A26959:729
More proofs of infants church-membership and consequently their right to baptism, or, A second…
More proofs of infants church-membership and consequently their right to baptism, or, A second defence of our infant rights and mercies in three parts ... / by Richard Baxter.
London: printed for N. Simmons and J. Robinson, 1675
Chapter 4: Of Mr. Danvers's his Witnesses against Infant-Baptism.
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.
§. 46. His tale of Swermers he refers us for to Merning and Rulicius, or Lulicius and Glanaus, men that I know not so well as himself, and I had rather he had referred me to himself or Mr. Tombs.
§. 46. His tale of Swermers he refers us for to Merning and Rulicius, or Lulicius and Glanaus, men that I know not so well as himself, and I had rather he had referred me to himself or Mr. Tombes.
§. 47. He addeth p. 231. [Nicephorus l. 17. c. 9. saith that [In the year 550. one Peter Bishop of Apamen and Zoroarus a Monk in Syria did maintain and defend the point of dipping, rebaptization or wedder-dipping.
§. 47. He addeth p. 231. [Nicephorus l. 17. c. 9. saith that [In the year 550. one Peter Bishop of Apamen and Zoroarus a Monk in Syria did maintain and defend the point of dipping, rebaptization or weder-dipping.
Answ. Did Nicephorus write in Dutch? 1. Is dipping any thing to the case of Infants? 2. Are you really for Rebaptizing; and are you justifying ⟨p. 270⟩it? If not, why cite you instances of Rebaptizers? Too many besides the Donatists rebaptized others to engage them to their Sect as the only Church. 3. Do you know the History of the Council of Calcedon and Dioscorus, and the Nestorians? Reader, believe not this man any further than sense or great evidence constraineth thee: That which Nicephorus there saith is this, [Severus of Antioch, and Peter of Apamea, and Zooras a Monk, were found to curse the Council of Calcedon, and to hold but one nature in Christ; praeterea anabaptismos aliaque nefandae obscoenitatis plena facinora peragere, that is, [and also to have practised Rebaptizings, and other villainies full of such obscenity that is not to be named.] If he rejoice in these Witnesses, is here a word of Infant-baptism? When shall I come to a sentence that is true?