A41334:296
A sober reply to the sober answer of Reverend Mr. Cawdrey, to A serious…
A sober reply to the sober answer of Reverend Mr. Cawdrey, to A serious question propounded viz. whether the ministers of England are bound by the word of God to baptise the children of all such parents, which say they believe in Jesus Christ, but are grossly ignorant, scandalous in their conversations, scoffers at godliness, and refuse to submit to church discipline ... : also, the question of Reverend Mr. Hooker concerning the baptism of infants : with a post-script to Reverend Mr. Blake / by G.I. Firmin ...A sober reply to the sober answer of Reverend Mr. Cawdrey, to A serious question propounded viz. whether the ministers of England are bound by the word of God to baptise the children of all such parents, which say they believe in Jesus Christ, but are grosly ignorant, scandalous in their conversations, scoffers at godliness, and refuse to submit to church dicipline ... : also, the question of Reverend Mr. Hooker concerning the baptisme of infants : with a post-script to Reverend Mr. Blake / by G.I. Firmin ...
London: printed by J.G., 1653
A SOBER REPLY TO A SOBER ANSWER, &c.A SOBER REPLY TO A SOBER ANSVVER, &c.
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.
You ground is this: It was so then for Circumcision Ergo, now for Baptism. Your Consequence you prove, because privileges are not straitened under the Gospel.
You ground is this: It was so then for Circumcision Ergo, now for Baptisme. Your Consequence you prove, because priviledges are not straitned under the Gospel.
I answer, 1. had God after Christ taken one Nation (suppose England, as then Canaan) and tied up his Church to such a nation, so that no other people could partake in the O dinances but by joining to England, then the argument had been good, for still here had been a wall which shut out the other nations, which was the ground of that Administration; but now the Church may be any where.
I answer, 1. had God after Christ taken one Nation (suppose England, as then Canaan) and tyed up his Church to such a nation, so that no other people could partake in the O dinances but by joyning to England, then the argument had beene good, for still here had beene a wall which shut out the other nations, which was the ground of that Administration; but now the Church may be any where.
2. God hath recompensed that privilege with a wit•esse I think when he sends his Gospel to all the world, which before was tied up to little Canaan.
2. God hath recompenced that priviledge with a wit•esse I think when he sends his Gospel to all the world, which before was tyed up to little Canaan.