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

SECT. XCIX.

R.B. Quest. 2. IF (as you say) it was on the Jews rejection of Christ that they were broken off from being Gods people, were those thousands of Jews that believed in Christ so broken off, or not, who continued successively a famous Church at Jerusalem, which came to be a Patriarchal seat. Whether then were not the children of the Disciples and all believing Jews Church-members in Infancy? If no, then it was somewhat else than unbelief that broke them off.

R.B. Quest. 2. IF (as you say) it was on the Jews rejection of Christ that they were broken off from being Gods people, were those thousands of Jews that believed in Christ so broken off, or not, who continued successively a famous Church at Hierusalem, which came to be a Patriarchal seat. Whether then were not the children of the Disciples and all believing Jews Church-members in Infancy? If no, then it was somewhat else than unbelief that broke them off.

Mr. T. They were broken off from the Jewish Church, not by unbelief, but by faith in Christ.

Reply. This is too short an answer to so great an evidence against you. The Infants of the Christian Jews were the day before their Conversion members of the Jewish Church and of Gods universal Church, of which the Jews were but a part: For as he that is a member of the City is a member of the Kingdom, and a part of a part is a part of the whole, so every member of the Jews Church was a member of Gods universal Church. Now, 1. The very Jews policy totally ceased not till the destruction of Jerusalem at least. 2. But if it had, I ask, was it no mercy to be a member both of the Jews Church and the universal? If not, the Jews lost nothing by being broken off? If yea, how did the Christians Children forfeit it? Was it better to be of no visible Church, than of the universal? The Jews were