A47585:334
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.
1. It is most manifest that those Popes, Councils, and Fathers, that have corrupted, polluted, and changed the holy Ordinance of Baptism, and the Lord's Supper, did also change, alter, and corrupt this of Imposition of Hands.
2. That tho the principal Arguments the Church ⟨p. 104⟩of Rome, and others who have drunk of the Whore's Cup, do bring to defend the Rite called Confirmation, is humane Tradition, and far-fetched Consequences from Scripture, yet there is plain Scripture-proof for the holy Institution of Imposition of hands upon baptized Believers.
2. That tho the principal Arguments the Church ⟨p. 104⟩of Rome, and others who have drunk of the Whore's Cup, do bring to defend the Rite called Confirmation, is humane Tradition, and far-fetch'd Consequences from Scripture, yet there is plain Scripture-proof for the holy Institution of Imposition of hands upon baptized Believers.
3. That many godly Persons in several ages have opposed Popish laying on of hands, on the same account that we reject Popish Baptism, and not otherwise.