The Character of the Beast, Debate 2 · John Smith 6 – Richard Clifton 7
Iohn Smyth.
Your 5. argument is taken from 1. Cor. 10.1.2. framed thus.
If the infāts of the Iſraelites were baptized in the cloud & in the ſea, aſwel as their parents, what letteth the infants of beleving parents vnderunder the goſpel to be likewiſe partakers of baptiſme aſwel as they?
The former the Apoſtle affirmeth, 1. Cor. 10.1.2. & therfor good warant muſt be shewed that our infants are cut of from this priviledg that the Iewes children had: that baptiſme being a type of our baptiſme,
To this argument I make anſwer: by framing the like argument.
If their infants did eate the ſame Spiritual meate & drink which the parents did eate: then why may not our infants being able to eate & drinck, eate & drinck the Lords Supper?
The former the Apoſtle affirmeth, 1. Cor. 10.1.2. & therfor good warrant muſt be shewed that our infants are cut of from the priviledg: & thoſe ſacramēts were types of our Sacraments.
Againe, I anſwer more properly thus: That ther shalbe a proportion betwixt the Type & the truth, that baptiſme of the cloud & ſea, & our baptiſme, viz: that as yong & old carnal Iſraelites were baptized in the cloud & ſea, ſo yong & old Spiritual true Iſraelites shalbe baptized by the baptiſme of repētance: & as the carnal parents with their carnal children were baptized in type: So Spiritual parents with their Spiritual children, that is ſuch as are regenerate by the word & Spirit, shall bee baptized with the baptiſme of repentance for the remiſſion of ſinnes, which is baptiſme in truth.
Further I ſay: That our infants shal have a priviledg fair greater then the infants of the Iſraelites had in that typical baptiſme: For they by it were only baptized into Moſes & the Law: That by it they might learne Moſes, & in Moſes the truth in Chr. as it were vnderunder a vele: but our infants vnderunder the goſpel shal have the dayly inſtitution & education of Faithful parents, which is infinitely ſuperior to that darke pedagogical baptiſme, & al the baptiſmes & ordinances of the old Teſtament: Seing that with open face they may in the preaching of the goſpel ſee Chriſt Ieſus, & not vnderunder the vele of Moſes.
Moreover I deny that the baptiſme of the cloud & ſea was a type of the external baptiſme of the new Teſtament, in the abſtract: but it was a type of our baptiſme in the concrete: that is the baptiſme of the cloud did Type out our baptiſme in the 3. parts therof, viz. 1. The baptiſme of the Spirit, 2. The declaration of Faith & repentance the antecedent of baptiſme with water, 3. The outward washing with water a manifeſtation of the foreſaid particulars: & all theſe to bee conferred vppon infants proportionable to thoſe infants, that is, New borne babes in Chriſt.
And whereas you further alledg that if your infants bee not baptized, the Lords bounty is shortned to vsus & our infants: our confort is diminiſhed in reſpect of our infants which they had in reſpect of theirs: & the goſpel is not preached to our infants as it was to theirs: I answer that Gods bounty, our confort in reſpect of our infants, & the preaching of the glad tydings of the goſpel is as large & ample every way to our infants as to theirs: For Gods bounty of the actual exhibiting and fealing the everlaſting covenant to Abraham & al his carnall infants was never extant in the Old Teſtament: Neither were the parents in circumciſing their infants comforted in the aſſured conferring of it vppon their infants: & circumciſion did not ſo plainly preach Chriſt then as he is preached now to infants: but what could the preaching of Chriſt profit infants either then in types or now in truth? Neyther doe I think that the Lord ever intended to teach the infant any thing at that inſtant, but afterward hee was to learne that which the Schoolemr. circumciſion vppon his Flesh taught him: viz: the circumciſion of the hart: & if you ſay that ſo infants baptized are to be inſtructed, I anſwer, that in the New Teſtament by baptiſme wee manifeſt what wee have, namely, the inward baptiſme, whereas in the Old Teſtament by circumciſion they learned what they had not but ought to have, viz: The inward circumciſion of the hart, & mortification of the ſinnefull Flesh.
Mr. Rich. Clifton.
Mat. 28.19.
If Chriſt gave a commaundement for the publishing of his covenant & adminiſtring of baptiſme the ſeale therof to al nations: then are the beleving Gētils & their infants to receave the ſame.
But the firſt is true, Mat. 28.19,
Ergo the latter alſo is true, Act. 13.48. & 16.14.15.32.33.
It wil be objected againſt the Major, that if followes not, that the infants are any more bound to receave baptiſme, then they are bound why leſt they are infants to receave the word, but the word they cannot receave, ergo. I anſwere, that the commaundements is general to al nations, & therfor as Abraham if he ſhould not have obeyed to the Lord commaunding him to circumciſe himſelfe, & al his family, yea the infants, he should grevouſly have rebelled againſt God: So whoſoever of the Gentils shal not beleve & be baptized both himſelfe & his ſeed, shall have no part …or portion in the inheritance of Chriſt: Seing he cuts himſelfe of & his ſeed from the covenant of God, Gen. 17.14.
And though infants bee not capable of the preaching of the covenant, (which not withſtanding they are bound vntounto, as they shall come to yeres of diſcretion) yet are they capable of the ſeale, as before is ſhewed, & therefore by vertue of this generall commaundement. Mat. 28.19. are to bee Baptized.