A63200:191
A trial of the new-church way in New-England and in old ... by that…A tryall of the nevv-church vvay in New-England and in old ... by that…
A trial of the new-church way in New-England and in old ... by that learned and godly minister of Christ, John Ball of Whitmore ; penned a little before his death and sent over to the New England ministers, anno 1637, as a reply to an answer of theirs in justification of the said positions ... ; now published ... by William Rathband and Simeon Ash.A tryall of the nevv-church vvay in New-England and in old ... by that learned and godly minister of Christ, John Ball of Whitmore ; penned a little before his death and sent over to the New England ministers, anno 1637, as a reply to an answer of theirs in justification of the said positions ... ; now published ... by William Rathband and Simeon Ash.
London: printed by T. Paine and M. Simmons for Thomas Underhill, 1644
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.
In all which we must affirm nothing but what God hath taught us, and as he hath taught us.
In all which we must affirme nothing but what God hath taught us, and as he hath taught us.
Secondly, as for the Proposition it self; certain it is, Circumcision and the Passover were to be administered only to the visible members of the Church, e. to men in Covenant, professing the true faith; But that in Abraham's time none were visible members of the Church, which joined not themselves in Church orders to the family of Abraham, we have not learned. In the first Institution of Circumcision, we find that God gave it to Abraham, as the Seal of the Covenant formerly made with him: But of any Church covenant or order whereunto Abraham's family should enter before Circumcision we read not. Melchizedek, Lot, Job, &c. were not only visible Believers under the Covenant of grace, but visible members of the Church, according to the order and dispensation of those times. We read not (you say) that Melchizedek, Lot or Job were circumcised, but that is no good reason to infer negatively that they were not Circumcised. We read not that John the Baptist, or the Apostles, or the 500. brethren were Baptized,1 we must not forthwith conclude, that they were not initiated by that seal. Moreover, if they were not Circumcised, it may be the Institution of that Sacrament was not known unto them, or the Author of Circumcision (upon whose will and pleasure they must depend) did not command it unto them, or require that they should join themselves in Covenant with Abraham's family: and in that case if they had Circumcised themselves they had transgressed. But then the reason why they were not circumcised was not this, that they were not (as you speak) in Church order: but because Circumcision was appropriated to Abraham's family by divine Institution in some special and peculiar respects belonging to the manner of Administration. After the Church of the Jews was constituted (when we can no more imagine that there was a Church among the Gentiles, then that there are Christians among the Barbarians at this day) we find none must be admitted to the Passover that was not first Circumcised, but nothing was required of a stranger