A39697:207
Vindiciæ legis & fœderis
Vindiciæ legis & fœderis: or, A reply to Mr. Philip Cary's Solemn call Wherein he pretends to answer all the arguments of Mr. Allen, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Sydenham, Mr. Sedgwick, Mr. Roberts, and Dr. Burthogge, for the right of believers infants to baptism, by proving the law at Sinai, and the covenant of circumcision with Abraham, were the very same with Adam's covenant of works, and that because the gospel-covenant is absolute. By John Flavel minister of the gospel in Dartmouth
London: printed for M. Wolton, 1690
A REPLY TO Mr. Philip Cary's Solemn Call. › Section 3 › Argument 5: Argument V.
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. It had been more modest to suspect, that you understood not the Text aright, than that the Apostles understood not their Commission aright. The order of the words (as this well fortified Objection declares, and you cannot deny) puts Teaching after Baptizing; and though we should allow you that they discipled adult Persons by teaching, and taught others Baptized in Infancy, after their Baptizing them; in both they followed their order and commission in Discipling the Parents by Preaching, and ⟨p. 87⟩teaching their Children Baptized by virtue of the promise to them, after their Baptism: For he declares, Acts 2. the Promise is to them, and to their Children, which gives a right of both unto Baptism; and so teaching, according to the order of this Commission, may be an antecedent Duty to the Parent, and a subsequent Duty to him and his baptized Children: For if [Greek or Hebrew] includes Teaching before Baptizing, why should not [Greek or Hebrew], which is put after Baptizing, respect the subsequent Duty of teaching both the one and other?
Reply. It had been more modest to suspect, that you understood not the Text aright, than that the Apostles understood not their Commission aright. The order of the words (as this well fortified Objection declares, and you cannot deny) puts Teaching after Baptizing; and though we should allow you that they discipled adult Persons by teaching, and taught others Baptized in Infancy, after their Baptizing them; in both they followed their order and commission in Discipling the Parents by Preaching, and ⟨p. 87⟩teaching their Children Baptized by vertue of the promise to them, after their Baptism: For he declares, Acts 2. the Promise is to them, and to their Children, which gives a right of both unto Baptism; and so teaching, according to the order of this Commission, may be an antecedent Duty to the Parent, and a subsequent Duty to him and his baptized Children: For if 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 includes Teaching before Baptizing, why should not 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, which is put after Baptizing, respect the subsequent Duty of teaching both the one and other?