Rich. Baxters apology against the modest exceptions of Mr. T. Blake and the digression…

3. That which you judge undeniable, you see I deny. It is not therefore de facto undeniable. When you and I can each of us attain to such a height of ⟨p. 92⟩confidence, of the Verity of our several Contradictory Propositions, in a matter of such moment, and about the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ, which the Apostle reckoneth as the milk of Babes, who are unskilful in the word of Righteousness (Heb. 5.12, 13, 14. and 6.1.2.) it increaseth my conviction of the great necessity of toleration of some great errors, even in Preachers of the Gospel; For either yours or mine seem such. I find no proof of your undeniable Proposition. 1. The Seal is but an affix to the Promise: therefore that which is the condition of the Promise, is the condition of the Seal. 2. The use of the Seal is to confirm the Promise to him to whom it is Sealed: Therefore the condition of the Promise is the condition of the Seal. 3. If the Promise and Seal have two distinct conditions, then there are two distinct Covenants (for from the conditions, most commonly are contracts specified: and therefore Wesenbechius and such like Logical Civilians, call it the form of the contract, or stipulation to be either Dura vel in diem, vel sub conditione, and those sub-conditions are specified oft from their various conditions). But there is not two Covenants, therefore▪ but of this more anon.

3. That which you judge undeniable, you see I deny. It is not therefore de facto undeniable. When you and I can each of us attain to such a height of ⟨p. 92⟩confidence, of the Verity of our several Contradictory Propositions, in a matter of such moment, and about the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ, which the Apostle reckoneth as the milk of Babes, who are unskilful in the word of Righteousness (Heb. 5.12, 13, 14. and 6.1.2.) it encreaseth my conviction of the great necessity of toleration of some great errors, even in Preachers of the Gospel; For either yours or mine seem such. I finde no proof of your undenyable Proposition. 1. The Seal is but an affix to the Promise: therefore that which is the condition of the Promise, is the condition of the Seal. 2. The use of the Seal is to confirm the Promise to him to whom it is Sealed: Therefore the condition of the Promise is the condition of the Seal. 3. If the Promise and Seal have two distinct conditions, then there are two distinct Covenants (for from the conditions, most commonly are contracts specified: and therefore Wesenbechius and such like Logical Civilians, call it the form of the contract, or stipulation to be either Dura vel in diem, vel sub conditione, and those sub-conditions are specified oft from their various conditions). But there is not two Covenants, therefore but of this more anon.