A19884:1045
An apologetical reply to a book called an answer to the unjust complaint of…An apologeticall reply to a booke called an ansvver to the unjust complaint of…
An apologetical reply to a book called an answer to the unjust complaint of VV.B. Also an answer to Mr. I.D. touching his report of some passages. His allegation of Scriptures against the baptising of some kind of infants. His protestation about the publishing of his writings. By John Davenport BD.An apologeticall reply to a booke called an ansvver to the unjust complaint of VV.B. Also an answer to Mr. I.D. touching his report of some passages. His allegation of Scriptures against the baptising of some kind of infants. His protestation about the publishing of his wrightings. By Iohn Davenporte BD.
Rotterdam: printed by Isaac van Waesberghe, 1636Rotterdam: printed by Isaack van Waesberghe, 1636
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Reply. 1. The end for which that text was brought was to show that none were circumcised but the infants of those that were in the Covenant. How they declared their embracing of the Covenant, if he demand, the Scripture elsewhere showeth, viz, by their joining with the Church of God, in walking according to the laws delivered unto their fathers by the ministry of Moses. And this they declared more by their works, in their ordinary conversation, then by words at Circumcision. In which case, we will not much stand upon words, if the parties are joined to any true Church, now under the Gospel, as they were then to the Church of the Jews, under the Law. 2. This answer is as a sword, wherewith he woundeth his own cause. For, he saith, they were circumcised persons, who brought their children to be circumcised; and we know, that such were of the Church of Israel. But many, for whose admittance he pleadeth, are children of such parents as are of no Church, and some of them may be such, for aught he knoweth, as never were baptised.
Reply. 1. The end for which that text was brought was to shew that none were circumcised but the infants of those that were in the Covenant. How they declared their embracing of the Covenant, if he demand, the Scripture elsewhere sheweth, viz, by their joyning with the Church of God, in walking according to the lawes delivered unto their fathers by the ministry of Moses. And this they declared more by their workes, in theyre ordinary conversation, then by words at Circumcision. In which case, we will not much stand upon words, if the parties are joyned to any true Church, now under the Gospell, as they were then to the Church of the Iewes, under the Law. 2. This answer is as a sword, wherewith he woundeth his owne cause. For, he sayth, they were circumcised persons, wbo brought their children to be circumcised; and we know, that such were of the Church of Jsraell. But many, for whose admittance he pleadeth, are children of such parents as are of no Church, and some of them may be such, for aught he knoweth, as never were baptised.
3. Text. Rom: 4.11. This Text was alleged to show that they must be believers, at least one of them, in external profession, whose infants may be admitted to baptism, which is (as Circumcision was) the seal of righteousness that is by faith.