More proofs of infants church-membership and consequently their right to baptism, or, A second…

But God made not so noble a creature with vain inclinations and affections to act fallaciously and falsely. Also Gods works would not be harmonical: So that as Gods promise is but a sign of his will obliging him improperly in point of fidelity and immutability, so, say they, the nature of man was a sign of Gods will so far engaging him: So that as he could not let-sin go unpunished without some breach in the harmony of his sapiential frame of administration, no more could he deny to perfect man the object of those desires which he formed in him. So that although he might have made man such a creature as should not necessarily be punished for evil, or rewarded for good, that is, he might have made him not a man; yet having so made him, it is necessary that he be governed as a man in regard of felicity as well as penalty. 3. Our Philosophers and Divines do commonly prove the immortality of the soul from its natural inclinations to God and eternal felicity. And if the immortality may be so proved from its nature, then also its felicity in case of righteousness. I interpose not my self as a Judge in this controversy of Divines, but I have mentioned it to the end which I shall now express. ⟨p. 77⟩1. It is most certain, whether the reward or promise be natural or positive, that such a state of felicity man was either in or in the way to, or in part and the way to more. And it is most certain, that man was made holy, devoted to God, and fit for his service, and that in this estate according to the Law of his creation, he was to increase and multiply: It is most certain therefore, that according to the first law of nature, Infants should have been Church-members. 2. But if their opinion hold, that make the reward grounded on the law of nature, and not on a mere positive law, (and you see the reasons are not contemptible,) then the argument would be yet more advantageous. 3. But however it be of the title to glory or eternity, it is most certain, that according to the very law of nature Infants were to have been Church-members if man had stood. The first Text therefore that I cite for Infants Church-membership, as expressing its original de jure, is Gen. 1.26, 27, 28. [So God created man in his own Image — And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.]

But God made not so noble a creature with vain inclinations and affections to act fallaciously and falsly. Also Gods works would not be harmonical: So that as Gods promise is but a sign of his will obliging him improperly in point of fidelity and immutability, so, say they, the nature of man was a sign of Gods will so far engaging him: So that as he could not let-sin go unpunished without some breach in the harmony of his sapiential frame of administration, no more could he deny to perfect man the object of those desires which he formed in him. So that although he might have made man such a creature as should not necessarily be punished for evil, or rewarded for good, that is, he might have made him not a man; yet having so made him, it is necessary that he be governed as a man in regard of felicity as well as penalty. 3. Our Philosophers and Divines do commonly prove the immortality of the soul from its natural inclinations to God and eternal felicity. And if the immortality may be so proved from its nature, then also its felicity in case of righteousness. I interpose not my self as a Judge in this controversie of Divines, but I have mentioned it to the end which I shall now express.