A47591:1760
Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the ancient…Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the antient…
Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the ancient Britons [sic] being an answer to a book, intituled [sic] Children's baptism from Heaven, published in the Welsh tongue by Mr. James Owen / by Benjamin Keach.Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the antient Britains [sic] being an answer to a book, iutituled [sic] Children's baptism from Heaven, published in the Welsh tongue by Mr. James Owen / by Benjamin Keach.
London: printed by William Marshall, 1696
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.
Arg. 17. That Custom or Law which Moses never delivered to the Jews, nor is any where written in the Old Testament was no Truth of God, or of Divine Authority. But that Custom or Law to baptize Proselytes, either Men, Women or Children, was never given to the Jews by Moses, nor is it any where written in the Old Testament, Ergo, it was no Truth of God, or of Divine Authority; and evident it is, according to that Forementioned and Worthy Author Sir. Norton Knatchbal, that the Jewish Rabbins differed among themselves about it; for, saith he, to Cite his very words again, Rabbi Eleaezer expressly contradicts Rabbi Joshua, who was the first I know of, who asserted this sort of Baptism among the Jews; for Eleazer, who was contemporary with Rabbi Joshua, if he did not live before him, asserts, that a Proselyte Circumcised and not Baptized was a true Proselyte.
Arg. 17. That Custom or Law which Moses never delivered to the Jews, nor is any where written in the Old Testament was no Truth of God, or of Divine Authority. But that Custom or Law to baptize Proselytes, either Men, Women or Children, was never given to the Jews by Moses, nor is it any where written in the Old Testament, Ergo, it was no Truth of God, or of Divine Authority; and evident it is, according to that Forementioned and Worthy Author Sir. Norton Knatchbal, that the Jewish Rabbins differed among themselves about it; for, saith he, to Cite his very words again, Rabbi Eleaezer expresly contradicts Rabbi Joshua, who was the first I know of, who asserted this sort of Baptism among the Jews; for Eleazer, who was contemporary with Rabbi Joshua, if he did not live before him, asserts, that a Proselyte Circumcised and not Baptized was a true Proselyte.
Arg. 18. If Baptism is of Mere positive Right, wholly depending on the Will and Sovereign Pleasure of Jesus Christ, the great Legislator, and he hath not Requi red or Commanded Infants to be baptized; then Infants ⟨p. 314⟩ought not to be baptized; but Baptism is of mere positive right, wholly depending on the Will and Sovereign pleasure of Jesus Christ, the great Legislator, and he hath not required or Commanded Infants to be baptized, Ergo, Infants ought not to be baptized.