N00206:90
A brief answer to a small book writtenA brief ansvver to a small book written
A brief answer to a small book written by John Norcot against infant-baptism. This answer is written by John Eliot for the sake of some of the flock of Jesus Christ who are ready to be staggered in point of infant-baptism by reading his book.A brief ansvver to a small book written by John Norcot against infant-baptisme. This answer is written by John Eliot for the sake of some of the flock of Jesus Christ who are ready to be staggered in point of infant-baptisme by reading his book.
Boston: printed by John Foster, 1679
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.
5. God hath commanded to baptize believers and their infants: we therefore offer to God that which he hath commanded, and hath always accepted ever since the institution thereof unto this day.
5. God hath commanded to baptize believers and their infants: we therefore offer to God that which he hath commanded, and hath alwayes accepted ever since the institution thereof unto this day.
6. There was no error in their Baptism, Acts 19.1. &c. nor were they rebaptized, they were so far instructed ⟨p. 25⟩by the Apostle as to see that they were rightly baptized. There have been many errors and stains in baptism, by the corruption of Antichrist: but we are not therefore to be rebaptized: an error in the infant-subject, and in the manner of the action, as you suppose in our infant-baptism, is not essential, and therefore neither destroy baptism, nor require a rebaptizing, were the case as you say.
6. There was no error in their Baptisme, Acts 19.1. &c. nor were they rebaptized, they were so far instructed ⟨p. 25⟩by the Apostle as to see that they were rightly baptized. There have been many errors and stains in baptisme, by the corruption of Antichrist: but we are not therefore to be rebaptized: an error in the infant-subject, and in the manner of the action, as you suppose in our infant-baptism, is not essential, and therefore neither destroy baptism, nor require a rebaptizing, were the case as you say.