Light Broke Forth in Wales Expelling Darkness, Chapter 16
CHAP. XVI.
In which it is proved, That the Children of the Faithful, as ſuch, ought not to be baptized, becauſe 'tis ſaid whole Houſholds were baptized: Being an Anſwer to what Mr. James Owen hath ſaid in his 13th Chapter, and ſo a Confutation of his Tenth Argument for Infant Baptiſm.
MR. Owen ſaith, it was God's way from the beginning of the World, to receive whole Houſholds into Covenant, the Children were received in with their Parents; even ſo Noah and his Family were in the ſame Covenant, for his ſake his Family was received with him into the Ark, and were baptized with him in the Waters of the Flood: Abraham believed, and his whole Family was received into God's Covenant with him, Gen. 17. Heb. 11. 7. 1 Pet. 3. 20, 21. Not himſelf and his Seed, but his Men-Servants and Maid-Servants, and of the Gentiles, that were willing to receive the true Religion, and their Seed, Gen. 17. 23. Exod. 12. 40. And ſo God's Covenant continued in the Families of the Faithful, until the coming of Chriſt, for near four thouſand Years. If any ſay, that the Diſpenſation is altered, and the Members rent from the Head of Families, let them ſhew a plain Scripture for it.
1. Anſ. I anſwer; As touching that Covenant God made with Noah and his Family, it was not only made with him and his Family, but with all the World, for they were the Repreſentatives of all that ſhould live on the Earth; nay, and not only Mankind, but with Fowls of the Air and Beaſts of the Field. See Gen. 9. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. And God ſpake unto Noah, and to his ſons, Verſe 8. And I, behold I will eſtabliſh my covenant with you, and your Seed after you, Verſe 9. And with every living creature that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattel, and of every beaſt of the earth with you, from all that go out of the ark, to every beaſt of the earth, Ver. 10. And I will eſtabliſh my covenant with you, neither ſhall all fleſh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood: neither ſhall there any more be a flood to deſtroy the earth, Verſe 11.
Now to what purpoſe do you mention this Covenant, or the temporal Salvation of Noah's Family in the Ark? May be Noah's Family, or ſome of them, were ſaved with that external Salvation for his ſake; yet this proves not that his Faith extended to the Spiritual Salvation of the Souls of his Children, for he had a curſed Cham to one of his Sons, his Faith could not ſave him.
2. As to the Ark being a Type of Baptiſm, or that his Family were baptized in the Ark, this, as I have once before told you, doth as much tend to prove that all the World may be baptized, even the good, and bad, and Cattle alſo, as any in particular; for all, in the Ark, were as truly baptized, as any that were in it.
3. Had you ſaid Noah's Family was a Type of the Goſpel-Church, you had ſpoken ſomething to the purpoſe; for ſo Expoſitors intimate, and not without good Reaſon. And,
1. As all his Familily were received into the Ark, ſo all the Members of the Goſpel-Church were by Faith to be received into Chriſt, the Anti-Type of the Ark.
2. As Noah built the Ark according to the Commandment of God, ſo Chriſt built his Church, and did every thing according to the Commandment of his Father.
3. Noah took many Trees well hewen and fitted to build the Ark; ſo Chriſt takes many Believers, who are Spiritually well hewed and fitted by the Word and Spirit, to build his Church, who are called trees of righteouſneſs, choſen People, as Noah built the Ark of ſuch Trees or Wood, God himſelf choſe.
4. As ſome clean and unclean Beaſts were received into the Ark, yea and a Cham who was an ungodly Perſon, ſo this might figure forth, that ſome unſanctified Perſons (tho' not by God's appointment) would get into, or be received into the Goſpel-Church. And,
5. As all that were not received into the Ark periſhed, ſo all who get not Spiritually into Chriſt by Faith, or are not Members of the viſible or inviſible Church, ſhall be damned and periſh eternally.
6. As Noah's Ark was ſometimes, (no doubt,) overwhelmed or covered with Waves, and thoſe that were in it; ſo all true Believers, that are Members of the true Goſpel-Church, ought to be dipped, baptized, or overwhelmed in Water. And, as Sir Norton Knatchbal obſerves, The Ark was a Figure of the Reſurrection. (Speaking of that Text) Mr. Owen cites 1 Pet. 3. 20. (ſaith he,) Baptiſm which now ſaves us by Water, that is, by the aſſiſtance of Water, is Antipical of the Ark of Noah, and it doth not ſignifie the laying down of the filth of the Fleſh, but the Covenant of a good Conſcience towards God, while we are plunged in the Water, which is to teſtifie our belief of the Reſurrection of Jeſus Chriſt; ſo that there is a manifeſt Antitheſis between theſe words by Water, and by the Reſurrection: Nor is the Elegancy of it diſpleaſing. The Ark of Noah, not the Flood, was a Type of Baptiſm; and Baptiſm was the Anti-type of the Ark, not as if Baptiſm is a waſhing away of the Filth of the Fleſh by Water, wherein it anſwers not all to the Ark; but, as it is the Covenant of a good Conſcience towards God by the Reſurrection of Chriſt, in the belief of which Reſurrection we are ſaved, as they were ſaved by the Ark of Noah; for the Ark and Baptiſm were both a Type and Figure of the Reſurrection, ſo that the proper End of Baptiſm ought not to be underſtood as if it were a Sign of the waſhing away of Sin, altho' it be thus oftentimes taken Metonymically in the New Teſtament, and by the Fathers, but a particular Signal of the Reſurrection by Faith in the Reſurrection of Chriſt; of which Baptiſm is a lively and emphatical Figure; as alſo was the Ark out of which Noah returned as from the Sepulchre to a new Life. Thus far Sir Norton Knatchbal in his Notes printed at Oxford, 1677, who though a great Pedo-Baptiſts, yet denyed ſprinkling or pouring to be Baptiſm.
Now this hath teaching in it, and ſhews the Sente of the Apoſtle Peter's Words very fully no doubt. ut to tell the World, becauſe God ſaved, and covenanted with Noah's Family; therefore God takes whole Families in Goſpel times into Covenant, argues great darkneſs.
2. As to Abraham's Family, we deny not but his Family was taken into Covenant with God, even his natural Seed as ſuch, but it was a covenant of peculiarity; for ſimply conſidered, as a Family they were not taken into the Covenant of Grace; becauſe there where ſome godly Families that had no lot or part in that Covenant, but we having fully opened the twofold Covenant God made with Abraham at the beginning; I ſhall not renew the Argument again.
But worthy Brittains, let this be well conſidered by you, that as Noah's Family and Abraham's Family were taken into Covenant with God and other, whole Houſholds under the Law, and the whole Houſe and Nation of Iſrael, ſo they were Types of the Goſpel Church, even as the whole Houſe or Family of Abraham, (or whole Houſe and Family of Iſrael were typically relatively and federally holy;) it did prefigure that true ſpiritual Holineſs, that in Goſpel times ſhould be in all the members of the true Goſpel Church, and not of God's taking under the Goſpel whole Families into Covenant with himſelf, either into an outward external Covenant, or into a ſpiritual or new Covenant relation with himſelf.
'Tis true, God perhaps hath ſometimes called whole Families, both Parents, Children and Servants, and converted them all; but alaſs, how many Families are there, where may be, but one is called, and in ſacred Covenant with God, may be the Husband and not the Wife, the Wife and not the Husband, the Child, and not either of the Parents are ſo called and taken into Covenant with God. Pray worthy Brittains, conſider well what God ſpeaks of his Promiſe under the Goſpel. I will take one of a City, and two of a Family, and will bring you to Zion. Jer. 3. 14. Not in Goſpel times whole Families, no no, this God may do, but 'tis more then he hath promiſed; or as to matter of Fact is ſo; he doth frequently ſpeak in another I may ſpeak here as the Apoſtles ſpeaks in another Caſe, you ſee your calling Brethren, how not many whole Families are called.
3. Becauſe God made a Covenant with Abraham, and his natural Seed, as ſuch, as a Covenant of peculiarality, and alſo with him made or renewed the Covenant of Grace, ſetting him up as a covenanting Head on a double reſpect; doth it follow, that every believing Man is ſet or placed by the Lord, as a like Covenant head to all his natural Off-ſpring: Till Mr. Owen hath proved this, he ſaith nothing to the purpoſe.
In the Covenant of Circumciſion that appertained to all Abraham's natural Seed, were many external Priviledges and Promiſes made, of which Circumſion was given as a Sign or Token, as particularly the Land of Canaan, &c.
But what Priviledges and Promiſes hath God granted to Believers Children, as ſuch, in Goſpel times which Baptiſm gives them an aſſurance of; the ſign is nothing without the ſubſtance or thing ſignified; Believers have the ſubſtance or the things ſignified in Baptiſm, ſo have not Infants in their pretended Baptiſm, nor many of them ever after.
4. Whereas you call for a plain Scripture to prove that the Children of the Faithful are rent from the Head of the Family; you miſtake the Buſineſs; you muſt prove that in the Goſpel Diſpenſation, Children and Servants, or whole Houſholds are taken with the Heads of thoſe Houſholds into Covenant with God: What whole Nation is taken into Covenant with God, as the whole Houſe or Nation of Iſrael was under the Law; prove, that there is ſuch a Nation, and we will grant, that all the Families in that Nation, are alſo in Covenant, for in that univerſal Family all particular Families muſt needs be comprehended.
You proceed to the Goſpel times, and mention Zacheus, who as ſoon as converted, the Lord Jeſus ſaid, this day is Salvation comé to this Houſe, for as much as he alſo is a Son of Abraham, Luke, 19. 9 10.
1. Anſ. I anſwer, you do your Buſineſs effectually, if you can prove, that ſo ſoon as the Father believes, Salvation comes to belong to all that are in his Houſe; I thought you argued for ſome external Priviledge, only for the Children upon their Parents Faith; but it appears, 'tis no leſs then Salvation it ſelf, even eternal Salvation; for it was ſuch a Salvation that came to Zacheus that day. O happy Children of Believers if this were true! For then it follows, that all the Children of the faithful muſt of neceſſity be ſaved, whether they in their own Perſons believe or not; nay, and happy Servants too, for they muſt all be ſaved, becauſe part of the Family; but what credit is there to be given to a Man that talks after the manner as you do, is this true or falſe? for what do you mean leſs then what I ſay and doth; Eternal Salvation come to all in that Family or Houſe, when the Head of it doth believe, you ought to repent for ſpreading ſuch grand errors among the People.
Chriſt you ſay, explaineth Abraham's Covenant, in Gen. 19. which God made with him and his Family, or his Seed, becauſe he was a Son to Abraham; as if he ſhould ſay, though this Man hath been a great Sinner, and though he hath been chief Publican, yet becauſe he did repent, and receive the mediator of the Covenant of Grace, Abraham's Covenant, and the Priviledges thereof do belong unto him, and to his Houſhold. He is a Son of Abraham, therefore Abraham's Covenant belongs to him, in the ſame Latitude to him and his Seed; many judge that Zacheus was one of the Gentiles, for uſually ſuch were Publicans, and this they gather from theſe words of Chriſt, … ſo much as he alſo is a Son of Abraham; he alſo, though he is not a natural Seed to Abraham, yet he is one of his Spiritual Seed, and therefore Abraham's Covenant belongs unto him and his Houſhold, &c.
Anſ. I anſwer, your own explanation of this Text overthrows all you ſtrive to prove, were it but conſidered.
1. For you grant he was not one of the natural Seed of Abraham; now we ſay, that all that do believe are the Spiritual Seed of Abraham, and ſo ſuch to whom the Covenant of Grace, God made with Abraham, (and conſequently eternal Life) doth belong; for the true Spiritual Seed of Abraham cannot miſs of eternal Salvation, the promiſe is ſure to all the Seed, Rom. 4. 16. Now then if your Eyes were opened, you might quickly ſee that Abraham was a two-fold Father, and that he had a two-fold Seed; you know that all Abrahams natural Seed, and the natural Seed of Believers, are not the Spiritual Seed of Abraham, nor have the promiſe of Salvation ſure to them.
2. From hence it appears, Salvation could not come to Zacheus Children, (if he had any) unleſs they as well as himſelf did believe, and receive by Faith the Bleſſing of the Covenant of Grace God made with Abraham; becauſe none are Abraham's Sons or Spiritual Seed, but Believers only, whether Jews or Gentiles, if you be Chriſts, then you are Abraham's Seed.
3. Therefore if Salvation came to every individual Perſon in Zacheus Family, they all did believe as well as himſelf, though it be not expreſſed. But,
4. Salvation might be ſaid to come to his Houſe, becauſe the Saviour and means of Salvation was that day come to his Houſe.
5. Salvation might be ſaid to come to his Houſe that day, though it came only to Zacheus himſelf, it coming to the head of the Family, it may be ſaid to come to his Houſe, and yet not to every particular Perſon in that Houſe, but you bring in this Objection, viz. but what is this to Baptiſm.
You anſwer, if Salvation came to his Houſe or Family, then Baptiſm belonged unto them.
2. It is probable, that Zacheus and his Houſhold were baptized before by John, for the Publicans came to be baptized of him, Luke 3. 12. and 7. 29.
1. Anſ. I anſwer, you may be ſure when Zacheus believed in Chriſt, he was a proper Subject of Goſpel Baptiſm, ſo were all that believed who were in his Houſe; but the Text doth not ſay, that every particular Perſon that were in his Houſe believed, or that Salvation came ſo to his Houſe, but if it did, no doubt they were all upon their believing baptized.
2. But you may well ſay, what is this to Baptiſm, ſince he and all his Houſe were baptized before, even when he was in his Sins, and a notorious Sinner, the chief of the Publicans; it is probable ſay you, ſure Sir, 'tis more then probable, it was impoſſible, that Zacheus and his Family ſhould eſcape Baptiſm, when John had baptized all the whole Country before, all, yea every individual Perſon that dwelt in Jeruſalem, Judea, and all the Regions round about: The truth is, this is very impertinently brought in to prove Infant Baptiſm; what doth it ſignifie, that Salvation was come to Zacheus that day, and not until then, ſeeing John's Commiſſion was to baptize all, whether Godly or Ungodly, Believers or Unbelievers, whether Salvation was come to them or not; let the Reader obſerve, what darkneſs and ignorance this Man ſhews.
Peter, (ſay you) when he firſt planted the Chriſtian Religion among the Jews, exhorted them ſaying, be baptized every one of you, for the promiſe is to you, and to your Children.
Anſ. This of the promiſe being unto them and to their Children, we have fully already anſwered; but why doth Peter command theſe Jews (who doubtleſs dwelt at Jeruſalem) to be baptized, ſeeing John Baptiſt had baptized them and their Children before, as you have poſitively aſſerted; what muſt they be all rebaptized, what inconſiſtency is there in your arguing?
2. The latitude of this Command, be baptized every one of you, is no further then to all them that he commands to repent, nor is the promiſe to any of their Children, but ſuch that the Lord our God ſhall all the Parents right and intereſt to the promiſe of the Holy Spirit, Remiſſion of Sins, and eternal Life, ſpring from their Intereſt in Chriſt by Faith, and at that Door comes in the right and intereſt of all their Children or Off-ſpring that are called by the effectual operations of the word and ſpirit of God, 'tis the promiſe made to all the true ſpiritual Seed of Abraham, but are the natural Seed of Abraham, and the natural Seed of Believers, as ſuch, or as ſo conſidered the ſpiritual Seed of Abraham?
3. the promiſe here meant, and the duty of being baptized are as you ſay of the ſame Latitude; thus you argue, viz. be baptized you and your Children, for the promiſe is unto you and to your Children, we ſo are to underſtand the Words; the Promiſe, and the Duty, being of the ſame Latitude, if the Promiſe belongeth unto them and their Children, then bap…
Anſ. I anſwer, what is the promiſe but the Holy-Ghoſt and eternal Life, and ſuch that receive this Promiſe, viz. the holy Spirit as an earneſt of eternal Life, we deny not are to be baptized, and if no Child hath any other right to the Duty, but ſuch who have received the ſame Promiſe through Faith, ziz. remiſſion of Sin, and of the Holy Spirit, then no Children but ſuch that repent and believe ought to be baptized, ſeeing the Promiſe and Duty runs to the Children or Off-ſpring as it runs to the Parents.
In the ſame manner, you ſay, when Peter planted the firſt Church among the Gentiles, as might be gathered from the words of the Angel to Cornelius, being the firſt Fruits of the Church of the Gentiles, Acts 11. 13. ſend Men to Joppa and call for Simon, whoſe Sir-name is Peter, who ſhall tell thee words whereby thou and all thy Houſe ſhall be ſaved; the Goſpel bringeth Salvation to him and to all his Houſe; Cornelius well knew the meaning of the Words, for he being a proſelite to the true Religion before that time, though uncircumciſed, yet received the ſevere Commandment of Noah, the ſubſtance of which might be ſeen, Gen. 9. 1. God's Covenant was with Noah and his Seed, &c.
1. Anſ. I anſwer, 'tis ſaid Peter ſhould tell Cornelius words, whereby he and all his Houſe ſhall be ſaved, but it muſt be ſuch of his Houſe that could hear and underſtand thoſe Words Peter ſhould tell them; he ſhall tell thee, and tell all thy Houſe Words whereby you ſhall be ſaved, but not unleſs he and they of his Houſe believed; and pray obſerve, is it not ſaid he was a devout Man, and one that feared God with all his Houſe, Acts 10. 2. all his Houſe, the Holy-Ghoſt here intends, were ſuch who were of underſtanding, and did fear God as well as himſelf, alſo Cornelius ſaid to Peter, now we are all here to hear what things are commanded thee of God, all his Houſe were capable to hear, &c. Moreover, is it not ſaid, while Peter yet ſpake theſe words, the Holy Ghoſt fell on them, which heard the word Verſe 44. and all theſe were commanded to be baptized, viz. that had received the Holy-Ghoſt for their reception of the Holy-Ghoſt, is that argument the Apoſtle uſes to command them to be baptized, Verſe 47 can any Man forbid water, that thoſe ſhould not be baptized which have received the Holy-Ghoſt as well as we, and he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord, Verſe 48, them that did believe? them that had received the Holy-Ghoſt them that ſpake with Tongues and magnified God; and if it was every individual Perſon in his Houſe, let it be ſo, the greater Grace of God was manifeſted, but here are no Children mentioned in Infancy that were baptized.
2. Beſides, I wonder at you, 'tis ſaid Peter ſhould tell Cornelius words, whereby he and all his Houſe ſhould be …, ſure you do not believe what you ſeem to plead for; pray anſwer, when the Parent believes, and is ſaved, or aſſured of Salvation, are all his Children and whole Family by his Faith brought into the like ſtars of Salvation, ſhall they all be ſaved alſo Through his Faith? the external Priviledges of the Covenant that your Brethren talk of (that is ſomething, but I know not what) by virtue of their Parents Faith, it is not however that which you plead for; you tell us when Cornelius heard words whereby he came to be ſaved, all his Family through his Faith were ſaved alſo, if you do not this, I profeſs I know not what you mean, by what you have written; but if this be your meaning, I hope no Body will believe you, becauſe all know it is utterly falſe.
3. But the greater wonder comes at laſt, viz. it appears Cornelius and his Houſhold becauſe a Gentile, had right to Baptiſm by the Covenant and Commandment of God to Noah, not by virtue of Abraham's Covenant; the Truth is, one is as good an Argument for Baptiſm as the other, but was the Covenant God made with Noah the Covenant of Grace; if it was, all the World are in the Covenant of Grace, and not Mankind only, but the Fowls of the Air, and Beaſts of the Field, and it had a Sign or Seal alſo to confirm it to all, viz. the Rainbow, now your argument from hence muſt be this becauſe the Sign or Seal of the Rainbow belonged to Noah and his Sons, to confirm the Covenant Bleſſings, therefore Baptiſm belongs to all Gods Noahs, and their Sons and Daughters; and you may extend the inference further if you pleaſe, but perhaps 'tis rather the command of God to Noah; you cite Gen. the ninth Chapter and firſt Verſe, and that was given to Noah and his three Sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth, and in them to all the World; well but what is this Command, take the words, and God bleſſed Noah and his Sons, and ſaid unto them be fruitful and multiply and repleniſh the Earth; I know not what this is brought for, nor what Cornelius could draw from thence, unleſs it was to ſtir up his Sons and Daughters to marry and beget Children, which certainly is one thing if not all that God commands, Gen. 9. 1. to Noah and his Sons, that ſo the World might be a freſh increaſed and multiplyed with People after the Flood.
2. You ſay, he could no leſs then know the reſt of the Proſelytes who received Circumciſion, that they and their Children were in Abraham's Covenant, and alſo he at this time by his receiving the Goſpel, ſhould come into the ſame Covenant, ſo that he and his whole Houſe ſhould be the firſt Fruits of the Gentiles. Thus Peter founded the Chriſtian Church of the Jews and Gentiles in Houſholds, according to the ancient practice from the beginning of the World.
Anſ. I anſwer, 'tis a great abuſe of the ſacred Hiſtory, to ſay Peter founded the Chriſtian Churches in particular Houſholds, for the firſt Church conſiſted of Three Thouſand, and there is no mention made of any particular Houſhold; but perhaps two of a City, and one of a Family, as God promiſed, were at that time brought into God's Goſpel Sion; alſo here were many gathered together at Cornelius's Houſe, as appears Verſe 33.
2. Why, do you not diſtinguiſh between the Covenant made with Abraham's natural Seed, as ſuch, and the Covenant of Grace God made with him, &c. you think that thoſe blind and unbelieving circumciſed Proſelytes were as truly in the covenant of Grace, even in the ſame covenant God made with Abraham's ſpiritual Seed, as Cornelius was after he believed in God and Jeſus Chriſt; why then doth Paul ſay, and if you be Chriſts, then are you Abrahams Seed and Heirs according to the promiſe, Gal. 3. 29. beſides the Covenant of peculiarality made with Abraham's natural Seed, as ſuch did not intitle the Proſelyte ſtranger to the inheritance of the Land of Canaar. Oh! that the Lord would take this Vail from off your Eyes, every Soul muſt reckon from Chriſt, not from being Abraham's natural Seed, that would be one of Abraham's ſpiritual Seed, and an Heir according to the Promiſe.
Paul you ſay, planted or founded Churches among the Gentiles, even in the ſame manner as Peter did, when the head of the Families believed he did baptize the whole Family,
1. You ſay, he planted the Church of the Philippians in Houſholds, Acts 16. 14, 15. a certain Woman named Lydia which worſhipped God, heard us, whoſe Heart the Lord opened, that ſhe attended unto the things that were ſpoken off by Paul, and when ſhe believed, ſhe was baptized and all her Houſhold. You note on this Text three things; firſt, that Lydia was a Proſelyte before to the Jewiſh Religion, and the Proſelytes of the Gentiles and their Children, were in God's Covenant through Baptiſm and Circumciſion; and here you tell us the ſtory over again of Moſes the Son of Maimon, about baptizing Proſelytes, that they baptized Proſelytes among the Jews, by command of the Council, &c.
Anſ. I anſwer, you will have I ſee all theſe to be re-baptized alſo; I cannot ſee but you are truly a grand Anabaptiſts in your Judgment, and ſuch an one that I never met with before; firſt you intimate they were baptized by a Jewiſh humane Invention, and the ſecond time baptized by virtue of Chriſt's command, let who will be your Proſelyte, I will not; who thus contend for, and mix the Traditions of Men with Chriſt ſacred Inſtitutions.
2. Had Lydia and her Family a right to Baptiſm becauſe a Proſelyte? I thought your Brethren always aſſerted her Childrens right thereunto by virtue of her Faith.
Secondly, you note as ſoon as ſhe believed, ſhe and her Houſhold were baptized.—according to the order of Gods covenant to receive the faithful and their Seed, &c.
1. Anſ. I anſwer, then Baptiſm it appears is no mear poſitive command of Chriſt, but wholly depends upon Gods Covenant with Noah, or elſe his Covenant with Abraham.
2. You ought firſt to prove ſhe had any Seed, either Sons or Daughters, and if ſhe had, whether any of them were Infants.
3. Prove, that becauſe her Houſhold is ſaid to be baptized, every individual perſon in her Houſe was baptized, ſeeing we read of a whole Houſe went up to offer unto the Lord, but not all, two of the Houſe went not up, 1 Sam. 1. 21. 22.
4. Prove that Paul planted a Church in her Houſe, if he did, I ſhall make it appear, that they were all adult Perſons, and ſuch that did believe in Chriſt; and as to your argument, that in the New Teſtament whole Families received the Goſpel, 'tis not denyed, but ſome whole Houſholds then did believe, or the major part of them, and ſo now adays, but not many ſuch, but would you therefore have Churches to conſiſt only of private Families. This a is new way to prove national Churches.
You ſay after the ſame manner, the Apoſtle offered Salvation to the keeper of the Priſon and his Houſehold, if he only believed, Acts 16. 30, 31. and he ſaid, believe on the Lord Jeſus Chriſt, and thou ſhalt be ſaved and thy Houſe.
Paul explaineth unto him the Covenant of God to the Faithful and their Seed, ſaying unto him, believe, and thou ſhalt be ſaved and thy Houſe, he doth not ſay, thou ſhalt be ſaved and thy Houſe if ye believe, but believe thou, and thy Houſe ſhall be ſaved with thee, the promiſe of Salvation belongeth to the Houſhold, if he believed who was the head of the Family, &c.
Anſ. Sir, I poſitively charge you for writing and publiſhing falſe Doctrine, and acquit your ſelf of it as well as you can; I appeale to the Conſciences of your Brethren, and to all underſtanding Men, whether this be a truth or not, viz. that when the head of a Family doth believe in Chriſt, that all the whole Family ſhall be ſaved; I muſt confeſs that this is a new and eaſie way for all in ſuch Families to be ſaved, but doth not Chriſt ſay, he that believes ſhall not be damn'd, Mark 16. 16. let them dwell in what Family they will, you do not ſpeak of any external Covenant right to Baptiſm, but of Salvation it ſelf.
2. You do not ſpeak of Infants as ſuch, but of all in the Family or Houſhold, viz. comprehending adult Sons and Daughters, Men Servants or Maid Servants; adult perſons it appears from hence, in the primitive times were baptized, by virtue of the Parents Faith as well as Babes; nay, and were ſaved alſo by the Faith of the head of the Family.
3. Doth it not alſo follow, that your ignorance of God's Covenant with Abraham is very great, for if it be as you ſay, then all Abraham's Seed according to the Fleſh muſt be ſaved, becauſe he as the Head of his Family believed; but doth not the Scripture ſay in oppoſition to this, that though the number of the Children of Iſrael be as the Sand of the Sea, yet but a Remnant ſhall be ſaved.
4. May not this Doctrine of yours alſo corrupt and tend to ruine many poor Souls, both Children and Servants, who live in Families where the Heads of thoſe Families do believe, and are Godly; may not they ſay we ſhall be ſaved, though we believe not, becauſe we dwell in a Family where the Head, viz. our Father, our Maſter doth believe; Mr. Owen aſſures us, we ſhall all be ſaved, becauſe our Father or Maſter believes, be aſtoniſh'd, Oh ye Heavens! is this your proof for Infant Baptiſm. Worthy Brittains, this may ſufficiently ſhew you that the Covenant that God made with Abraham, namely, the Covenant of Circumſion, which was made with him and his natural Seed as ſuch, was no Covenant of Salvation, and ſo not the Covenent of Grace; 'tis ſo plain you need not doubt of it, becauſe multitudes that were in that Covenant periſhed, though Circumciſion was a Seal of Abrahams Faith, yet not a Seal of the Covenant of Grace to his Seed, as ſuch, becauſe if it were it would have Sealed to them all, the righteouſneſs of Faith and eternal Life, which we know it never did to multitudes of them. But very remarkable 'tis, to ſee how Mr. Owen doth in the very next place both conhimſelf, and overthrow his Argument, as to the purport of it, he brings in this Objection,
Object. All his Family believed, verſ. 34. Take his Anſwer.
Anſ.
I anſwer, (ſaith he) ſo were the adult; the whole Houſe ſometimes ſignifies thoſe of the adult in a Family, it is ſaid of Sampſon, that all his Fathers Houſe buried him, that is (ſaith he) thoſe that were of age in his Fathers Houſe, for the little Children could not go into the Land of the Philiſtines to bury his Body, &c.
It is ſaid (ſaith he) of Cornelius that he was a devout Man, fearing God with all his Houſe, that is, all the adult in his Houſhold, ſo the Goaler believed with all his Houſhold, viz. all that were of age to believe.
2. And we are not to think (ſaith Mr. Owen) all theſe Houſholds to be barren, which were baptized by the Apoſtles; there were not many Houſholds in thoſe Ages, without Children in them, for the greateſt part of their Riches was their Bond Servants, and the Children born of them, and thoſe Children were in God's Covenant, even as free-born Children, Gen. 17. 13, 23. ſo are they alſo under the Goſpel, they are Abraham's Seed through the Faith of their Parents and Heirs as before, Col. 1. 12. Gal. 3. 29.
Anſ. 1. I need give no further Anſwer touching this argument, concerning what you ſay of whole Houſholds, you have effectually anſwered your ſelf; you affirm that by whole Houſholds or Families in the Scripture, ſometimes none but the adult are comprehended or meant, and that Inſtance of Sampſon doth ſufficiently prove it, little Children could not go to bury his dead Body; though 'tis ſaid all his Fathers Houſe buried him. So ſay we by whole Houſes that were ſaid to be baptized, none are meant but thoſe adult Perſons who believed.
2. You ſay and confeſs, that Cornelius and all his Houſe feared God, and that the Goaler and all his Houſe believed, that is all the adult (ſay you) believed, or that were at age to believe; this may ſerve to clear up the matter touching all the other whole Houſholds that were ſaid to be baptized, God conſtrains you to ſpeak the Truth here, though it be to overthrow your whole Argument.
2. But what you ſpeak in the next place is not true, viz. that Parents and their Children, and Bond Servants, and their Children, were under the Law, and under the Goſpel times; alſo in the Covenant of Grace, through the Faith of their Parents: For notwithſtanding the Bond-men and their Male Children were commanded to be Circumciſed that were in Abraham's Family, and that were as Proſelytes received into other Families of the Jews under the Law, yet they were not Heirs of the Land of Canaan; none but the natural Seed of Abraham could hauehave any poſſeſſion therein, according to that Covenant of peculiarality God made with the fleſhy Seed of Abraham as ſuch, which typified forth that none but Believers, or the elect of God, who are the true Spiritual Seed of Abraham, were the true Heirs of the Promiſe, and of the Heavenly Canaan; will you ſay that all the natural Seed of Abraham and Bond-Men and their Children as ſuch, and alſo all the natural Seed of Believers as ſuch, are the true Spiritual Seed of Abraham; ſure God will take of this Vail from your Eyes, and open your underſtanding if you look to him by Prayer, and ſearch the Scripture with a canded deſire after the knowledge of this matter.
3. You will find a great difference between the Covenant that peculiarly did appertain to the natural Seed of Abraham as ſuch, and the Covenant of Grace made with Abraham and his true Spiritual Seed as ſuch.
4. I have proved that neither Abraham's Faith nor the Parents Faith intitles any of their natural Seed as ſuch, to the inheritance or bleſſings purchaſed by Jeſus Chriſt, viz. Juſtification, Adoption, Pardon of Sin, and eternal Life, no, no, the Children of the Fleſh, (as ſuch) theſe are not the Children of God, but the Children of the promiſe are counted for the Seed, viz. thoſe that are the elect of God only, Rom. 9. 6, 7, 8, 9. are the Children of the premiſe, and Heirs of Glory; the promiſe runs Gal. 3. 16. not to Seeds as of many, but to thy Seed which is Chriſt, i. e. Chriſt perſonally conſidered primarily, and then to Chriſt myſtically conſidered, that is all that are ſpiritually united to him; therefore the Apoſtle ſaith, Verſe 29. if ye be Chriſts, then are you Abraham's Seed and Heirs according to the promiſe, or according to the Covenant of Grace God made with Abraham.
5. This muſt be ſo, becauſe the Covenant of Grace is well ordered in all things and ſure; ſee once again, Rom. 4. 14. for if they which are of the Law be Heirs, Faith is made void, and the promiſe of no effect, no need of Faith, if the legal Covenant can ſave any Man; but if a perſonal Obedience to the Law could not ſave the Parent, beſure the Faith and Obedience of the Parent cannot ſave the Child. But obſerve, verſ. 16. therefore it is of Faith, that it might be by Grace to the end, the promiſe might be ſure to all the Seed. Now conſider well the promiſe is eternal Life, this all underſtand here, and this ſaith Paul is ſure to all the Seed; 'tis confirmed not only by the word of God, but by the Oath of God alſo, Heb. 6. 13 for when God made promiſe to Abraham becauſe he could ſwear by no greater, he ſwore by himſelf; to ſhew the Heirs of the Promiſe, the immutability of his Counſel, he confirmed it by an Oath—that ſo the Heirs of the promiſe might have ſtrong Conſolation, verſ. 17. 18. all that are the true Heirs or ſpiritual Seed of Abraham muſt be ſaved, for 'tis impoſſible for God to lye, or fail in his Promiſe, to any one of rhe true Seed of Abraham; therefore if all the natural Seed of Abraham were in this Covenant, and all the natural Seed of Believers, 'tis impoſſible that any one of them ſhould periſh eternally, or miſs of eternal Life.
They are all born of God, and Heirs as Iſaac was, they are all choſen from Everlaſting to Salvation, they are all given to Chriſt, and all Members of his myſtical Body, or are but one myſtical Chriſt, and are even Fleſh of his Fleſh, and Bone of his Bone, and therefore this Covenant and free promiſe of God, cannot appertain to Abraham's natural Seed as ſuch, nor to the natural Seed of Believers as ſuch, for alaſs! how many of them do periſh eternally? For though the number of the Children of Iſrael be as the Sands of the Sea, yet but a remnant of them ſhall be ſaved, as was hinted before.
But ſay you, if the keeper of the Priſon had no Children, or if they were the adult, it is the ſame thing, the Apoſtle offereth Salvation to him and to his Houſhold, even to little Children, if there were ſuch with him, and that is ſufficient to confirm the preſent matter, i. e. that by this Houſhold, we are to underſtand principally his Children, as the word frequently is taken in Scripture, Gen. 30. 30. and 45. 19. Num. 3. 15. 1 Tim. 5. 8.
Anſ. It appears, you queſtion whether the Goaler had any Children or not, beſide you tell us, that whole Houſholds comprehend the Adult only ſome times; from whence I infer according to the Scripture, whole Houſholds may be ſaid to be baptized, when none but the Adult in thoſe Houſholds are baptized.
2. If the Apoſtles offering Salvation to People, gives them a right to Baptiſm, then all the World may be baptized, becauſe all the World ought to have Salvation offered to them, go into all the World and preach the Goſpel to every Creature, Mark 16. 15. but this offer gives none a right to Baptiſm ſimply in it ſelf; no none but ſuch that believe as the next Words prove, he that believeth and is baptized ſhall be ſaved, verſe 16. they muſt firſt believe or be made Diſciples, and then be baptized, the Parents muſt believe, and the Children muſt firſt believe, not the Parents for the Children, but the Children muſt believe for themſelves, before they ought to be baptized, according to the Commiſſion, and the nature of the Adminiſtration of Goſpel Baptiſm.
3. 'Tis ſtrange the Apoſtles ſhould preach to little Children, o…er Chriſt to them, what preach Chriſt to the Infant in the Cradle? that knows not its right Hand from it, …t.
But ſay you, the Children are the chief part of every Houſhold; therefore when Paul ſaith to the Keeper of the Priſon, believe on the Lord Jeſus, and thou ſhalt … ſaved and thy Houſe; it is as much as if he ſhould ſay, if thou wilt believe in Chriſt, the Covenant o… Span…d and the Seal of Baptiſm, appertaineth to thee a… Children, &c.
Anſ. … Children, I grant, are part of thoſe … there are Children, but not of every … becauſe there are many Houſholds wherein … no Children in non-age, and they cannot be part of thoſe Houſholds, in which there is no Infant.
2. Believe on the Lord Jeſus and thou ſhalt be ſaved; that is, do thou believe, and thy whole Houſe that are capable to believe, let them believe alſo, and you ſhall all be ſaved; no more is intended, for according to your own argument, the Servants and Adult Children were under the ſame promiſe with his Infants, if he had any; now will you ſay that his Servants and Adult Children could be ſaved by his Faith, I tell you again, the Covenant of peculiarality God made with Abraham's natural Seed as ſuch, was gone and aboliſhed when Paul preached to the Goaler, and the Covenant of Grace or Covenant of Salvation God made with Abraham, I have proved appertained to none but the elect only, or his true Spiritual Seed.
3. Beſides if the Parents believing brings the Children into the Covenant of Salvation; then it will follow, that the Parents non-believing keeps the Children out of the Covenant, and ſo hinders them of Salvation, and if ſo, the Children may be damn'd for their Parents Sin in not believing.
You proceed and ſay, the Apoſtle planted the Church of the Corinthians by baptizing whole Houſholds, 1 Cor. 1. 16, 17. as the Houſe of Stephanas and Criſpus, and the Jews with one accord roſe up againſt Paul at Corinth, and accuſed him that he perſwaded Men to worſhip God contrary to the Law, verſe 13. by how much the more would they have accuſed him, then (ſay you) for caſting out their Children from the Covenant of Abraham if he had ſo done, &c.
Anſ. I anſwer, how do you know but that might be one thing which they charged upon him, no doubt Paul according as John Baptiſt did, did declare, that their being the Children of Abraham according to the Fleſh as ſuch, now availed them nothing; he 'tis plain denyed their Childrens right to Circumciſion, to give them a right to Baptiſm; he received none of them to Baptiſm who profeſſed not their Faith in Chriſt, the Covenant of peculiarality with Abraham's natural Seed as ſuch being aboliſhed. Moreover Paul told theſe Corinthians, all things were now become anew; a new Church, and a new Church Memberſhip, and a new right to that Church Memberſhip, and now there is no knowing of Men after the Fleſh, this Doctrine he preached to theſe Corinthians, 2 Cor. 5. 16. 17. and you force me to urge this matter often, wherefore henceforth know we no Man after the Fleſh, yea, though we have known Chriſt after the Fleſh, yet now henceforth know him no more, what doth the Apoſtle intend here by theſe words but this. viz. now henceforth or from the eſtabliſhment of the diſpenſation of the Goſpel, we know no Man after the Fleſh; know, to know here, is to prefer or to eſteem no Man above others, upon the account of their fleſhly deſcent from Abraham in a lineal way by Generation, or in reſpect had to any Covenant God made with him or his fleſhly Seed as ſuch, that Covenant and Covenant right being taken away, he took away the firſt that he might eſtabliſh the ſecond, Heb. 10. 9. for the Prieſt-hood being charged, there is made of neceſſity a change alſo of the Law, Heb. 7. 12. there is therefore now no knowing or eſteeming of Perſons after that old Covenant manner, the new Covenant being quite different, or not according to the old, which run to Abraham's Fleſhly Seed as ſuch; they muſt now believe, and their Children muſt believe, before admitted as Members into the Goſpel Church, therefore if any Man be in Chriſt, he is a new Creature, old things are paſſed away and all things are become new, 2 Cor. 5. 17. if any Perſon be grafted into Chriſt, or into the Goſpel Church, he muſt have Faith and be a new Creature, or be of the New Creation as the Greek word holds forth; …ay, (ſaith he) though we have known Chriſt after the Fleſh, that is a Son of the Jewiſh Church, or eſteemed him upon that account, Yet henceforth we know him, or prefer him in that reſpect no more; this was that Doctrine … preached, and 'tis very probable it was as much from hence that they charged him, for perſwading Men contrary to the Law, as upon any other Conſideration whatſoever; therefore all your flouriſh on this reſpect is vain, but ſince you make ſo great a stir about the baptizing of whole Houſholds; I ſhall add ſomething farther to clear up this Matter, and I argue thus, viz.
1. If there were no Families or Houſholds, but in which there are ſome Infants, you might have ſome pretence for what you infer from hence; but how palpable is it, that there are every where many whole Families, in which there is no Infant or Child in nonage, and this being so, what certain Concluſion or Conſequence can he drawn from hence?
2. Beſides you know by a Synecdecha, a part is put for the whole, as Isa. 7. 2, 5, 8, 9. the Tribe of Ephraim is put for all Iſrael: 'tis ſaid, all Jeruſalem and Judah went out to be baptized by John in Jordan. In 1 Sam. 1, 21. 22. the Text ſaith, The Man Elkanah, and all his Houſe went up to offer unto the Lord, yet in the next Verſe 'tis ſaid expreſly, That Hannah and her Child Samuel went not up; nay you have ſhewed us a Family or whole Houſe that were ſaid to bury the Body of Sampſon, and yet you tell us the little Children were not included in that Expreſſion, all his Houſe.
3. As touching the Goalers Houſe, 'tis poſitively ſaid, Paul preached to him, and to all that were in his Houſe, do you think he preached to his Infants (if he had any?) but to put the matter out of doubt, 'tis ſaid he rejoyced, believing in God with all his Houſe, as well as 'tis ſaid, he was baptized and all his.
4. Touching Lydia, we ſay 'tis uncertain whether ſhe was a Maid, Widow or Wife, but if ſhe was Married and had Children; 'tis very unlikely (if Babes) that they were at that time with her, becauſe ſhe was far from her proper dwelling, nay many Miles from it, for ſhe was of the City of Thiatira, verſe 14. but when Paul preached to her, ſhe was at Philippi, where ſhe was Merchandizing, being a ſeller of Purple. Can we ſuppoſe ſhe carried her little Babes ſo far to Market? Beſides thoſe of her Houſe were called Brethren, who were baptized with her, therefore ſure Children cannot be here meant; will you build your Practice of baptizing little Babes from ſuch uncertain Concluſions, when 'tis doubtful whether ſhe had any Children or no? Or if ſhe had, whether they were with her at that time or not; our denying of it is as good as your affirming of it, yet 'tis plain ſhe had Servants, or ſome who are called her Houſhold, therefore what you ſay is impertinent upon this account.
And thus it appears to all impartial Perſons, that there is nothing in this argument touching the practice of the Goſpel Church; hears no mention made in baptizing whole Houſholds of one Infant baptized, nor the leaſt color of reaſon to conclude there were.
Mr. Burkit is ſo unreaſonable as to put us upon ſearching the Scripture to prove a Negative, i. e. that there were none baptized in Infancy; we might as well have deſired him to give proof that there never was any Infant ordained an Elder, or Paſtor of a Church; or how can we prove they did not make uſe of Honey or Oil in Baptiſm, which ſome of the ancient Fathers uſed, as Mr. Perkins Notes, or Salt or Spittle, which practice is ſtill in the Romiſh Church? Where is the extream …unction forbid, or auricular Confeſſion, or the uſe of Beads in Prayer, and a hundred more ſuch Romiſh Fopperies? May theſe things be therefore done, becauſe we read not that they are forbid, I thought adding to God's Word was forbidden, Rev. 22.
But ſays Mr. Burkit, ſearch the Scripture, and produce me any one inſtance if you can from the time of St. John the Baptiſt, to the time of St. John the Evangeliſt, which was more than threeſcore Years, during which time many Thouſands of Infants were grown up to maturity, and make it appear there were not any baptized in their Infancy, or that their Baptiſm was deferred till riper years, or that there is any divine Command for the delaying the baptiſm of Children of Chriſtian Parents, until they are grown up, and I will frankly yield the Cauſe. Bravely ſpoken.
Anſ. I muſt retort this argument back again on him, and muſt ſay, it is a great argument againſt Infant Baptiſm, and not for it; for, ſay I, let it be conſidered, that ſince there was ſuch a long ſpace of time as 60 Years and more, between John Baptiſt and the Death of John the beloved Diſciple, or John the Evangeliſt, during which time many Thouſand, of Infants were born of baptized Believers, both of Jews and Gentiles, yet we read not of one Infant of them that was baptized.
Reader, obſerve Mr. Burkit, ſays in the Goſpel day, and when our Saviour ſent his Diſciples firſt to preach, they were to teach or make Diſciples of thoſe they baptized; but upon the Parents believing and being baptized, he ſays, their Children were admitted to Baptiſm alſo. Now ſay I, ſince many Parents thus taught and baptized, had multitudes of Infants born to them; how comes it about that we read not of one of their Infants that were baptized, no not from the time of John Baptiſt, to the Death of John the Evangeliſt? Can any Man think, had any Infants been baptized, that God would not have left ſome account of it, to put the matter out of doubt, eſpecially ſince it was never taught Doctrinally nor Commanded? Certainly, it could not ſtand conſiſtent with the Care, Wiſdom and Faithfulneſs of Jeſus Chriſt, to have hid and concealed ſuch a Practice, had there been one Infant by his Authority or Allowance baptized. But ſince the Scripture is ſilent in it, we may aſſure our Selves 'tis not the will of God, Infants ſhould be be baptized. Alſo if thoſe who were to be baptized were firſt to be taught, were firſt to repent and believe, Then it follows clearly, that Baptiſm muſt be deferred till Children were ofripe Years, and able ſo to do, and did not Mary delay the baptizing of the Holy Child Jeſus-
As to the Houſe of Crispus, you your ſelf acknowledge, they all believed, theſe are your words, viz. it is true, all the Houſe of Crispus were Believers, viz. Adult Perſons, but ſay you, were all the Houſholds of the Faithful Barren, &c.
Anſ. No doubt but in ſome of thoſe Houſholds were Children, they might not be all Barren without Children, yet their Children might be grown up to maturity; but you your ſelf have proved that whole Houſes may be ſaid to be baptized, and yet none but the Adult in thoſe Houſholds might be baptized, ſeeing the Scripture you quoted, ſaith, that Sampſon was buried by all his Fathers Houſe, yet none of the little Children in that Houſe could be concerned in that matter.
As to the Houſe of Stephanas you ſay well, they are called the firſt Fruits of Achaia. I beſeech you Brethren, ye know the Houſhold of Stephanas, that is the firſt Fruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themſelves to the miniſtry of the Saints, 1 Cor. 16. 15. that you ſubmit your ſelves to ſuch, verſ. 16.
Anſ. They, that is the whole Houſhold gave themſelves up to adminiſter to the Saints, but beſure little Babes could not do that, nor ought the Adult to ſubmit themſelves to little Children, or eſteem and reverence them for acts of Charity.
You bring in this Objection, viz. we do not read of any Infant that were in thoſe Houſholds, to which you anſwer, if the Houſholds of the Corinthians when the Apoſtle baptized them were ſo barren, what need had the Apoſtle to write unto them that their Children were holy, 1 Cor. 7. 14. it is more than probable, that Children were in every Houſhold that was baptized.
Anſ. Now you go over again with your former argument, and repeat the ſame things which I have again and again anſwer'd, about the Childs being in Covenant, after the Head of the Family or the Parents do believe.
2. I ſay, 'tis very probable there might be no Children in non-age in thoſe Houſholds, becauſe 'tis ſaid, the whole Houſe had believed.
3. If there were yet by your own grant, all the Houſe might be ſaid to be baptized, and yet no little Children baptized that might be in thoſe Houſholds, becauſe all is often taken but for a part.
4. But will you ſaid I build an Ordinance upon a probability and on uncertain Conſequences; nay one of the ſacred Inſtitutions of the Goſpel, called one of the two great Sacraments thereof; that Text, 1 Cor. 7. 14. we have already anſwered. Now from the whole, we ſhall draw Concluſions in oppoſition to yours.
1. That the Covenant that God made with Noah and his Family, was a Covenant made with all the World, and ſo not the Covenant of Grace, though there was Mercy and Grace contained in it to all Mankind, and to the Fowls of the Air, and Beaſts of the Field alſo.
2. That God's taking all Abraham's Family or Houſehold into Covenant as ſuch, it was only a Covenant that peculiarly appertained to his natural Seed, and it had many Temporal Bleſſings and Priviledges attending it, which no Houſhold under the Goſpel can pretend unto, and of this Covenant Circumciſion was a ſign, and that Circumſion was only given to be a Seal of the righteouſneſs of Faith to Abraham only, and not to little Children.
3. That the whole Houſe of Iſrael as ſuch, or the whole Nation of the Jews, under the Law were all as ſo conſidered then, the Church of God, and that the Goſpel Church conſiſteth not of whole Houſholds or any one whole Nation, it being not of an National Conſtitution, but Congregational only, conſiſting of none but of believers, baptized upon the profeſſion of their Faith who are called the Houſhold of Faith.
4. That the whole Houſe of Iſrael was a typical Church, who were holy with a Ceremonial and Typical Holineſs, ſignifiing that all the Members of the Goſpel Church, ſhould be ſpiritually and ſavingly Holy.
5. That God in the Goſpel times, (though now and then he is pleaſed to call by his Grace, all or the greateſt part of whole Families, yet contrary to the old Covenant) he uſually now takes but two of a City and one of a Family, and brings them into his true Goſpel Sion.
6. That the firſt Churches were only planted of ſuch that believed, ſome out of one Family, and ſome out of other Families, and that out of the Jewiſh Church, and ſuch that were called of the Gentile Nations.
7. That the Parents Faith ſaves none of his Houſehold, either Children or Servants, nor gives them any right to Goſpel Baptiſm.
8. Laſtly, one would think theſe things to be clear enough to give Satisfaction to all that deſire Satisfaction about Infant Baptiſm, and that there is not the leaſt ſhadow of proof for it from what our Brethren argue, from whole Families who were ſaid to be baptized, if we compare Scripture with Scripture, for as we find, no Precept nor Example for Infant Baptiſm, ſo not any Conſequence for it, that is naturally drawn from any Text of Holy Scripture, to which the Pedo-Baptiſts do refer,