalian you will have Christ to save all that fell in Adam if all that partake of Adams sin must partake of Christ Truly sir none are like to partake of Christs grace but believers that I know of and this faith is the gift of God Ephes 2. 8. Therefore take heed how you stretch the grace of Christ beyond what it was intended lest you delude souls with the name of grace without the truth 7. You say Then Infants
the judgement of the Church he may lawfully nay he ought to submit unto the Call of God be he high or low from the Speaker of the House or President of the Counsell of State unto the Hewer of wood and Drawer of water and this is a true Call when thus called of God therefore all you say to this is but an idle fancy you have no ground for it His second Error That Infant-Baptism is a childish thing And this you say He will own for a Truth And this I do say I still own for a Truth and that first in the Subject 2. In the Administrators You say There is an Objection lies in the way which he sets down viz. That the Infants of the children of Israel were as uncapable of the understanding of the mysterie of Circumcision as Infants are now of Baptism My Answers though reproached by you I suppose it s not for want of ignorance I shall relate them again and leave them to the judgement of the Reader only adding one more will stand and their truth be manifest when what you practise will fall in the streets It s truth that one part of Circumcisions Mystery viz. the Circumcision of the heart was as far from the capacity of Infants as the mysterie of Baptism is now 2. As Circumcision was a Type and Figure in the flesh of Christ who was to come of Abrahams Seed and there was no such capacity required because it was a Jewish Legal Type as all the rest of their external Worships and Sacrifices were leading to and representing the coming of Christ in the flesh That these are not words to please children as you pretend unless you mean the children of God but words of truth it will appear if the honest Reader do but consider that as all the Ordinances of the Jews were Carnal and Typical Heb. 9. 10. Col. 2. 16 17. So those Ordinances were given to the Natural or Carnal Seed viz. the Seed of the Flesh which was Typical likewise as their Ordinances were therefore was not the like capacity required in them as in those in the Gospel days who are directly led into the Mysterie unto Jesus who is come being the substance of all those Types and shadows 3. There was a Command for that of Circumcision none for that of Baptism you cry out O egregiously gifted Disputant Answ O egregiously ignorant Is it not the Command that gives a capacity to the one and to the other If the Lord Command the one and not the other is not that enough to silence man for ever Zac. 2. 13. I say its the Command of God that gives a capacity to the creature of obeying and there are none capable of a Duty but those that are called to the Duty and this you confess your self p. 86. that in weighty things of God a Christian must have a certain evident Rule to warrant his practise Whereas you say They were therefore circumcised because taken into the Covenant and so Church Members I shall Answer it in its place and say something to it in my fourth Answer I shall adde a fourth and that is They were capable of those things promised to them in that Covenant viz. The Land of Canaan and only the spiritual seed are capable of those things promised in the Gospel-Covenant viz. The spiritual Land Jesus Christ and all the good things of the Gospel 2. I say its childish as relating to the Administrators c. and you give a clear answer to it of just nothing I refer the Reader to it His third Error That none must be baptized until they come to perfect age To this you seem to give a learned Answer crying out of Ignorance and where it is let the Reader judge by the Scriptures I produce Was not Christ himself baptized at thirty years of age The Eunuch by Philip Acts 8. 37. And those that came to Iohn Mat. 3. and those Acts 2. 40 41 You say When any Anabaptist in England can prove that there was no Infants baptized in the Apostles time then it may be you will make use of that which I bring I shall make use of your own words before O egregiously gifted Disputant What are you so well verst that we must prove Negatives I thought that you had known so much in disputation of Reason and Scripture that if you will practise a thing then you must prove it or else it is Will worship if you can produce no precept nor president in Scripture for your practise then you have no ground for your practise but you can produce neither precept nor president for your practise Ergo. I say Is there one rule for them and another for us now if there be produce it To this you learnedly answer If he did understand sense he would see that the same Scripture-rule that was then given to the Churches directs us to a different course in gathering of Churches And truly I must be mighty wise then to understand that which is not for mine own ends such sense will prove sensual in the end Jam. 3. 13 14 15 16. and this is the summe of what you say only you would flatter the people with your love to them and its manifest it is in darkening the Truth You have produced no Scripture for another rule to us then that to them although I called for it but only Rev. 2. 2. Try them that say they are Apostles and are not but lyars I say so too and earnestly desire nay charge those who have any knowledge of Jesus to do it See who sticks fastest to the Scriptures we or you that so they may find out the lyars and detect and avoid them for they serve not the Lord Jesus but their own bellies and by their works they shall know them As for those consequences mentioned as that of Circumcision the Housholds and those brought to Christ c. I wonder that you blush not to write so audaciously as you do knowing that almost all people know the truth of what I write that these are the consequences witness The Font-Guarded Immediatly you confess that its true The first consequence is made use of but come hither all you that fear the Lord see what a shift this man makes to help himself he takes it for granted that I acknowledge that baptism is come in the room of Circumcision when I do but declare your false and nonsensical consequences not mine own conclusion I deny Baptism to be come in the room of Circumcision my grounds you may see in the Font-Guard Routed in my answer to Doctor Hall yet if it were true that Baptism were come in the room of Circumcision as Richard Sanders would have it let the babes and sucklings come and see what ground here will be for Infant baptism let Jesus Christ be King let him have but so much honour as to tell you who shall be baptized and how it shall be done the controversie will be ended If you think
judgment to us is not material Yet this I shall say that it is in mercy and much wisdom For all the works of God are wrought in mercy and truth It was the will and wisdom of God that the Natural seed should have an interest in the outward Covenant and that the Spiritual seed should have a true interest in the spiritual Covenant and priviledges Therefore cease reasoning thus let God be true let God have his will though he take away all cause of fleshly boasting from us For now we have no interest in any thing in this Covenant unless Christ be ours and if Christ be ours then all is ours but lose him and lose all 1 Cor. 3. 21 22. You come you say to his fourth Error That God now reveals his will not only by the written word but by dreams and visions more credited then the Scriptures This you assert it 's none of mine as the Reader may see if he please to peruse the place It is your own invention and a lying one too And to this you adde another as great immediately following viz. That you believe the Prison at London had done me good where you heard I lately was for my Heresies Strange man I you are speaking against Dreams and yet are in the very interim dreaming you did but dream that I was in prison and I suppose it was because you would have it so you had studied deep upon the point the day before and so it seems you dream'd the thing was done What Richard Sanders dream a lye if he can dream no better then that he were as good give off dreaming or at least forbear to publish it in writing lest all men count him but as he is And what I say of Dreaming is no more but this that I dare not condemn the thing because God hath not limited himself he may reveal himself which way he pleaseth though not contrary but agreeable to the Scripture And further that it is not my experience nor any of that I know therefore may be a whimsie of Tho Halls own head This is the substance of what I say yet you dare to assert that I affirm that God reveals his will that way that it s more to be credited then the written word when all I say is that for all that I know some may have something revealed thar way although I know it not See Mr. Fox in the Book of Martyrs vol. 3. pag. 607. he relates of that good Martyr Mr. Philpot in a dream or vision he saw as it were a glorious City full of excellencies c. and it brought much joy to his soul it was cleered to him that it was a representation of the glorious Church of Christ and dare you say this was false And may not God do the like if he please though it 's not usual yet limit not God His fifth Error That the Saints need not ask the pardon of sin that it is form and custome that carries them to this petition Forgive us our sins c. It seems you resolved to lye when you began and so you will do it to the purpose but you are driven to confess the truth immediately that every one that runs may read you While any lives in the cleer enjoyment of mercy it is form and custom that carries them to that petition but if a soul apprehends want of pardon let him ask it And is this so strange unto you truly I do not wonder I believe it is in good earnest as strange as you make it It seems you know not that there is a time for all things and every thing in its season is sweet and comely There is a time to ask pardon and a time to rejoyce in the enjoyment of pardon there is a time to be merry a time to be sorry If any be merry saith James let him sing if afflicted let him pray And for that word If any soul or when a soul apprehends the want of pardon let him ask it it s no otherwise then what James saith If any want wisdom let him ask of God c. Jam 1. 5. All you say about this is either a spurning against the truth and a manifesting of your ignorance in this truth of God or secondly a declaration of what is included in my assertion That as they commit new sins so being sensible of it and of the want of pardon let them ask it His sixth Error That gifted Brethren may exercise the Ministerial or Pastoral act of Preaching in a constituted Church without any Call to the Office of a Minister Ans 1. I suppose it 's impossible for you to state any thing truly as it was laid down by me But that you pretend that what I have written is so full of contradictions that in sober sadness you know not what I would have Truly in sober-sadness I am much of the mind that your mind in writing was rather to make the Truth and my self its servant contemptible to the people then to answer the truth written in my book for else you durst not change my language into your own so oft as you do and then rail and pretend you answer me nay pretend you know not what I would have when it is so cleerly asserted from Scripture grounds not only in the generall but in particular pag. 95. 96. in seven or eight particulars and I shall at present mind but one which is the first That all the brethren in the Church that have the gift may prophesie You assert it thus That they may exercise the Ministerial or Pastoral act c. Well but you pretend you will not answer the Arguments that you will leave to your brother Hall But you pittifully cry out of ignorance in the Collier but I suppose and it s not my supposition only that it is your own pittifull ignorance makes you so to cry out against me for the Arguments you pass nor do you say any thing of substance unto those things you pretend to be Errors You say you will lay down some Observations which may serve as a key to see the weakness ignorance and impertinency of the same You observe p. 66. That I do pittifully say I Sir and No Sir And is this such a pittiful thing Let the Reader judge As to your 7 particulars instanced there is no contradiction in them For first that gifted brethren may preach according to their gift both in and out of a constituted Church is cleer and there is not any thing you have said that bears the least shew of a solid answer unto it For both of these see 1 Cor. 14. 31. Rom. 12. 3. 6. 1 Pet. 4. 10 11. Act. 8. 4. with chap. 11. 19 20 21. Act. 9. 20. chap. 18. 25 26. in all which it appears the lawfulness of the Preaching of gifted Brethren both in and out of the Church and truly I cannot think that you are so ignorant of this Truth as you pretend only you
and Prophesying are put together 1 Cor. 11. 5. Was it extraordinary praying too You answer You will put in that too for his Learning 1 Cor. 14. 14 15. If I pray in an unknown Tongue c. Is not here extraordinary praying Doth the Scripture call it extraordinary anywhere and may we not say truly as the Apostle saith of Prophesie greater is he that prophecieth then he that speaketh with tongues and the reason is because he speaketh to edification so say I greater was and is he that prayeth in a known tongue then he that prayeth in an unknown tongue and the Apostle upon the same account disswades them as well from praying or praising in an unknown tongue as from speaking in an unknown tongue and if that prayer had been extraordinary surely he would not have perswaded them from it for I think that prayer is most extraordinary that is most prevailing with God and that is the prayer of Faith not of an unknown tongue You now come to give your Reasons why this Prophesie is extraordinary 1. Because it is joyned with extraordinary gifts 1 Cor. 14. viz. The gift of Tongues Ans 1. Those gifts as hath been already shewed were not so extraordinary as you pretend For greater was be that prophesied then he that spake with tongues But 2. Were what you say truth that that Prophesy in this Chapter were intermixed with extraordinary gifts as that of tongues for which you say its unlikely that Prophesy should be ordinary I say were what you say in the first place truth yet the second doth not follow For in Scripture its ordinary to place or intermix those gifts or offices which you call ordinary and extraordinary together And I wonder you had not so much in you as to see it That might have saved you the labour of setting down this Reason See 1. Cor 12 29. Are all Apostles are all Prophets are all Teachers are all Workers of Miracles c You affirm Apostles Prophets Miracles are extraordinary and Teachers placed in the midst to be ordinary or by way of ordinary office So Rom 12. v. 6 7 8. v. 6. he speaks of Prophesy You say that it is extraordinary yet it s joyned in with that you call ordinary Teaching and exhortation v. 7 8. you parallel with it for your proof Ephes 4. 11. which Scripture makes as much against you as any I know when rightly understood For 1. these are not extraordinary offices as is discoursed at large in the Pulpit-Guard Routed But the ordinary standing gifts and offices in the Church of Christ And Secondly if otherwise upon your own account Apostles Prophets Evangelists which you say are extraordinary are reckoned up with Pastors and Teachers which you say are ordinary and continuing offices in the Church of Christ And 3. I wonder how you dare to divide and with Tho. Hall to pick out what you please and to call one ordinary and another extraordinary when the Scripture presents them all as standing in the Church upon the same account gifts given forth by the Spirit from Christ to the Church And you would take some and leave others so rob the Church of Christ of those gifts orders Priviledges and Officers that Christ hath given to it but no wonder for you own neither Church Ordinances Gifts or Officers according to the mind of Christ but what you have received by Tradition from Antichrist You say that he sayth Apostles are not extraordinary and as for Evangelists he hath nothing to say of them c. Truly had you not been blind or forgetfull there is enough said of them It seems I must say it again Pag. 70. An Evangelist is not an extraordinary but an ordinary work a cryer or publisher of glad tydings which is proper to all the servants of the Lord that preach glad tydings to men and as for Apostles they are not extraordinary but ordinary I say it again and I wonder you durst to oppose so clear a truth those who are sent of God to preach the Gospel for converting souls and gathering Churches are Apostles viz. sent ones and the Twelve Apostles did not take their denomination from their extraordinary gifts of the Spirit but from their mission from Christ to do his work so that notwithstanding none are so sent as those Apostles were 1. immediately or by an immediate mission from his own mouth 2. So immediately inspired and abilitated from above nor 3. to do the same work in every particular though the same in substance viz. to be the first Planters of the Gospel to establish it by signs and miracles c. Yet there is the same in truth and men sent for the gathering of Churches are as truly Apostles as they were as the sons of God are as truly the sons of God as Christ himself though not filled with the same fullness And that you may see there were more Apostles then those Christ was the great Apostle Heb. 3. 1. and he sent the Twelve and other Apostles it s more then probable there were Rom. 16. 7. the Scripture saith that Andronicus and Junias were of note among the Apostles 1. It s probable that they were Apostles c. else how should they be of note or reckoned among them 2. That there were Apostles there and it could not be of the Twelve For Paul was the only Apostle to the Gentiles and the others of the Circumcision they were of note among the Apostles of or belonging to the Church in Rome But Secondly It s apparent that there are or shall be both Apostles and Prophets at the Fall of Babylon which work I believe is now begun and the Lord hath his sent ones abroad in the World in and by whom he will effect his work who shall rejoyce in the fall of Babylon Rev. 18. 20. Rejoyce over her ye holy Apostles and Prophets for God hath avenged you on her So that notwithstanding all your scuffling shifts you make to help your self and to keep up your honour with the people yet know that God is truth and every man that opposeth him shall be found a lyar and that he hath left these ordinary standing gifts and offices in his Church Apostles Prophets Evangelists Pastors Teachers c. And whereas you say that I argue against it p. 70. that those scattered brethren Act. 8. were not Apostles though sent to gather Saints c. That I say is as a blind man may understand that they were none of the twelve Apostles for they tarried at Jerusalem in answer to Tho. Halls assertion that they might be Apostles whereas it is said that the Apostles tarried at Jerusalem but that they were Apostles viz. sent forth by the Lord not in a common way though not of the twelve Apostles The second Reason Because this word Prophet hath been alwayes used to signifie a person extraordinarily inspired of God when taken in a good sense c. Ans 1. Because Prophets were ordinarily taken in this sense