A47585:19
Laying on of hands upon baptized believers, as such, proved an ordinance of Christ…
Laying on of hands upon baptized believers, as such, proved an ordinance of Christ in answer to Mr. Danvers's former book entitled, A treatise of laying on of hands : with a brief answer to a late book called, A treatise concerning laying on of hands, written by a nameless author / by B.K. ...Laying on of hands upon baptized believers, as such, proved an ordinance of Christ in answer to Mr. Danvers's former book intituled, A treatise of laying on of hands : with a brief answer to a late book called, A treatise concerning laying on of hands, written by a nameless author / by B.K. ...
London : Printed, are to be sold by Benj. Harris ..., 1698
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
3. But how contrary to the Rule and glorious Doctrine of the Lord Jesus would they act, should they get into the practice thereof, whilst they so grievously err in the administration of Baptism, since that also wholly belongs to adult persons, as must be owned if the Scriptures be a perfect and sufficient Rule for us to walk by, and express whatever is necessary to know concerning this as well as things of the like nature?
3. But how contrary to the Rule and glorious Doctrine of the Lord Jesus would they act, should they get into the practice thereof, whilst they so grievously err in the administration of Baptism, since that also wholly belongs to adult persons, as must be own'd if the Scriptures be a perfect and sufficient Rule for us to walk by, and express whatever is necessary to know concerning this as well as things of the like nature?
But probably some may object, Since most of the Authors mentioned in this Discourse for the further evincing the Truth contended for, are corrupt ⟨image 5⟩either in Baptism or laying on of hands, or both, to what purpose are they produced?
In answer to which I must say, that what's offered on the account of Authors and Antiquity, has been occasionally done, Mr. Danvers having led us in that path. Nay, I might say, we are necessitated thereto by his means, unless we should leave one chief part of his Book unanswered, in regard he utterly denies the thing it self, viz. Laying on of hands upon baptized Believers, as such, affirming there is no mention made of any such thing or practice in the Scripture: and secondly, in saying the Ancient Fathers and asserters of it flew mainly to Tradition, and the usage of the Church in the case. Should an Adversary utterly deny Water-baptism, however administered, and say it was never commanded by Christ, but is a mere human Invention, or Innovation of Man; yea and affirm that all the Fathers and Confessors, that heretofore pleaded for it, wholly made use of Tradition, and usage of the Church in vindication thereof: Would not any that is for Baptism judg it necessary, not only to prove it instituted by the Lord Jesus, and practised by the Apostles and primitive Christians, but also, in opposition to his Opponent, that those Writers both of former and later times who contended for it, did fly to the Scripture for its proof and confirmation, tho some of them could not do so as touching the Subject and Manner of Administration? Hence it is we have took the same method in the defence of an Ordinance of the same Nature and Authority.