A CENSURE UPON A DIALOGUE OF THE Anabaptists; Entitled, 〈…〉 what God hath Predestinated concerning man, etc. By HENRY AINSWORTH.  ROME 9.11.15.16. 
11 (For the children being not yet borne, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth.)  
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.  
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.  
Printed in the year of our Lord, 1623.   

TO THE READER.  
CHristian Reader, howbeit the continued infirmity of this author's body, wherewith it pleased God to exercise him, might justly have excused him from taking pen in hand to write, especially in businesses of this nature, his desire being as himself testified in his life time, to finish this last period of his life with more comfortable meditations then to follow controversies: yet did he labour to his power, yea and (as I may say) beyond his power, to enforce himself even in his decayed health, together with his other necessary labours, to discover the fraud and falsehood of the adversaries: amongst others he judged these Anabaptists not the least, which occasioned this ensuing Censure; Another nearer inhabitant than the former author, was one Mr. Paget that lived in the same city by him▪ being a chief leader to another congregation there, who being of a quarrelsome disposition, and envious hearted towards Mr. Ainsworth, and the truth professed by him, having unjustly picked quarrels against him: afterward without his privity while matters were in debating (not imitating D. Reynolds to heart although he highly commends him pag. 367.) published a book against him, laying to his charge things which he knew not, even gross untruths, and palpable reproaches, making diverse false charges upon him, as if he neither shamed nor feared to be Satan's instrument to blow abroad whatsoever envy and malice had scraped together, in likelihood expecting no other reward then gratifying the world, by the Gospels' disgrace in our subversion; yea labouring through his sides to smite the text itself, which I trust M. Ainsworth hath well cleared in that little advertisement published in his life time with those books of Moses, besides a particular answer to his book he had well begun, and had finished long before his death had not his infirmity of body hindered. But now time permits not to instance particulars, but leaving so unneighbourly, yea so unchristian an opposite to the Lord for judgement, I will add a word or two touching the occasion of this treatise ensuing, which was at the request of some, (whose minds the Anabaptists would cumber with their errors) to show his judgement on the foresaid book. Now as some were assaulted that yet would give no way or entertainment to those errors, yet othersome that had stood in the truth a long time, were perverted. The knowledge of these things coming to this reverend and judicious man, Mr. Henry Ainsworth, he soon drew out this answer, and sent it by a friend into England, to reclaim (if God saw it good) such as had erred herein, and gone astrray by rash and inconsiderate zeal beyond knowledge, and through the grace of God to preserve such from falling as yet stood: this he sent for the present, purposing if the Lord continued some competent health and strength, to revise and so to make more perfect this which then shortness of time in respect of the Messengers great haste, could not be afforded, and so to make it public in this spring; but the Lord having prevented this his purpose, by taking him to himself, he now resteth from his labours. Yet finding the matter may, through the blessing of God, be profitable to his people, it is thought fit not to keep these his last labours in matters of this nature in silence, but that it come to the public view for the good of them that are ordained to life. And so I wish thee to farewell in the Lord.   

A CENSURE UPON A DIALOGUE of the Anabaptists, entitled, A Description of what God hath Predestinated concerning MAN, etc.  
BEING requested by some, whose minds the Anabaptists would cumber with their errors, to show my judgement on their foresaid Book; I have set down these few observations.  
In the first part which they entitle of Predestination, they commit a double fault, 1 They confirm not by holy Writ their own doctrine: for in the third page of their Dialogue, they describe God's Predestination out of their own head; not one Scripture brought to prove that they say: neither can they justify by God's word that their description, wherein some things are erroneous, some ambiguous and sophistical till they be cleared. 2 They abuse and calumniate the doctrine of those whom they call Calvinists, and would father upon them absurdities, errors, blasphemies: taking advantage upon some harsh phrases, concluding against them worse things then either they spoke or meant; passing over the explanations to be seen in sundry of their works, which will clear them of the errors that these men would enforce upon them.  
The differences which they make (in page 4) between the Calvinists doctrine and theirs, are fraudulent and injurious. As between All things, and all good things: where first these Anabaptists do differ from the plain Scriptures, which testify that All things were created by Christ, Col. 1 16, and without him was not any thing made that was made, 1 joh. 1 2. Secondly, they cannot be ignorant but that we hold all things that were made to be very good, Gen. 1 31, so this difference they forged out of their idle heads.  
The 2 & 3 differences, as that the Calvinists should say, whatsoever is done (murder or the like) cometh from God; and that God is the principal cause and author of all things, appointing all things to the one part and to the other, damnation as salvation, vice as virtue. But the Anabaptists say, whatsoever good is done cometh from God, but no evil things that are done; and that God is the principal cause and author of all good, and of salvation to all men; but the devil is the author of all evil. In these differences they set down some error, with calumny and sophistry.  
Error it is to say, God appointed not Damnation as Salvation: wherein again they proclaim themselves different from holy Scripture. For damnation being a work of God's justice upon the reprobates, (as salvation is a work of his grace towards his elect,) comes from God, and is by him appointed; as those Scriptures plainly testify, Mat. 25 41, jude v. 4, 2 Pet. 2 3 ● 9, Rom. 9 22.  
That any of us should say, murder and other l●ke vices come from God, and are appointed by him, is injurious sophistication. We hold not God to be the principal cause or author of any evil as it is sin; but only of evil as it is condign punishment for sin, according to Esa. 45 7, Amos 3 6. Concerning murder, and other like actions, we distinguish between the action as it is natural, and as it is moral. All actions as they are merely natural, are of God: for in him we live, and move, and have our being, Act 17 28, without him no man can move his hand to smite h●s neighbour. As they are moral, God's providence concerning them is twofold: for as they are vicious & sinfully done, God doth them not, but suffreth them so to be done: as they have in them respect of justice and punishment, so God doth, appointeth, commandeth them to be done: As, the defiling of David's Concubines, being considered in the sinfulness of it, proceeded from Absaloms' wicked lust, and A●hitophels wicked counsel, 2 Sam. 16 21 22. thus God did it not, but suffered it to be done. But considering it as a punishment or chastisement for David's sin, the Scripture telleth us, that God took David's wives and gave them to Absalon, and God did this thing, 2 Sam 12 11 12. The murdering of the Israelites by the Assyrians, of the I●wes by the Babylonians, was a very sinful action done by these Heathens; and thus God suffered them to do it: But as it was a just punishment for his people's iniquity, God sent those heathens against the hypocritical nation, Esa 10▪ 5 6. God caused the jews to fall by the sword, he made jerusalem desolate, he himself fought against them with an outstretched hand, he delivered them into the hands of Nebuchadrezar; he prepared destroyer's against th●m, he gave them into the hand of those that sought their lif●: the Babylonians w●re his servants, whom he sent and took, and brought against the land; though those Heathens for their iniquity in doing this, were afterward punished, jer. 19▪ 7 8, & 21 5 7, and 22 7 25, & 25 9 12. Other examples ma●y are in the Scriptures, how these actions which men did most sinfully, G●d did the same actions by those evil men; most justly: either for judgement upon reprobats, or for chastisement & mercy unto his ch●sen.  
They inveigh against us, 
Page 5.  as teaching that God decreed that Adam could not but sin; that God commanded him not to sin, and yet decreed that he should not sin. Answ. They proceed in wronging us. We teach not that God decreed sin should be done, otherwise then by suffering it to be done. He never decreed either to do sin, or to command it to be done, or to approve it being done. Neither did any decree of God force Adam to sin; he might have have avoided sinning if he had would: but he would not continue in obedience, he sinned willingly.  
Further, they feign us to say, 
Page ●.  that though God by his revealed will commanded Adam not to sin, yet in his secret will he decreed he should sin. Answ. God neither openly nor secretly decreeth or willeth sin as sin: for he is not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness, Psal. 5 4. They keep their wont therefore in calumniating us. Also they err, in refusing the distinction between Gods revealed and his secret will, whereby we understand not two wills in God, but one and the same will, partly revealed, partly concealed from us and secret, according to Deut. 29 29. By his revealed will or commandment, God would have Abraham to kill his son, Gen. 22, by his secret will (not th●n reveiled to Abraham but afterward) he would not have him killed. 
Page 7.   
They go on and would prove, that God did neither decree, nor lay any necessity on Adam to transgress. But they labour in the wind, and would prove that which we confess, yet in their proof lurketh error; for they affirm, that God left not Adam unfurnished with any thing that ●ight support him in that estate in which he created him. For th●s th●y bring no word of God, but broach their own fancies. A●am was unfurnished of God's gracious help to support him when h● was tempted: for want of it, he willingly yielded unto Sa●an: by it, he might and would have resisted all tentations; even as the elect Angels having this grace, are supported so as they shall never fall. Adam in deed was so furnished of God, that no power or fraud of Satan could have vanquished him, unl●sse he himself would voluntary yield: which he did, and therefore had no excuse for his sin. But God (if he had pleased) could so have confirmed his will in good, could so have supported him with grace in tentation, that his will should not at all have declined to evil. This God did not, because so it pleased him; and he was not bound to give Adam more grace, then that which he had bestowed on him: which was so great, that no power of devils could have prevailed, if the man had not willingly fallen.  
They proceed to manifest two things: first, Of Adam's state, 
Pag. 10 1●.  viz. that God could not make him otherwise then be made him, that is mutable, able to obey his precepts: but not unchangeably good. Ans. Not to reason of things too high for us, how God could have made man: I grant that men and Angels, and all cr●atures are changeable: and that Adam was able to obey all God's commandments, if he had would: but this proveth not that he was furnished with all things that might support him in that good estate: for he had not special grace from God to establish his will in good; which the Lord could have done, and then Adam had not sinned. Whereas they add, God did not decree and force him to sin; we say the same, and they sinfully wrong us to impute such blasphemy unto us. 2 The second thing they would manifest is; That many things be done against the will of God. Answ. This as it is set down is false: For it was the will of God to suffer Adam to fall, else he had not fallen: and God willingly suffers all the sins done under the Sun; for if he would not suffer them, the creatures could not do them. But understanding by Gods will his commandment, or his approbation: so it is true, that too many things are done against God's will: and this they need not go about to prove, for none (I think) denyeth it.  

Page 13.  But they scoff at the distinction between the action, and the sin of the action, and call it merely a fabulous riddle: and say, the subtlety of the Riddle is this, that sin is nothing: whereupon they pleasantly infer, that malefactors are punished for nothing. Answ. Had they not a better faculty in deriding then in disputing, they would not have called it a fabulous riddle. I have before proved that all actions of men as they are natural, all motions inward or outward, are of God, Act. 17 28. Again, I have proved that the actions of Assyria and Babylon, were just and holy actions as God did them; but wicked & sinful as men performed them Therefore the action and the sin of the action are rightly and needfully distinguished, seeing God's hand is in the one, but not in the other. That sin is no substantial thing is plain, seeing all things were made by God, joh. 1 2, but sin he never made: it is a vicious quality infecting the good things which God made, and corrupting their actions. And thus though sin be not simply nothing, yet it is no substantial thing. Their definition of sin, that it is a thought, word, or deed, contrary to the will of God▪ is no perfect definition: for there is an hereditary sin from Adam, which all have, before they can either do, or speak, or think: of which point we are to treat anon. Their inference that they which hold God to be the author of the deed which is sin, hold him to be the author of sin, is denied and before disproved. We know God was author of the deed of sending joseph into Egypt: for he sent him ●hither, partly to try and humble joseph, partly to provide for jacob's family, Psal. 10● 17 19, Gen. 45 7 8, yet was ●e not author of the sin committed in sending him, that was of the Patriarches, moved with envy, Act. 7 9  
They charge M. Knox with wide wand'ring, and large blasphemy, 
Pag. 15 16.  for ascribing to the providence of God, whatsoever the Ethnics attributed to fortune: Their reason is this, who knoweth not that unto fortune, the Ethnics ascribe all perverse and pestilent wickedness. Answ. Herein they wander from the truth, and blaspheme it. God's providence extendeth further than to such things as he himself is author and doer of: it extendeth to all the most horrible sins in the world, which he willingly suffereth to be done, and provideth in what manner and measure he will suffer them to be done, and by his wisdom knoweth to bring good out of the worst and most sinful deed. Could Adam have been tempted to sin, if God had not given Satan leave to tempt? Could he have fallen, if God had not left him to himself? Was not God's providence in Absaloms' horrible sin when he defiled his father's wives; seeing God foretold it, and the manner of it, before all Israel, and before the Sun? 2 Sam. 12 11 12. God's providence suffered Shimeis sin when he cursed David: his providence kept Abimilech from sinning in defiling Sarah, Gen. 20 3 6. To conclude, it is near unto Atheism & Epicurism to deny God's providence in any the least thing or action be it good or evil.  
But these men infer worse matter; 
Page 16.  ask whether any thing may be spoken more repugnant to the nature of God, or contrary to his word etc. then to say that God punisheth man with hell torments, for doing those things which he himself hath predestinated, ordained, decreed, determined, appointed, willed and compelled him to do, and that which a man cannot choose, but must needs do by the force and compulsion of his predestination. Ans Bold calumniators, which will make the worl● believe we say such things as we abhor to think. In how many books might they have seen these things denied, and refuted. We teach that sin is suffered of God, not done by him, nor decreed, willed, commanded, much less compelled. All that sin (whether men or devil's) sin voluntarily, of their own will, for which they might all in justice be damned. God tempteth no man to evil, much less forceth or compelleth any to evil, jam. 1 13. So they answer unto, and woul● refute their own fictions.  
They affirm that we say, whatsoever God forseeth be willeth, 
Page 17 1●▪  and it cannot but come to pass: whereto they answer, that God forseeth all things, good and evil, but he willeth only good. And though he foreknoweth ●ll things, yet all things come not to passeth ●efore of necessity. Answ. They still dally and deceive by general and ambiguous terms. If they understand by God's will, his permissive will, or willing sufferance: so we say all things good or evil co●● to pass by his will. But if they mean Gods effective or approving will, so we hold that he willeth nothing but good. The second we teach not, that all things therefore come to pass because God foreknoweth them: his foreknowledge imposeth no necessity on things. But withal we teach, that whatsoever God foreknoweth shall be, that must needs be, else his knowledge should not be certain and infallible: but they come to pass by other causes then his bare foreknowledge. These distinctions observed, their reasons deduced from Scripture are soon taken away.  
They plead, 
Pag. 18.  that God forseeth the death of ● sinner, and the cause thereof, viz. his wickedness; but willeth it not, as Ezech. 18 32 and 33 11. I will not the death of a sinner, but that he return and live. Christ foresaw the destruction of jerusalem, yet he willed it not for he wept etc. Mat. 23 37. Answ. They do not well to shuffle together, Death, and wickedness the cause of it. Wickedness God willeth permissively, suffering it to be done: Death he willeth ●ff●ctiuely, infl●cti●g it on obstinate sinners. Secondly, they err in denying absolutely that God willeth the death of a sinner, else how should God judge the world? To kill for sin is a work of ●ustice, as to pardon sin is a work of mercy. God willeth his own justice and work thereof. Who but he createth the evil of punishment? Esay 45 7, Amos 3 6. Who but he prepareth death and hell for sinners? Math. 25 41. And ●id he do this against his will? The Scripture in plain words saith of Eli●s wicked sons. They harkened not &c. because th● Lord would sl●y ●hem, 1 Sam. 2 25. Whereas therefore Ezekiel saith, God w●●ld not sinners death, it cannot be meant absolutely or in all respects (for then it should contradict the other Scripture,) but conditionally or comparatively: 
* So it is explained in Ezek. 18.21  if sinners repent he willeth not their death; or he willeth not their death so much as their repentance. But if the wick●d turn not, than the (Prophet saith) God whetteth his sword, bendeth his bow, and prepareth for him the instruments of death, Psal. 7.12 13. So Christ would not jerusalem's destruction, if they would have come to him: but because they would not, he would make it desolate, as was foretold, Dan. 9.26 27.  
They would prove, 
Pag▪ 18.  that all things come not pass of necessity therefore; to wit, because of God's foreknowledge. Answ. They labour in vain to prove that they need not. God's foreknowledge layeth no necessity that the thing must be done by force or compulsion. Yea Gods will always layeth no such necessity: seeing he willeth some things conditionally, which are not effected unless the condition be observed: as he would a sinner's life, not death, conditionally if he return to God. He would the destruction of Niniveh; but conditionally, except they repented. Other things God willeth absolutely; and those must needs come to pass: for none can resist or hinder his absolute will. Esa. 46 10.11. job. 23▪ 13 Ps●l. 33.10.11. But forasmuch as God certainly foreknow●th all things that shall be, whether good or evil, in this respect all things come to pass of necessity, otherwise God in his foreknowledge might be deceived. But as necessity meaneth violence, force, compulsion: so all things are not of necessity, but many are of the voluntary will of the creature. Therefore these adversary's deceive their readers in answering texts of scripture alleged: for sometime they father untruths on us, 
Pag. ●●.  and with ●ll s●metime spread their errors As when they say, In these actions (namely Shimeis cursing of David, and the like) there were evils, namely cur●ing▪ ●n●y▪ pride▪ deceit: now the controversy is (say they) who was the first cause ●f this cursing, ●nvy pride, deceit. Answ. They would make controversy where none is. 
Pag. 2●▪  We believe that all sin is originally from ●he creature, & none from th● creator. So when they would conclu●e from our doctrine, that God should be most to be blamed for forcing of necessity by his decree, Satan to tempt, and man to consent and act it: they show themselves to be calumniators: we do not hol●●hat ever any creature was, is, or shall be forced of necessity by God's decree, to consent unto, or to act any sin.  
And here let the prudent reader observe, how these men themselves can distinguish when they are driven to it: for (in pag. 24, 25.) they confess G●d made them that are now Devils, and continueth the life and being of men and Devil's: also (in pag. 26.) that these devils and men (the instruments that act wickedness) are good, as th●y are from God, yet the actions (th●y say) of those instruments, the sins, cannot be good from God.  
The first is true, that devil's and men were Gods good creatures: th● second, (that God continueth their life and being) is also true, but imperfect: they should have added their moving also: for so we are taught, that in him we live, and move, and have our being, Act. 17 28. Why said they not that God continueth their moving also▪ Was it because th●y saw all our actions are motions, and therefore in some respect a●● also of God? But this they balk for advantage to their errors. Their third assertion is partly false, and partly fraudulent. Fraud it is to confound actions and sins, as if they were all one, and admitted no distinction (which the Anabaptists call a turning device.) False it is that the actions of th●se instruments cannot be good from God: for whatsoever is from G●d, is good; & all actions as they are merely natura●l, are from G●d, in whom w● live and move▪ Again, all action's wh●●h God (either f●r ●●yall, chastisement or punishment) doth by ev●l●●●struments, they are morally good in respect of God: though as they are misdone, or sinfully done by devil's and men, they are morally evil; and thus God doth them not, but only suffereth them to be done amiss.  
Now for Gods sending the Assyrians against Israel, 
Pag. 26 27.  Esa. 10 5 6, his sending delusions upon reprobates, 2 Thess. 2 11, and the like: they say it was not otherwise then by suffering: and they would prove it by the devil's words to Christ, Send us into the swine, Mar. 5 12, which another Evangelist setteth down thus, Suffer us to go etc. Mat. 8 31. Hereupon they infer, that Gods sending is nothing but suffering in this case.  
Answ. They conclude more than the Scripture teacheth: for though such sending be suffering, yet it followeth not that such sending is nothing but suffering: there is more in it then so▪ For the punishing of Israel by Ashshur, Esai. 10. was an act of justice for their sins: and so is the sending of delusion in 2. Thess. 2. a work of justice: therefore a good work. And if God did not do these things, but only suffered them: then the good works of justice are done by wicked men and devil's; and the devils shall be good doers; and God a sufferer only of good to be done. The proof they make show of from comparing the Evangelists, showeth what strangers they are in the book of God. When sundry Prophets or Apostles repeat the same things, it is usually with some change and difference of words: not that the different words are equivalent, one meaning neither more nor l●sse than another, but of different meaning, and larger extent oftentimes, to teach further matter. That which one Evangelist calleth fasting, Mark 2.19. another calleth mourning, Math. 9.15. yet are not these two one, though often joined together. To drink with the drunken, Math. 24.49. is explained, To drink and to be drunken, Luk. 12.45. which two speeches are not always the same; for a man may drink with the drunken, and yet not be drunken himself. In 2. Chron. 5.4. the Levites took up the Ark: in 1. King. 8.3. it is said, the Priests took up the Ark: this expoundeth the former; for though all Priests were Levites, yet all Levites were not Priests. In 1. Chron. 19.19. the Syrians would not help the Ammonites: in 2. Sam. 10.19. it is said, they feared to help them. Yet are not these words of equal force and extent: for some may be unwilling to help though they be not afraid. The Prophet saith, Rejoice greatly O daughter of Zion, Zach. 9.9. the Apostle allegeth it, Fear not O daughter of Zion, joh. 12.15. The Prophet saith, the Gentiles shall seek, Esa. 11.10. the Apostle expoundeth it, the Gentiles shall trust. Rom. 15.12. And many the like; where to make one of the words no more in force then the other, were to do open violence to the scripture. And that all may see that sending is more than suffering, the very same history which they allege doth convince them, for the same devils at the same time desired Christ that he would not send them away out of the country, Mark. 5 10. but in Luk. 8.31. it is said, they desired that he would not comm●nd them to go out into the deep. If these men's reason be of weight, sending is no more than suffering: this reason hath as much weight, that sending is no less th●n commanding. Now betwixt commanding and suffering themselves (I suppose) will confess there is sometime a great difference. But why doth the one Evangelist say send us, and an other, suffer us? Not to confound these two as one, but to teach us two things; 1. that as it was the devil's sinful and malicious desire to hurt the creatures, & to procure envy against Christ in this respect he suffered them: 2. but as it was Christ's just punishment on the covetous Gadarens, and trial of them whether they loved their swine more than him and his gospel; in these respects Christ not only suffered, but sent the devils into the swine; and the devil's were his servants to do what he would have done. The like is to be minded for Gods sending the Assyrians, and Babylonians, with sword to kill; and the devils with delusions to deceive the reprobates; and other the like, 1 King. 22, 19, 20— 22.23.  
This is further manifested by the example of Christ's death: touching which (whatsoever the Scripture saith) these men do deny that God determined, appointed or decreed, 
Pag. 28.  that the wicked should betray or murder him, otherwise then by suffering them. Which if they spoke in respect of the sin only, we would grant: but being meant of the actions done, it is against the express Scriptures, which say the jews took and crucified him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, Act. 2 23, and that both Gentiles and Israelites were gathered together for to do whatsoever Gods hand and his counsel, predestinated (or foredetermined) to be done: Act. 4 27.28. Now God's Counsel and Predestination that a thing should be done, is more than bare permission; and his hand being in it, showeth him to be an agent in this work. God out of his love, sent and gave his Son for us, joh. 3.16.17, it pleased the Lord to bruise him, and put him to grief, Esay 53.10, and Christ laid down his life of himself, no man took it from him, joh. 10.18, he poured out his soul unto death, Esa. 53.12, he offered up himself a sacrifice for our sins, through the external Spirit, Heb. 7.27, & 9 14. These and the like sayings in Scripture, teach us more of God in Christ's death, than a bare suffering. God's good hand was in it for our redemption, and not only the wicked hands of them that sinfully crucified him.  

Pag. 29.  Whereas they tell us, Christ might have been slain without sin, for God might have appointed some to sacrifice Christ, as he did Abraham to sacrifice Isaak etc. They speak too presumptuously in God's matters. Will they teach him an other or a better way to effect his own purposes, than himself hath chosen? But what would they infer upon it? If God had decreed that Christ should have been slain by holy Angels; they would not then deny (I suppose) but God should be an agent in his Son's death. Now that God decreed he should be slain by evil Angels, and hands of wicked men; and his Decrees and Counsels must stand, Psal. 33.11, his predictions must needs be fulfilled, Act. 1.16, is he not therefore an agent in Christ's death? Shall he be restrained from using any of his creatures to do his good work, because they through their own corruption and malice do it (and cannot but do it) amiss? Or shall their misdoing which is in them voluntary, and not caused of God, be imputed to him? Let men speak and think of God with more sobriety: and though our dulness cannot comprehend how Gods good hand can be in the evil actions of wicked men, & he not partaker of their sin: yet let us not deny that which God plainly teacheth, but rather lay our hand on our mouth, and confess we have uttered that we understood not, things too wonderful for us which we knew not, job. 40.4, & 42, 3.  
The last reason which they pretend to answer, is such as dazelleth the adversaries eyes. The Scripture saith, the jews could not believe, because (the Lord) he blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, that they should not see, nor understand, and be converted and healed, joh. 12.39.40. Also the Lord saith, I will harden Pharoahs' heart: and be shall not hearken unto you, that I may lay my hand upon Egypt, etc. Exod. 7.3.4. 
Pag. 32.  They answer, to the first, that by comparing Esa. 6.9. Mat. 13.14, etc. Act. 28.26, etc. it is manifest, that they winked with their eyes, lest they should see: for which cause God gave them up to that reprobate sense. 
Pag. ●●.  To the latter they answer, that Pharaoh hardened his (own) heart, Exod. 9.34, and God hardened his heart (and so the hearts of the wicked) by giving them up to Satan (who worketh hardness of heart against God) and to their own hearts hardness, and lusts, to vile affections, and to reprobate minds, Psal. 81.11.12. Rom. 1.24.26.28.  
A●sw. That the jews winked and would not see, that Pharaoh hardened his own heart and would not let Israel go, is true. That for these causes God gave them up to their own lusts, etc. and to Satan is also true. Thus far we agree; but to the force of our reason they answer nothing at all. For in these works of blinding and hardening, there is more than God's bare permission: they did it, and God it; they sinfully, but God righteously, justly rewarding their sin. And thus the enemy condemneth himself. For he that for sin, inflicteth punishment, doth a good work of justice, and suffreth it not only to be done: but God for sin blinded the eyes, and hardened the hearts of the jews and Egyptians; therefore in blindning and hardening, God was a doer (as a just judge) and not a sufferer only, as while ere they pleaded. Between these two there is great difference. The greeks took Softh●nes and beat him before Gallioes' judgement seat; here Gallio suffered them only, caring for none of those things, Act. 18.15.16.17. Paul and Silas were beaten and imprisoned by the Magistrate's commandment, Act. 16.22.23, here the Magistrates not only suffered, but were agents also in their beating and imprisoning, though they did it by other wicked m●ns hands. So God when he commandeth Satan to go and deceive, or harden wicked sinners, 1. King. 22.22, when he giveth sinners up to a reprobat mind, Rom. 1.24.26, 28, than God deceiveth, God hardeneth in just judgement, and doth not only suffer these things. When the judge delivereth an evil doer to the Officer, & the Officer cast him into prison, Luk. 12.58, the judge doth this by the Officer. So God is the Iudg, he delivereth evil doers to Satan to be their deluder, their tormentor, their gaoler, he giveth them up to blindness, hardness, reprobate minds; & these are works of his justice, which Satan and evil men execute most sinfully. Christ saith, he came into this world for judgement, that they which see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind, job. 9.39. Now in what manner God blindeth and hardeneth sinners it is not in man to declare: for his judgements are unsearchable, and his ways past finding out, Rom. 11.33, But they that for his judgements would make God the author of sin, err on the one hand: and they that ascribe unto him herein but a bare permission, err on the other hand. Godliness will teach us to believe and rest in that which the Scriptures teach: though it pass our reach and capacity how God in his wisdom doth these things. Hitherto of Predestination.  

Of Election.  
THEY proceed to speak of election; where after they have set down (as they think good themselves) what our opinion is, they propound their own doctrine, viz. That Christ came to cure all men of their sins, 
Pag. 34 36.  but with a bitter medicine, which is, that we must deny ourselves, take up his cross, and follow him. So many as refuse to take this medicine, cannot be cured, but such as receive it are cured. Again, that they are elected who do put on Christ, and that our election dependeth upon this condition, 
Pag. 39  according to the Scriptures, 
Rom. 9.25.26.  the Lord chooseth to himself a righteous man, and they that were not God's people, shall be his people, etc. if they seek righteousness by faith, 
Rom. 11.5.7  and these are the elect, according to the election of grace. Election (they say) is not of particular person, but of quality: all persons are God's generation; and those persons in whom he findeth faith and obedience, 
Act. 17.28, 29.  of his mere mercy those persons he electeth to salvation, for the quality he findeth in them; whi●h he himself hath wrought by his word and Spirit, which they might have resisted, but did not, but submitted to the righteousness of God; and this is God's purpose of election before the world was; 
Rom. 8.29.  and these are they whom God knew, or acknowledged before. And for God's decree they feign it to be thus, 
Page 41.  I will cause all Nations to be taught (by Christ) and so many of them, (being all called) as do not behave themselves as they ought, I will cause to be punished, and the rest I will bless and make happy. This is the doctrine of blind Odegoes, the Guide; and ignorant Ereunetes the Searcher answereth, I do think it so to have been.  
Answ. Very ignorantly and erroneously have they propounded their opinion, with some truth mixing much error, that the blind may lead the blind into the ditch. It is true, that such men as they describe are Gods elect: it is also true that God hath wrought these good things in them by his Word and Spirit. But false it is, that our election dependeth upon this condition; False, that election is not of particular persons, but of quality. False it is (and thwarting their former speech) that God electeth those persons in whom he findeth faith and obedience: For before election no such persons are to be found among all the sons of Adam. False it is, and an abusing of the Scripture, to say, that God chooseth to himself a righteous man. False it is to say (in this matter of Election) that all persons are God's generation. Briefly, the whole tenor of their description of God's election, is perverse and erroneous. For,  
1 No scripture telleth them that our election to life, dependeth on this condition, of our faith and obedience. Faith and obedience are the effects (not the cause) of our election, and are conditions following election, not going before it; as it is written, As many as were ordained to eternal life believed, Act. 13.48, teaching that Gods ordaining to life (that is his election) went before their believing, but these men invert the order of God, and would teach, that so many as believed (beforehand) were ordained to life.  
2 The Apostle teacheth us, that whom God foreknew, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, Rom. 8.29, so that our conformity to the image of Christ, our faith, obedience, bearing of his cross etc. is that whereunto (not that wherefore) God predestined or chose us. This is most apparent by the words following: Whom he did predestinate, them he also called, and whom he called them he also justified, and whom he justified them he also glorified, Rom. 8.30, So then glorifying cometh after justifying; justifying after calling; call, after predestinating or choosing unto life: and these graces are not before predestination or causes of it, as these adversaries would persuade.  
3 It is written, that God hath chosen us in Christ, before the foundation of the world▪ that we should be holy; and he predestinated us unto the adoption of children by jesus Christ, Eph. 1.4.5, so that our holiness, and our adoption, are things that we are chosen unto, and do follow election; but are not the things going before, and which we are chosen for, because God findeth them in us.  
4 Paul teacheth us that God justifyeth the ungodly that believe in him, Rom. 4 5, now those whom he justifieth, he did choose and predestinate before, Rom. 8.30, therefore he chose the ungodly, the unrighteous, that they may be made godly, righteous, and holy, through his grace. But these men say, God chooseth a righteous man, whereas the Scripture saith, There is none righteous, no not one, there is none that understandeth, none that seeketh after God, Rom. 3.10.11, so that if God should choose the righteous only, none at all should be chosen. They say, it is according to the Scripture, but they show no Scripture that acordeth to their saying. If they intent Psal 4.3, the Lord hath set apart (or separated) him that is godly for himself; (for I know not else what Scripture they should mean,) they are deceived and would deceive; for David speaketh not there of his election to life, but of his being set apart to the glory of the kingdom of Israel, which his enemies would have turned to ignominy: neither useth he the word of election, but of setting-apart (or separating after a marvellous sort) which word is used for God's administration towards his people after they are elected and called, as appeareth in Ex. 33.16, & 11.7, yea and it is applied to bruit beasts, which are not partakers of the Election that we treat of, Ex. 9.4.  
5 Moses teacheth Israel, that God gave them not inheritance in the earthly Canaan (much less in the Kingdom of Christ) for their righteousness or uprightness of their hearts, Deut. 9 4.5.6, he telleth them, Because God loved their fathers, therefore he choose their seed after them, Deut. 4.37. But these men would persuade, that because men deny themselves, take up the cross & follow Christ, (that is, because they are righteous and holy) therefore God chooseth them to inherit heaven.  
6 Because all men are by nature, or creation, the offspring, or generation of God. Act. 17.28, these men would conclude that election to eternal life, is not of particular persons, but of quality: as if our first natural birth, and our second supernatural birth were all one: or, because all persons are of God by creation, therefore no persons (or all persons) are of God by regeneration, and by election. But it is palpable error to confound things so different.  
They proceed in their error, and say, All men to whom the Gospel is preached, 
Pag. 4●.  were elected to salvation in Christ; not actually, for they could not be actually chosen, before they had actually any being, but in the eternal purpose of God upon the condition afore spoken.  
Answ. Their first assertion is against truth, against reason. It is not true that all to whom the Gospel is preached, were elected to salvation in Christ: no scripture saith so. We are taught the contrary by Act. 13.46.48. where the Gospel was preached to many, but all that heard it were not elected to salvation: for as many as were ordained (that is elected) to eternal life, believed. But all believed not: therefore all were not ordained (or elected) to life. Against reason it is to say, All are elected: for election implieth a leaving or refusing of some. Where all are taken, no choice is made. Their second saying is, all were elected, not actually, because they had no being; but in God's eternal purpose. The action is in God, not in man: and his purposes or decrees are his actions: and if before the foundation of the world, God elected us in Christ, as the Apostle teacheth, Eph. 1.4. then were we actually chosen before we had natural being: though God's choice had not effect in us till we had being: But whereas they add, upon the condition afore spoken; it is an error before refuted.  
Object. But of the elect Paul saith, Ye were without Christ, without God in the world, Eph. 2.12. so they were not then really and particularly elected.  
Answ. Howsoever they change their terms, their reason is not good. They were not without God or Christ in respect of God's election, which he did before the world was made, Eph. 1.4. but in respect of their sinful estate and unbelief, before they were called, they were without God.  
2 Obj. But the Apostle saith, After ye believed, ye were sealed with the holy spirit of promise, etc. Eph. 1.13.14.  
Answ. What of this? Could they not be elected of the father, before they were sealed by the holy Ghost? God's election was before all time, Eph. 1.4. their calling and sealing by the Spirit, was in time. But they would confound election and sealing ignorantly.  
3 Object. Rom. 9.25, 1 Pet. 2.10. I will call them my people which were not my people, etc. If we were actually and particularly chosen before the creation, than were we also really God's people, and could not at any time be said, not to be his people.  
Answ. Here again they confound God's election, with his cal●●ng▪ which is the manifestation of his election by the effect. God's predestination is before his calling, Rom. 8.30. So though they were not his people by calling, they were his by election. It is evident by Act. 18.10. that many in Corinth were God's people, before they were called or converted. jeremy was known, sanctified and ordained to be a Prophet, before he was form or born, jer. 1.5. and can we think he was not then also chosen to life?  
They say, The Apostles meaning is, 
Pag. ●●  that we are first particularly chosen, when we receive or put on Christ. For God only chooseth where be findeth faith and obedience to the Gospel; and rejecteth where these are wanting. Herein they wrong the Apostles, who neither spoke nor meant as these men speak. It is showed before from Act. 13.48. that election goeth before faith: so these men err, that put it after. They pervert the order set down in Rom. 8.30. whiles they make men to be first called, justified, glorified; and then predestinated unto life. They neglect Paul's doctrine, that God chose us before the world was, that we should be holy: and teach new doctrine of Antichrists devising, that God chose us because we were holy. But to follow them in their doctrine: God chooseth none (they say) but where he findeth faith. Where doth God find this, seeing he hath shut up all in unbelief? Rom. 11.32. Faith is not of ourselves, it is the gift of God, Eph. 2.8. so than he findeth not faith in his elect, but giveth them faith. And if they say some will not believe, and them God rejecteth: some will believe, and them God electeth: I demand, whence have any this will to believe? If they answer, of themselves and their own power; the Apostle telleth us the contrary, It is God that worketh in us both to will and to do of his good pleasure, Phil. 2.13. Now God giveth not all men this will to believe and obey: for some cannot believe, 1. joh. 12.39. some are reprobate concerning faith and every good work. 2. Tim. 3.8. Tit. 1 16. If God would give all men alike grace, he could make all men willing to believe and obey: but this he doth not: for in some he giveth a new heart and a new spirit, and takes away the stony heart out of their flesh, Ezek. 36.26. in other some he hardeneth their heart, that they cannot believe, nor turn unto him, joh. 1●. 39 40. The mystery of his Gospel, God bideth from some, and revealeth to othersome: even so, for so it seemed good in his sight, Math. 11.25.26. He hath mercy on whom he will, & whom he will he hardeneth, Rom. 9.18.  
By this which hath been said, all that love the truth may see, that all men to whom the Gospel is preached, are not elected to salvation in Christ, as these corrupters of the Gospel teach: neither can all men believe, or obey; because God gives them not such grace. Some refuse indeed willingly, and they perish justly: some (who naturally are as bad as other, & have hearts of stone not of flesh) are changed, new hearts are given them, faith and holiness are wrought in them, and so they are brought unto salvation whereunto they were elected. Why God changeth the heart of some and not of other some, when he could if he pleased, change all is not a question to be disputed of, Rom. 9.19.20. Let it suffice us, that God oweth us nothing, except death for our sins. His grace is his own, he may give it where he will, and none have cause to complain: If God have given grace to any of us, let us praise him for his mercy: when we see others left without grace, let us reverence him for his unsearchable judgements.  
The rest of their discourse about election, though there be many abuses they offer to the scriptures, which might justly be taxed, yet because they none of them do prove these men's universal Election, nor disprove our faith, I think needless to reply unto.   

Of Reprobation.  
TOgether with Election, they treat of Reprobation, badly as before, Our doctrine they pretend to be thus, They say, 
Pag● ●●.  God hath reprobated some, and the greatest number, and that before they were borne, and had done evil; for whom there was never means of salvation, because God would have them perish, for that was his good pleasure.  
Answ. We hold not (as they would bear the world in hand) that God would have men to perish, because it is his good pleasure: but because of their sins he destroyeth them, his justice so requiring. Neither do we hold that God ever decreed to punish his reasonable creature, without respect of the sin thereof deserving punishment. Yet was their punishment decreed before they were borne, or had done evil. For God foreseeing their wickedness, appointed them to wrath before they acted it, though he inflicteth not punishment till they be sinners. And this the scripture teacheth, as in jude vers. 4. there are certain men crept in, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation. If they were ordained to it before of old, then was it before they were borne. The same is confirmed by Rom. 9.11.12.13. which scripture they seek to pervert by a longsome and erroneous exposition. Our doctrine being thus by them mis-reported; they labour to refute their own forgeries, not our assertions. So that they are unworthy of any reply.   

Of falling away.  
THE next error which they would maintain, is, 
Pag. 78.  that a man may fall from his election: or, that godly men, which are in the true and saving grace of God, may fall away: 
Pag. ●9.  and may lose their heavenly inheritance which they have right unto. This Popish heresy they have not confirmed by any one Scripture, though they pervert many Scriptures for a show to delude the simple.  
The faith which we profess is this: that the elect, however through Satan's tentations, and their own infirmities, they are subject to fall from God and perish; yet they are kept by the power of God, through faith unto salvation, 1 Pet. 1.5, though they through their weakness sin and fall, yet the Lord putteth under his hand, Psal. 37.24, and the seed of God remaineth in them, and they cannot sin (unto death) because they are borne of God, 1 job. 3.9. Though of themselves they are too ready to depart from God, yet he will not turn away from them to do them good, but putteth his fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from him, jer. 32.40, so Christ's sheep shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of his hand, but he giveth unto them eternal life, joh. 10 28, and the elect cannot possibly be seduced from Christ, Mat. 24.24.  
They plead for their error by 7 reasons.  
The 1 is certain Scriptures; as Heb. 12.15. Look lest any man fail of (or fall from) the grace of God. Answ. This proveth not that God will suffer his elect to fall utterly from saving grace: but warneth them to take heed to themselves in respect of their own frailty, and Satan's subtlety. Though God's election and foundation standeth sure, 2 Tim. 2▪ 19, yet we must make an end of our salvation with fear and trembling; and must add virtue unto faith, and give diligence to make our calling and election sure; which if we do we shall never fall, 2 Pet. 1.5.▪ 10.  
Salt may lose his savour, Mat. 5. Answ. It may, if men be seasoned but with common grace, such as God giveth to many reprobates Heb. 6.4.5.6, but saving grace bestowed on the elect, is a gift and calling without repentance, Rom. 11.29.  
Some that have escaped the pollutions of the world, etc. may return with the Sow to wallow in the mire, 2 Pet. 2.20.22. Answ. Too many in deed do so, but they are swine, not sheep of Christ: they seemed to be washed, by the knowledge of the Lord which they had, but their swinish nature was never changed. The Apostle in that chapter speaketh of hypocrites and reprobates, which walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, v. 10, which are as natural bruit beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, v. 12. which are wells without water, v. 17, so they never had saving grace.  
Those that Christ hath bought may be damned, 2 Pet. 2.1. Answ. Those are such as before I spoke of, which were bought of Christ by his offer of grace, and their feigned acceptance of it: but had they been in deed bought from the earth, they would have followed the Lamb, and should have been without fault before the throne of God, Rev. 14.3.4 5. Had they been justified by his blood, and reconciled to God by his death; much more should they be saved by his life; Rome 5.9.10. Had they been of Christ's sheep, for whom he laid down his life, he would have given them eternal life, joh. 10.27▪ 28. And here note how these men would make Christ's sufferings vain: for many whom (as they think) Christ died for, shall die themselves for ever. Where is now the justice of God, that punisheth the wicked themselves, and yet punished Christ for them, without cause without fruit? Such doctrine the Apostle doth abhor, Gal. 2.21.  
Some may tread under foot the blood of Christ, wherewith they were sanctified, etc. Heb. 10.29. Answ. Such were never sanctified otherwise then Swine that were washed, whose filthy nature was never indeed changed, otherwise then by counterfeisance and hypocrisy.  
They that have faith and good conscience, may put it away, and make shipwreck of it: and some may leave their first faith, & be damned, 1 Tim. 1.19, & 5.12. Ans. Faith is not always in deed, that which it seemeth to be: There is a temporary faith, which falleth away in time of tentation, Luke 8.13▪ a vain dead faith, jam. 2, and there is a living faith, the ●aith of Gods elect, Tit. 1, 1, this faith never faileth utterly, for it is the seed of God, by which we are regenerate, and it remaineth in us, keeping us from sin, 1. Joh. 3.9.  
Some written in the book of life, may be put out, Exod. 32.32.33. Psal. 69.25.28, Rev. 3.5. Answ. Many things are spoken of God, not properly but figuratively, & after the manner of men. So God is no way changeable, Mal. 3.6, jam. 1.17, neither doth he repent, 1. Sam. 15.29, yet is it said, It repented him that he had made man etc. Gen. 6.6, because in destroying the world, he did as men when they repent. So God is said to blot out of his book, those wicked which for a time seemed to themselves, & to others to be written in his book, but after by God's rooting them out, are manifested never to have been written there; for than they should have continued there▪ because the gifts and calling of God are without repentance, Rom. 11. ●9, his foundation standeth sure, having this seal. The Lord knoweth them that are his, 2 Tim. 2.19. But to the wicked he will profess, I never knew you, Mat. 7, 23. The talon may be taken from him that useth it not well, Mat. 25. Answ. All that have talents, that is gracious gifts, have not true saving grace to sanctify those gifts, neither are they all Gods elect. This therefore is no proof of the question in hand.  
The Saints at Rome that were justified by faith, and had access unto grace, Rom. 5.1.2, yet if th●y continued not in the bounty of God, they should be cut off, etc. Rom. 11.22. Answ. This and the examples following are like to the former, and teach Gods elect to have care to continue in grace, without which there is no salvation. They teach also that hypocrites falling from God, shall perish. But none truly justified, and partakers of saving grace, shall perish, for God glorifieth them, Rom. 5.9, & 8.30, and he putteth his fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from him, jer. 32 40, and if they depart not, th●y perish not, but are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation, 1 Pet. 1.5.  
2 Their second reason is, 
Pag. 80.  If the elect cannot fall out of God's favour, than did not all fall in Adam, and then some were never dead in sins, and so need not Christ's redemption, etc. Answ. An ignorant cavil: for the Apostle teacheth that God hath chosen us in Christ before the foundation of the world. Eph. 1 4. These men speak of our state before Christ. Again Adam and all in him fell from grace, su●h as th●y had of God in creation; but not from Christian grace, from grace of election and redemption, whereof they had no need before ●h●ir fall, neither had they any promise of it till they were dead in si●, Gen. 3 It is this saving grace in Christ, from which the elect can never utterly fall, and not any other grace by creation, from whi●h all men and some Angels have fallen.  
3 If the elect cannot fall from their election, then have not all sinned and been deprived of the glory of God, and shut up in unbelief, etc. Answ. The same sophistry is in this reason, that was in the former, changing the state of the question, which is only of them that in Christ were chosen before the world was, and are by him redeemed, justified, sanctified, and shall have eternal life, joh. 10.28, whereas these deceivers speak of men without Christ, and before they are by him redeemed.  
4 The Ephesians were elect before the foundation of the world, Eph. 1. yet having forsaken their first love, if they repented not, God would remove the candlestick etc. Rev. 2. Answ. This is answered in the answers to the Scriptures which they brought in their first reason. It is true, the elect without repentance, faith, and perseverance cannot be saved. But all Gods elect have from him the grace to repent, believe, and continue in well-doing, as before is proved: so they cannot perish. But hypocrites which were among the Saints only, but never of them, they cannot continue with the Saints, and so cannot be saved, 1 joh. 2.19.  
5 If a man in God's favour and chosen cannot fall out of it: then need he not, though he commit incest, adultery, murder, etc. fear falling into damnation. Answ. Herein they abuse Gods comfortable promises, as if men should continue in sin that grace may abound. Far be it. All men ought to fear falling into any sin, and the elect fear continually knowing their own frailty. Our spiritual security is not carnal security: our faith is in God, not in ourselves; by his power we are kept, not by our own. He saith to his people, The mountains shall depart, and the hills be removed, but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed; Esai. 54.10. But if by fear, they mean fear without faith, that is despair: we believe that the elect though they fall into such sins, ought not to despair or distrust God's mercy: as the examples of David, Peter &c: which they allege, do evidently confirm. Psal. 51. Luke 22.31.32.  
6 If no man elect, can fall from his election by committing of any of these sins, then to what end is repentance taught? It is in vain, if they neither be, nor can be in condemnation, etc. Answ. They that teach such doctrine, their religion is vain. We believe as the elect cannot perish, so neither can they continue in sin: he that is borne of God (saith the Apostle) committeth not sin, 1 joh. 3.9. All that truly believe that they are elect, do also believe and know, that by repentance, faith, and abiding in Christ, they must come to the end of their election, the salvation of their souls: this is the way and means unto life, and without this they cannot see God.  
7 To what end are men admonished or exhorted not to receive the grace of God in vain, 2 Cor. 6.1, not to fall from their steadfastness, 2 Pet. 3.17 etc. If they cannot fall into them, doth the Lord use words in vain? Answ. No, but these men's words are vain. For God as he hath ordained men to life, hath also ordained his laws, exhortations, threatenings &c. as means to bring them into life. He dealeth not with men as with stones, to carry them into heaven by violence; but giveth them repentance, faith, love, zeal, care and other graces; he persuadeth, moveth, draweth them to come willingly, and to continue carefully, and so at last saveth them.  
In the next place, these fallers from grace, seek to wrest the Scriptures which refute their heresy. 
Pag. 84.  Unto Christ's words in Mat. 24.24, if it were possible they should deceive the very elect: They answer, that the elect, (namely those that receive and obey the truth jesus Christ, and abide in him to the death,) cannot perish. Answ. Great is the truth that forceth the adversaries to yield; this is that which we maintain; and Christ's words (if it were possible) prove it undeniably; and showeth it to be impossible that the elect should be deceived to lose Christ.  
Obj. Our controversy is whether those that be elect, may fall out of it: and not whether those that abide in it can perish. Answ. Here they would unsay that which before they said well. And the controversy they make is mere cavilling. For if it be impossible that the elect should be seduced from Christ, then is it impossible they should perish; and consequently it is impossible that they should fall from their election. Again, if it be possible that they should fall from their election, then is it possible they should perish, and possible that they should be seduced from Christ: and so our Saviour's words will not stand. How greatly are these Deceivers fallen themselves, that seek so to pervert the plain words of Christ.  
Object. Many fall from their election, not by being deceived, but willingly forsake the truth, against or after their enlightening, Heb. 6▪ 4, etc. and 10.26, etc. Answ. First, this is nothing to Christ's words in Mat. 24.24. Secondly, the Scriptures which they cite, say not (nor doth any Scripture say) that the elect may fall from their election either by deceit or willingly. Thirdly, as God keepeth all his elect from being deceived from Christ: so he keepeth them from willing forsaking of Christ: for he putteth his fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from him, jer. 32.40, he stablisheth them in Christ, and anointeth them, and sealeth them, and giveth the earnest of the Spirit in their hearts, 2 Cor. 1.21▪ 22. 
Pag. 1●.   
another sure proof of the salvation of all Gods elect is in joh. 10.3.4.5.8.14.15.27.28.29. This Scripture the adversaries would pervert with this gloss: That so long as they continue Christ's sheep, hear his voice and follow him, so long they are sure, and have safety in God's acceptance, etc. But if they do evil and will not hear his voice, than he will repent of the good that he promised, jer. 18.10, etc. Answ. First, that by sheep are meant Gods elect whom he will save, is plain by the parable of the sheep and goats, Math. 25.33, etc. Secondly, in john 10, Christ useth no such words, so long as they continue, so long as they hear his voice, etc. but he plainly telleth us, that the sheep do hear voice, v. 3, that they follow him, v. 4, that they will not follow a stranger, neither know they his voice, v. 5. that the sheep did not hear strangers, v. 8, yea all Christ's sheep shall hear his voice, v. 16.27, and he giveth them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of his hand, or his fathers, v. 28.29. How unsufferably now do these men wrist Christ's heavenly words! Thirdly, the exception which they put, If they do evil in his sight, and will not hear his voice, than he will repent of the good, etc. This exception is impossible to b●e found in Christ's sheep: for though through infirmity they fall, yet he casteth them not off, for the Lord upholdeth them with his hand, Psal: 37, 24, though they stray he seeketh them up, Psal: 119, 176, he brings again that which was driven away, binds up that which was broken, strenthens that which was sick, etc. Ezek: 34, 16, he circumciseth their heart to love the Lord, with all their heart and withal their soul, that they may live, Deut: 30, 6, Such as believe not, and hear not his voice, are not sheep, but goats or swine; as Christ said to the jews, ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, Ioh: 10, 26. And how is it possible that the sheep should perish, seeing God is greater than all, in whose hand they are, Ioh: 10, 28, 29. If Satan assail them, the God of peace will tread him under their feet, Rome 16, 20, if the world, they overcome it by their faith, for greater is he that is in them, than he that is in the world, 1 Joh. 4, 4, & 5, 4, if their own corruptions rebel in them; God not only pardoneth, but also subdueth their iniquities, Mic: 7, 18, 19: as he carried them from the womb, so he hath promised to carry them even unto old age, and hoary hairs, Esa: 46, 3, 4. he sanctifieth them wholly, and preserveth their whole spirit, and soul and body blameless unto the coming of Christ, 1 Thess: 5.23. If neither Satan, nor the world, nor the flesh can draw th●m from Christ: nothing can draw them away; but they are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation, 1 Pet. 1.5.  
Unto joh. 13 1. where it is said, Christ loved his own unto the end; they first say, 
Pag. ●7.  that the meaning is, unto the end of his life. Ans. This is a frivolous limitation: did Christ love his own no longer than while he lived with them in this world? Who taught these miserable men thus to limit and lessen the love of Christ? He himself testifieth otherwise to his people; I have loved thee with an everlasting love, therefore with loving kindness have I drawn, jer. 31.3.  
But it seemeth their conscience checked them when they wrote such doctrine: therefore after they say, that he loveth his for ever; but the question is not of Christ's love unto his, but of their love unto him. A. This is no answer to Joh. 13.1. which speaketh of Christ's love, not of theirs. Secondly, it is impossible that Christ should love any for ever, if they also love not him. For such as hate and forsake him, 
● Tim. 2.12.  them also he will hate and forsake: and so cannot love them for ever. Thirdly, it is before proved from Jer. 31.3. that those whom he embraceth with everlasting love, he also draweth with loving kindness: and being drawn, they run after him, Song. 1.4. those whom he loveth first, they love him 1. joh. 4.19. he circumciseth their heart to love him, Deut. 30.6. he putteth his fear unto their heart, not to depart from him, jer. 32.40. and nothing can separate them from the love of Christ, Rome, 8.35.  
Unto Rom. 11.29. where the Apostle saith, The gifts and calling of God are without repentance: they answer with their common exception, that if the jews abide not still in unbelief, 
Pag. 89.  they shall be grafted in again: of this the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.  
Answ. They still labour to overthrow one part of the truth by alleging another. The Apostle as he saith, that if the jews abide not in unbelief, they shall be grafted in, for God is able, Rom. 11.23▪ so he further saith, that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in, and so all Israel shall be saved, as it is written. There shall come out of Zion the deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from jakob, etc. v. 25 26. and further telleth us, that as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers: whereof the reason is this: for the gifts and calling of God are without repentance, v. 28.29 Therefore as the first is true, that God is able to graft them in, so the second is also true, that he is willing, and they shall be graffed in: as there is a condition on their parts, if they abide not in unbelief, so there is an absolute promise on God's part, that they shall not abide in it; because Christ the Deliverer will turn away ungodliness from them, that is, he will take away their unbelief and hardness, he will take away their sins, v. 26 27. which is a plain evidence that he loveth them, and repenteth not of his former love and promise. And as he dealeth with the elect jews, so doth he with all the elect Gentiles: therefore all Gods elect shall in time be converted, and have their sins forgiven them, and so undoubtedly saved by him whose gifts and calling are without repentance.  
In 1. joh. 2.19. it is said, They went out from us, but they were not of us, for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us, etc. This place showeth, that hypocrites and reprobates which abide not; were never of Christ's Church, though crept for a time amongst them. It teacheth also, that all who are of the Saints, of Christ's sheep and his elect, do abide, and fall not away to perdition. 
Pag ●0.   
To this they make answer, first by an open slander; that we should affirm, that God hath predestinated some to salvation; and some to damnation without any condition. This we affirm not, but they falsely charge us, as I have formerly manifested.  
Again they say we affirm, that the elect making never so great show of wickedness, and walking in the ways of B●●●all, are still elect, and can by no means fall out of their election, etc. But herein they keep their wont. Had they dealt honestly, they should have showed who and where we thus affirm. We hold that the elect after their calling, are careful to avoid all sin, as it is written, We know that whosoever is borne of God sinneth not; but he that it begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not, 1 joh. 5, 18, And though the elect fall through infirmity into many grievous sins, yet they abide not always in them, but are renewed by repentance and faith in Christ: and whiles they are fallen, they are not cast off, Psa. 37, neither doth God repent of his electing of them, nor utterly depriveth them of grace and his good spirit, Psal. 51, Luk: 22, 31, 32, Ezek: 34, 16.  
Thirdly, 
Pag. 91.  they tell us of difference between persons as they are God's generation (or creatures) and qualities good or evil. But this (howsoever they boast of the excellency of it) is to no purpose: for all men being corrupted with evil qualities, Rom. 2. & 3● how is it that any are changed into good; but by the power and grace of God, which is effectual in all his elect: The residue abide in their sins, because God changeth not nor reneweth their hearts, and such he never elected unto life, but ordained them of old unto condemnation, jude v ●4.  
Lastly they answer with absurd Sophistry; 
Pag. 92.  saying, that these words, 1 Ioh: 2: 19: they went out from us, is meant of lying spirits, the Antichrists, in those persons, who once had the spirit of truth in them. And the Apostle saith, they were never of us: for v: 21▪ no lie is of the truth: For example (say they) the spirit of Hymeneus, together with his person, was in spiritual fellowship with Paul, so long as he retained faith & a good conscience, but having put away the spirit of truth, and received a lying spirit, he went out from them in that his spirit, for or because it was never of them, etc. Will any say that the Pope himself is Antichrist in respect of his person? or rather in regard of his spirit or spiritual power he hath. Therefore all that this place proveth, is, that lying spirits or Antichrists in men's persons, went out from the truth, and were never of the truth; and therefore serveth nothing to prove that the elect can never fall away.  
Answ. Was ever plain scripture more violently wrested, by any heretic? The Apostle saith of the many Antichrists, they went out from us, but they were not of us, 1 joh. 2, 18, 19 This these men will not have to be meant of their persons, but of their spirits in their persons. And what understand they by their spirits? their lies, their errors, their spiritual power, such as the Pope hath: that is (as before they distinguished) their wicked qualities; not their persons: for God (they say) loveth all persons, they being his generation, Act. 17.27.  
First it is an error to say God hateth not the persons of wicked men, but the evil qualities in them only: for though he hateth no creature in respect of their creation which was good; yet the creature being degenerate and fallen from God, he hateth their wickedness and them also for it, as the Scripture plainly witnesseth, Psal. 5.4.5.6 & 11 5.  
2 It is erroneous to say, that by Spirits, the Apostle meaneth not persons, but qualities, 1 joh. 4.1. for himself showeth his meaning, when he saith, because many false Prophets are gone out into the world. So by Spirits to be tried, he meaneth Prophets, which came with spiritual gifts: and it is frequent in Scripture to call subjects or persons, by the name of adjuncts or qualities in them: as, I am against thee ê pride, jer. 50, 31, that is, o thou most proud: and, pride shall stumble and fall, v. 32, that is, the proud person: the poverty of the land, 2 King. 24, 14, 15, the poorest people. Deceit (or Sloth) roasteth not that which he took in hunting, Prov. 14, 27, that is, the deceitful man; and many the like.  
3 It is from the deepness of Familisme, to say, that Antichrists are not persons, but evil qualities in men, so Christ may be holden no person, but a godly quality in us. The Apostle speaketh of the person, for he saith not the lie, but the liar, he that denyeth that jesus is the Christ, he is Antichrist: 1 joh. 2.22.  
4 It is an absurd exposition of 1 joh 2, 19, to put qualities for persons. He there speaks of Antichrists, They went out fro● us; these men will have it, evil or Antichristian qualities went out from us. Bu● what sense then will they make of the last branch of the verse, That they might be made manifest, that they were not all of us? Will they say, some Antichristian qualities were of the Apostles; though not all? The meaning is evident, that in the Church are persons some good, some bad, some elect, some reprobate●: but whiles they abide and walk together in the Church, it is not manifest who are of the Church, who are not; but when the wicked and reprobates depart from th● truth and Church, than it is manifest that such Apostates, though for a time in the Church, yet were never of it. So it is a sure proof, that Gods elect are both in and of the Church of Christ, and shall never fall away utterly from it.   

Of Freewill.  
THis point these adversaries hand●e confusedly, and maliciously. Confusedly, because they show not what they mean by freewill, or freedom of will: whether free from compulsion, or free from bondage of sin. Maliciously, for that they feign the Calvinists to hold, 
Pag 94.  that the wicked are not only lift by Gods suffering, but compelled to sin by power, etc. compelled by the power, force and compulsion of God's predestination, to commit all those wicked crimes, for which they are punished by the Magistrate, or tormented in hell, etc. and then much more doth it in goodness, as violently work all: so that the godly can neither choose nor refuse goodness.  
Answ. If these adversaries have common honesty, let them show out of the writings of the Calvinists (as they call them) these assertions which they impute unto them. Till they do this, let them have their name and fame among liars and workers of iniquity. As for us, we abhor these doctrines of compulsion to sin by force and power of God's predestination etc. As for will in man, we know it to be a natural faculty, still remaining▪ though corrupted by sin, as all other like faculties in us. We acknowledge it still to be free from compulsion or constraint, for so will should be no will▪ But we confess with grei●e that in respect of bondage to sin (under which all m●n were sold, Rom. 7, 14.) it may rather be called Bond will, then Free will: for it is not free to refuse sin, until it be renewed by Christ: and so far as it is regenerate by him, 
Joh. 8.34▪ 36  it is again (as other powers and faculties in the Saints) freed by grace, and willeth things that are good.  
Again, 
Page 95.  they produce (to their own condemnation) out of Bastingius, and the Disput. in Geneva these words; Man by evil was spoilt, not of his will, but of the soundness of his will: therefore that which in nature was good, in quality became evil: and Bernard teacheth, there is in us all power to will, but to will well we had need to profit better: to will evil, we are able already by reason of our fall. The which if they would stand unto (saith this adversary) I would require no more.  
Answ. This we will stand unto, and thereby do evince Odegos to be a blind guide and vain disputer, that with lies and calumnies would disgrace his opposites. We grant evil freewill (or Free will to evil) is remaining in all natural men: we believe that freewill to good, is from grace and regeneration; and that all the Saints have it in part, as they have knowledge, faith, and other virtues here in part: which shall be perfected in the life to come. And if no more be required, his fruitless dispute is at an end: and it is worthless labour to answer words of wind.   

Of Original sin.  
THe Anabaptists hold (more erroneously than the very papists, 
Confess▪ 18. Concil. ) that Original sin is an idle term, and that there is no such thing as men intent by the word. In this their Dialogue they set the state of the Question thus; 
Pag. 113.  Of the Original estate of mankind. Wherein they speak doubtfully and deceitfully. For man's original estate is properly that described in Gen. 1▪ which was by creation very good. But since the fall of Adam, our original estate is through that fall become sinful and miserable: and is so acknowledged by David, Psal. 51.5, by job, job. 14.4. by Paul, Rom. 5, 12 etc. Eph●s. 2.3, and by Ch●ist himself, joh. 3, 3, 5, 6.  
Notwithstanding these aduersaries affirm. 
Pag. 113.  That no infant whatsoever, is in the estate of condemnation of hell with the wicked. Which they think to prove thus. Without sin there is no condemnation, Rom. 6, 23. Ez●k. 18, 4, 20; Without transgression of the Law there is no sin, 1 joh. 3, 4, Rom. 5, 13. Therefore if infants have transgressed no law, there is no condemnation them.  
Answ. The conclusion (which implieth that infants are not transgressers of God's law) is denied. The Apostle teacheth us▪ That by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin: and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: and, by one man's disobedience, many were made sinners; Rom. 5, 12, 19 Note also how th●se men thwart themselves: before, when they pleaded for falling from grace, one of their reasons was, 
Pag. 80.  If the elect cannot fall out of God's favour▪ then did not all fall in Adam, and th●n s●me were never dead in sins and trespasses, and so need not Christ's redemption, etc. Now they plead, that no infants are sinners: which if it be so, than many (as all that die infants) never fell in Adam, nor needed Christ's redemption. And so such shall either not come into heaven, or shall come thither other ways then by Christ; contrary to job. 14, 6, Act. 4, 12.  
But these enemy's dispute (against the Apostles doctrine) thus. 
Pag. 11●.  
Rom. 7.1.  Infants had no l●fe nor being at that time (when the law was given to A●am:) and the law is given to them that know it, and hath dominion over a man as long as he lives. Therefore infants having no being, and so no knowledge, nor being then living, that Law had no dominion over them.  
Answ. First, this is no more against infants then old men: for no man had life or being at that time otherwise then infants had So Adam's fall was for himself alone, and ●o man fell with him; for no man then had life 〈◊〉 b●ing but he. And thus th●se lying spirits fear not to resist the Apostle, who saith, Through the offence (or fall) of one, many are dead▪ Rom. 5.15, by the offence of one, (judgement come) upon all men to condemnation, v ●8, ●y one man's disobedience, many were mad● sinners, v. 1●, in Adam all died, 1 Cor. 15, 22. This Apostolic doctrine is as contrary to the Anabaptists, as light is to darkness.  
2 They hereby weaken (if they could) the Apostles Argument in Heb. 7, 9, 10, by Levies paying tithes to Melchisedek in Abraham: for a man might cavil, that Levi had no life nor being at that time. But Paul saith, he was in the loins of his father Abraham, when Melchisedek met him. So say I, we all were in the loins of our father Adam, when he transgressed. If then Levi paid tithes when Abraham did, we all broke God's law when Adam did.  
3 They hereby weaken (as they can) the Apostles proof of our redemption by Christ: for he saith, that Adam is the figure of Christ that was to come: and if through the offence of one many be dead, much more th● gift ●y grace, by one man jesus Christ hath abounded unto many: and, as by one man's disobedience many be made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous, Rom. ●, 14.15, 19 Now take away the first, namely the transgression of all men in Adam; and it overthroweth the latter, to weet the righteousness and salvation of the world by Christ.  
4 They abuse the Apostles words, in Rom. 7.1, whence they would prove, that the Law (given to Adam) was given to them (only) that knew it; namely to Adam and his wife, not to th●●r children which knew it not; wh●ras the Apostle speaking to the Romans, spoke to them that knew the Law; the more to convince them: he deneyeth not that God gave his Law to Adam and his posterity in his loins. The Lord calleth those things which be not, as though they were, Rom. 4, 17, he spoke to Cyrus, and gave him promises, before Cyrus knew him, or was borne into this world,, Esa. 45, 1,— 5, he promised the land to Abraham and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child, Act. 7, 5, he made a covenant with Israel, not with them only that stood there that day, but with them also that were not there that day with them, Deut. 29, 14, 15. And if he did thus imply the children with the parents in other covenants & promises: how much more did he the like to Adam's seed: seeing Adam is spoken of, not as a particular man, but a general: so that his unrighteousness was not his own only, but his children's also; even as Christ's righteousness (whom Adam figured) was not his own only, but is communicated with all his children, who therefore is the second Adam causing life, as the first Adam caused death, Rom. 5, 1 Cor. 15.  
5 Like vanity is in their next words, Infants had then no being, no life, therefore the Law had no dominion over them; For so they might elude Paul's argument of Levies paying tithes, Heb. 7, 9, 10, saying, Levi had then no being, no life, therefore he could pay no tithes in Abraham's days. But as the Apostle saith he was in the loins of Abraham, and so he paid tithes: likewise we were in the loins of Adam, and so we sinned. Again in Rom. 7, 1, the Apostle speaketh of a man during life, who when he is dead, his wife is free from his law, v. 2. If they will apply this to all sin and sinners, than they think when a wicked man dieth, the law of God hath no dominion over him any more; & so there is no punishment by the law of God to be inflicted on sinners after this life. But do these vain man think by such sophistry to escape the damnation of hell? Do they not know that after death cometh judgement, and that by the law? Heb. 9.27. Rom. 2.12.16.  
Against the Apostles doctrine in Rom. 5. they allege, 
Pag. 114.  That we were in Adam, not to bring any soul to hell for breach of that command, Thou shalt not eat: for the Lord saith, All souls are mine, both the soul of the father, and the soul of the son: that soul that sinneth it shall dye. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, etc.  
Ans. First the prophet speaketh not in Ezek. 18.4. etc. of Adam, but of the later fathers of the jews, which sinned, v. 2. but Paul speaketh of Adam, who was not only a particular person (as all other fathers in this case are) but an universal man, the root of all mankind, and a figure of Christ, Rom. 5.14. Again the Prophet speaketh of such sons as are just, and do not such like sins as their fathers did, Ezek. 18.5.14. etc. but Paul speaketh of us all as we are in Adam, unjust and sinners, and guilty of our first father's iniquity, R●m. 5.12.19. So these two scriptures the one speaking of actual sins which are eschewed, the other speaking of original sin, which we now cannot avoid▪ speak not of one and the same sin or estate, and therefore do not one expound an other▪ Thirdly, the Prophet exempteth the good children, which eschew their father's sinnes, from death, Ezek. 18.9.17. The Apostle inwrappeth us all the sons of Adam in his sin and in death; Rom. 5.12▪ 14 17. Fourthly, the Prophet speaketh generally of the many sins which the fathers did, and the sons did not, Ezek. 18.6.7.8.18. the Apostle speaketh of that one sin or offence, by which we all (being in Adam's loins) are guilty. Rom. 5.16▪ But to this they both agree, the Prophet saith, The soul that sinneth, it sh●ll die, Ezek. 18 4 the Apostle saith, th●t all have sinned (to wit, in Adam's loins) therefore death passes upon all, Rom. 5. ●2, Hereby all wise men may see, how impertinent a proof the Anabaptists bring from Ezek. 18. that Adam's sin brings not any soul to hell. For Adam's sin bringing sin and death upon all, and hell being the death which is eternal: it is brought by his sin upon all his posterity: except through I●sus Christ our Lord, they have eternal life, which is the gift of God, Rom. 6.23.  
Further, they answer, (and desire it may well be observed) that mankind was only in Adam in their bodily substance: he is the father of our bodies in respect of matter; but our form and souls came from God: he is the father of our spirits, Heb. 12.9. Eccles. 12.7. & 8▪ 8▪ that earthly matter was in Adam, of which our bodies are made, etc. thus and no otherwise were we in Adam.  
Answ. We observe it well, and observe their error also. It is untrue that thus (to wit in respect of our bodies only) we were in Adam, and not in respect of our souls: no scripture teacheth them this, but their own fancy. For though our souls were not in all respects in Adam, as our bodies were, to wit, materially: yet in some respect (to wit formally) we were in Adam both body and soul; which I thus manifest. Adam begat Seth in his own image, Gen. 5 Abraham begat Isaak, etc. Math. 1. so body begetteth not body; but man begetteth man: and man consisteth of body and soul, which are the parts that constitute a man. So man (that is the whole, not part of a man only) is said to be borne of a woman, job. 14.1. yea the 66 souls (whereby figuratively is meant persons, consisting of bodies and souls) are said to come out of jacob's thigh (or loins) Gen. 46.26. and Levi in the l●ynes of Abraham is said to pay tithes, Heb 7.9 10. Now the body without the spirit is dead, and therefore cannot pay tithes, nor do any action. And in the place and case in hand, in Adam all sinned, all died, judgement came on all men to condemnation, Rom. 5.12.18. but the body without the soul sinneth not, neither byeth, nor shall be condemned. Therefore it is apparent that the scripture speaketh of men in Adam otherwise then in respect of their bodies only: so that th●se men's special observation is nothing worth.  
Again they plead, 
Pag. 115.  As God gave no law to Adam, before he gave him a soul of reason and understanding: no more doth he give to any of Adam's posterity, a●y law, till he give them souls of reason and understanding, as in Deut. 11.2. I speak not to your children which have neither known nor seen, etc.  
Answ. First the words of Moses to Israel to whom he propounded the law, are not to be compared with God's law given to Adam: for the Israelites were spoken to personally: Adam generally as an universal man, the root of all mankine, as before is proved. Secondly, the covenant of Moses law, did also after a sort pertain to their children which then were not, Deut. 29.14.15. though it was actually taught th●m only which were present, D●ut. 11. Thir●ly, the sin which Paul treateth of, and death for sin, was in the world before Moses law, which these men speak of, Rom. 5.12.13.14. Fourthly, let all they say be given them, yet it helps them not: for I have before proved, that we were all in Adam as living men, not as dead corpses▪ and so had souls of ●easo● and understanding in him originally; even as we had bodies, eyes, ears; etc. in him originally: though after a different manner as before is noted.  
Further they say, God never purposed to execute on Adam for that transgression condemnation to hell; in that he purposed to send Christ betwixt, in whom Adam believing should be saved. If Adam for his own sin was not condemned to hell without remedy, shall any of his posterity be sent to hell without remedy, and that for his sin? etc.  
Answ. 1. The question in the first place is changed, which is, whether Adam and all his posterity in him falling from God, deserved not hell for their sin. This they deny not, neither can disprove. 2. As God purposed not to damn Adam for his sin; so neither purposed he to damn Noah for his drunkenness, Lot for his incest, David for his adultery and murder, etc. but to give th●m remedy by faith in Christ. Will they hereupon plead that other actual drunkards, murderers, whoremongers, deserve not damnation: or shall not many such be damned for these sins? 3. Though all infants for their native sin, and all men for their actual sins deserve damnation: yet never was it God's purpose to damn all without remedy. For Christ (the second Adam) giveth righteousness and life to all infants and old transgressors that are borne of him; as the first Adam conveyed unrighteousness and death to all his ordinary natural posterity. Yea grace here exceedeth: for the judgement (or guilt) of original sin was by one (offence) to condemnation; but the free gift (by Christ) is of many offences, unto justification, Rom. 5.16.  
They object, that condemnation is for not believing in Christ, joh▪ 3▪ 19 & 16 9 Mar. 16.16. Rom. 11.32.  
Answ. First th● Apostle saith, the wages of sin is death, Rom. 6.23. therefore the wicked shall be condemned not only for their not believing in Christ, but also for their unmercifulness, idolatries, adulteries and other crimes, Math. 25.41.42. Rom. 2.5.— 9 Secondly, the sin of unbelief cleaveth unto all Adam's children as other sins: and shall be imputed as well as the sin of lust, or any other iniquity. Thirdly, to believe is not in the will or power of man, but is the gracious gift of God, to such as he hath ordained unto life. Eph. 2 8▪ Act, 13.48.  
Again they allege, 
Pag. 116.  that Adam by that transgression deprived himself of God's favour in that estate wherein he was in paradise: and notwithstanding the promise of Christ, hath by his si● procured this judgement, Cursed is the earth for thy sake &c Gen. 3. Thus Adam brought himself and all his posterity, the earth and every creature in it to vanity and bondage of corruption, Rom. 8.20. etc. And in this estate are all Adam's sons begotten and borne: so that by Adam's sin, vanity, corruption and death went over all, etc. So infants have original corruption, as other creatures have. Yet those that die and have corruption by Adam's sin, shall not be cast into hell fire.  
Answ. A fellow, murderer, traitor, that is apprehended by the magistrate, imprisoned, kept in fetters and affliction, his lands and goods confiscate, etc. pleadeth he ought not to be put to death, because he hath suffered for his crimes, loss of liberty, goods, etc. But will this plea save him Even such is the plea of th●se evil men. For all men being in Adam fall●n from God, and traitors to his majesty, children of wrath, & servants of sin and Satan, because God hath cursed the earth for their sake, cast them out of earthly paradise, made the creatures subject to vanity, and themselves subject to sorrows and miseries; therefore they deserve not to die in hell, if these vain men may be judges. But we know the judgement of God is according to truth against all evil doers. He telleth us, the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ, Rom. 6.23. where eternal life being opposed to death, showeth that eternal death is the wages due for sin. And what sin is is there that deserveth not hell? 2. Whereas they say, Adam by his sin deprived himself of paradise: it is true. But if they mean earthly paradise only, they err from the truth: for by his sin he was depriv●d also of the heavenly paradise, to which there is no restoring but by Christ, Luk. 23.43. Reu. 2.7. and as himself, so all his posterity that sinned in him, Rom. 5. Thirdly, so where they say, all his posterity were subjected to vanity and corruption, it is true; but not all the truth, unless they understand such corruption as Peter speaketh, 2. Pet. 2.12. which is eternal destruction, and then they yield the cause. But they mean not so, but corruption such as is in beasts, birds, etc. wherein they go quite astray. For beasts and other brutish and senseless creatures, are not sinners, as all Adam's children are, Rom. 5▪ 12.19 sin is not but in reasonable creatures only, as Angels and men. Neither is any creature subject to eternal torment, but sinners only. Other creatures when they perish, there is an end of them, and of their misery with them: but they that perish in their sins, have no end of their misery, but it is eternal, Math. 25.46. Mark. 9.45.46. Wherefore they do not well to expound Rom. 5. by Rom. 8 because the Apostle speaketh not of the same, but of diverse things and estates in those two chapters. Fourthly, take that which they say, and it overthroweth them. For how should adam's sin bring all his posterity unto death, but by their guilt in Adam's sin? If it made not them sinners, the scripture which they formerly alleged, Ezek. 18. teacheth that the children should not dye for their father's sins. Now seeing many infants die daily, it proveth them all to be sinners, because death is the wages of sin, Rom. 6 23. Gen. 2.17. 
Pag. 117.   
At length they come to answer Rom. 5. with this perverse doctrine, This is the meaning of the holy Ghost, that by Adam's sin, all his posterity have weak natures, Rom. 8.3. by which, when the commandment comes (Rom. 7.10.) th●y cannot obey and live, but sin and so dye; till when they are alive without the law, so saith the Apostle verse. 9 and thus is verified, that all both jews and Gentiles are under sin, etc. Read on the scripture, and you may evidently see, that neither this, nor any part of God's word, is spoken to or of infants.  
Answ. This is not the Apostles meaning: for he saith not they have weak natures, but that all have sinned, and through the offence of one many are dead, many were made sinners; Rom. 5 12.15.19. which is more than weakness of nature, and proneness to sin. Secondly, in Rom. 8.3. it is said, that it (the Law) is weak through the fl●sh, and so cannot save any man: which words these men wrist, as if it meant Adam's children weak. Which thing though it be true, yet is it not that which is spoken of in Rom. 8.3. Thirdly, when the Apostle saith in Rom. 7.9. that he was alive without the law: this contradicteth (according to their sense) the other scripture, in Rom. 5 12. that all have sinned, and are dead. The Apostle in Rom. 5. speaketh of things as they are; in Rom. 7.9, he speaketh of things as they seemed to be, but were not indeed. Paul was alive in his own conceit, thinking himself able to keep the Law, as natural men do suppose they can. But when the commandment came (to wit unto his knowledge and conscience,) then sin revived and he died. How could this be: seeing the commandment is holy, just and good, v. 12 He telleth us in 13 v. that sin wrought death in him by that which was good. So then he was sinful (though he knew it not) before the commandment came; sinful by nature; but not discerning this his woeful state, the Law was given to show it him; for by the law cometh the knowledge of sin, Rom. 3.20. Again, saying in Rom. 7, 11, that sin took occasion by the commandment, deceived him and slew him: he plainly acknowledgeth sin to have been in him, before the commandment came: this he confirmeth in v. 14. saying, the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin: Whereupon he applieth the evils which he did, to si●ne dwelling in him, v. 17.20. and this inhabiting or indwelling sin, is that original sin whereof we treat; which Paul for a while could not discern to be in him (as all natural men discern it not, but count it an idle term, and think there is no such thing) till by the Law he came to discern it and to lament it. Fourthly, it is here to be observed how the Anabaptists ●grant, all men have weak natures, and cannot obey and live, but sin and dye. How cometh this to pass? By Adam's sin, say they. Behold here how they thwart their own grounds. They impose a necessity upon all men which (they think) are born innocents, to sin. They cannot but sin, they must needs dye: and this not through their own default at all, but by adam's. If we should thus teach, what outcries would they make after us! How is it they here forget the scriptures by themselves forealleaged, The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, Ezek. 18.20. Is not this a heavy burden which the sons bear, that their father sinning, and they being innocent, are so weakened of God, that they cannot but sin, they cannot but dye? Doth God create an innocent man, and give him charge to do that which is impossible for the man to do, and threaten death unto him for not doing it? We abhor such doctrine as quite overthrowing God's justice. When he made Adam innocent, he gave him no law, but that which was possible & easy for him to do, and to have continued in doing it, if he had would. His justice requireth him to do the like to all his innocent creatures. Wherefore if these men come not to acknowledge with the Apostle (and with us) original sin and death for sin to be in Adam's seed, that his fall and disobedience was the fall of us all, by imputation and by infection, (as a serpent brings forth but a serpent) & that so being sinners in him, we have lost our ability to do good, by God's just judgement, & are sold under sin: If they come not (I say) unto this, they will be open enemies to the justice of God, and make the judge of all the world not to do equity. 5. Finally, whereas they say, that neither this nor any part of God's word is spoken to or of infants: they impudently avouch untruth. The Apostle in Rom. 5.14. speaketh of them which sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, and yet death reigned over them also. What sin can this be but original sin wherein infants are born, and for which many infants dye. For when they pass from infancy and come to understanstanding, they sin actually as Adam did. To sin the same sin they cannot, for all being shut out of paradise, they cannot eat of the forbidden tree, though they would. Neither doth the Apostle speak of that same sin, but of sinning after the similitude of Adam's transgression: so it meaneth actual sin, like adam's. Now all sin, is either original or actual. If then death reigneth over them which sin not actually, as Adam did, it must needs reign over them which sin originally only in Adam: and these be infants. For the Anabaptists grant, that when they come to discretion, they sin (and cannot but sin) actually. And thus their next words also are refuted, 
Pag. 117.  when they say, Infants are under no law, therefore transgression cannot be imputed unto them, Rom. 4.15. The contrary is thus proved: Infants have transgression imputed unto them, and death for transgression, as the Apostle showeth in Rom. 5. Therefore they are under some law: though not under Moses law which punisheth actual transgressors, yet under Adam's law (in whose loins they were and sinned) for which they are punished even with death itself.  
In their next words, 
Pag. 117.  they condemn themselves and all their vain reasoning, confessing, that Adam fell from the estate wherein he was, and in him all mankind. This is very true, and overthroweth their heresy. For Adam's fall, as the Apostle describeth it, was sin, offence, transgression, disobedience, judgement (or guiltiness) to death, and condemnation: Rom. 5.12.— 19 Now all mankind fell in him, as Paul teacheth, and these enemies grant: therefore all mankind is in sin, offence, transgression, etc. unto death and condemnation. 
Pag. 118.   
Of the remedy for the sin of all (whereof they next speak) we grant that is both for infants and old sinners, by grace in Christ. But these are two several questions: and here we treat of sin only and the merit of it. Of God's grace we have spoken otherwhere.  
They proceed and say, that Infants whom Christ so often accounteth innocents, Mat. 18.3, 4, & 19.14. are freed from the law, and so sin is dead in them: but when the commandment comes, than they die in sins and transgressions, etc. Rom. 7.8. Eph. 2.1.  
Answ. Innocents' may be so called in sundry respects: 1 when in them there is no sin at all; thus Adam in his creation was innocent. 2. When though they be sinners, yet they are not guilty of such sins as men lay to their charge, Exod. 23.7. 2. Sam. 3.28. jer. 2.34. 3. When they are clear of actual sins: and thus infants may be called innocents, Psal. 106 38 That Christ calleth infants innocents in the first sense, I deny: the scripture also denieth them so to be, I●b. 15.14, & 25.4, joh. 3.3.6. Eph. 2.3. I find not in the places which they quote, that Christ called infants innocents: how b● it sometime he calleth his disciples innocents (or guiltless) Mat▪ 12.7. of whom yet these men (I suppose) will not say, they were without all sin. That infants are freed from the law given to Adam, is denied and disproved by Rom. 5. for in Adam they sinned and died. That sin is dead in them is also disproved: rather they are dead in sin, till they be revived by Christ, Eph. 2.1.3. 
Pag. 119.   
Infants (say they) have done neither good nor evil in the fl●sh therefore Infants sh●ll not appear before Christ, they shall receive no judgement, 2. Cor. 5.10. R●v. 20, 12.13.  
Answ. How boldly do these men abuse the scriptures▪ In 2. Cor. 5.10. Paul s●yth, We must all appear before the judgement seat of Christ. Rev. 20.12. it is said, I saw the dead small & great stand before God. Nay, say these adversaries, not infants. Their reason, because infants have done neither good nor evil in the flesh, is an error before refuted: for though they have not done good or evil actually, as older people; yet in the first Adam they have done evil; and in the second Adam (Christ) they have done well. 
Pag. 119   
Against David's confession of his birth sin in Psal. 51. they thus dispute. If David confess unto God his own sin, than he desireth him in mercy to behold whereof he was made, as Psalm. 103.14. of dust, weak flesh, unable to resist the Tempter: through which weakness he was overcome in these sins: and thus weak flesh is called sinful flesh, (in which Christ came) Rom. 8.1. Christ is said to be made sin, 2. Cor. 5.21. not that he was a sinner: no more David, confessing he was conceived in sin, doth prove that by conception and birth he was a transgressor.  
Answ. They pervert both David's words and meaning. He speaketh of sin and iniquity: they speak of weakness only, whereby he fell into sin. What scripture can be so plain, that may not be wrested with such wicked glosses. Against weakness we pray for aid and strength to resist evil: against sin we pray for mercy and forgiveness: and for this David prayeth in Psal. 51.  
Secondly, it is another abuse of scripture that they say, weak flesh is called sinful fl●sh, in which Christ came, Rom. 8.1. where first they make David no more a sinner at his birth, than Christ himself; contrary to the whole tenor of this Psalm, and contrary to Rom. 5. as is before showed. Then they falsify the text in Rom. 8.1.3. for the weakness there spoken of is in the Law, it was weak through the flesh, and so not able to save sinners.  
Thirdly, by Flesh there Paul meaneth not the substance of flesh, for that weakeneth not the Law, nor hindereth man's salvation: it is the good creature of God, as is the soul or spirit: but he meaneth by flesh, our corrupt sinful state in soul and body: for he saith in verse 8. they that are in the flesh cannot please God. If flesh mean our bodily substance, than no man living in the body can please God: not the Prophets, not the Apostles, no nor Christ himself, for he lived in our flesh, in our humame nature, and the Apostle should speak untruly in the ninth verse, ye are not in the fl●sh. Wherefore flesh in Rom. 8. signifieth our unregenerate state, as in Genes. 6.3. john 3.6. Rom. 7.18. & 8.5.9.  
Fourthly, it is another falsification when they say, sinful flesh in which Christ came: the scripture saith not in sinful flesh, but in the likeness of sinful flesh. Rom. 8.3. Fiftly, weakness or infirmity, as it meaneth not sin, but affliction, such Christ had: such, the Apostle took pleasure, 2 Cor. 12, 10, but infirmity as it meaneth sin, Christ had not: he is opposed herein to the Priests of the Law, which had infirmity or weakness, Heb. 7, 27, 28, and 4, 15, But David in Psal. 51, confesseth such infirmity (if they will have it so called) as was sin and iniquity; which proveth he was a transgressor from the womb, and not without sin as was Christ. 6 Christ is said to be made sin for us, 2 Cor. 5, 21, these words for us the adversaries balk and omit. David was not made sin for us, or for any: but was himself conceived in sin. Christ being himself no sinner, yet was he made sin, that is a sin-offering for us, to purge us, and make us the righteousness of God in him; for the Sin-offering was usually called sin in the Law, Leu. 4, 3, 8, 14, 20, 24, etc. the Apostle expoundeth it For sin, meaning a sacrifice for sin, Heb. 10, 6, from Psal. 40, thus Christ was a sin, that is a sacrifice for sin: but David was not so. Therefore these places speak not of sin in one and the same sense, but in the contrary. David complaineth of his own sin and guiltiness: Paul speaketh of Christ his purging David and us all from sin and guiltiness, by being made a sin offering for us.  
Their former answer being so apparently against the truth, that David acknowledging sin, they will have it no sin, but weakness, they devise to darken the light with an other cloud; as if David spoke not of his own estate, but his mothers: and then (say they) it is the curse or punishment for sin laid upon her, Gen. 3, 16, where the very words agree with these of David's etc. and it is frequent in Scripture to call punishment for sin by the name of sin, etc. and it is neither Davids sin nor his mothers that he here confesseth, to speak properly, but his mother's punishment.  
Answ. As a bird in the net, so the more they strive, the more they are entangled. First, the whole scope of the Psalm is, that David might find mercy with the Lord for his own sins, as any that readeth it may see. And that in supplicating to God for grace before and after, he should here insert a complaint of his mother's punishment, is without any colour of truth. But this is the meaning, and suitable to his other words, that lamenting his actual transgressions, he bewaileth the evil fountain whence they flowed, to weet, his native corruption, which brought forth these ugly trespasses. Secondly, to let pass how they call Gods fatherly chastisement, a curse or punishment; they here again belie the Scripture, in saying, that the very words in Gen. 3.16, agree with these of david's. For neither the word sin, nor iniquity, (both which David useth in Psa. 51,) are to be found in Gen. 3 16, that Od●gos brow may seem to be of brass, who sh●m●th not so often and openly to falsify the text. Thirdly, it is true that sin and iniquity do often improperly mean punishment: but the proper meaning for fault and guiltiness is most frequent: and wh●n it signifieth punishment, the context manifesteth▪ which it doth not here at all: but David before and after bewaileth his sins properly. Neither is here the phrase of bearing sin and iniquity, which is m●st usual when punishment is meant: but of being brought forth in iniquity, and conceived in sin; and they sh●w not a●y o●e place of Scripture where such a phrase signifieth punishment. Fourthly, as neither sin nor iniquity are used in Gen. 3, 16, so the word conception there agreeth not, but differeth from the conceiving that David speaketh of in Psal 51, and the difference of the words plainly discovereth these men's ignorance and error. For in Gen. 3, 16, Seron is conception with sorrow, during the time that the mother goeth with child: but in Psal. 51. jacham signifieth conceiving with pleasure; for the word properly signifieth to be warm or inflamed with desire, as in the act of generation, not of men only, but of cattle also, as in Gen. 30, 38, 39, 41. Now nature both of man and beast teacheth all, that such conceiving is with delight, not with pain, and therefore David using such a word when he telleth how his mother conceived him, cannot (in any reasonable man's understanding) mean his mother's corporal pains or punishment, as these corrupters of the Scripture do feign.  
They proceed and say, that David did not sin in being conceived and borne: 
Pag. 120.  the soul is the subject of sin, for from the soul or heart cometh wickedness, Mat. 15, 19 The soul comes from God, the matter of the body from the parents: the soul is very good coming from God, the body hath not sinned till it be infected with the soul by transgression of a law: and seeing th●y affirm that the very matter or substance whereof David was made was sin, and that this is it he confessoth in Psal. 51, observe what will follow ●f this their dream. The matter whereof all th● sons of Adam are made is sin: but Chr●st, one of the sons of Adam after the fl●sh was made of that matter; therefore the matter or substance of Christ's body was sin. 
Pag. 121.  If it be wicked, to say Christ was a sinner because he was conceived of his mother's substance, as it is: so it is no less wicked to say, David was a sinner because he was conceived of his mother's substance: seeing the substance of both the mothers was one and the same.  
Answ. It is even a wonder to behold how these men pervert, err and slander, as if they had sold themselves to work iniquity. We teach not, (as the perversely speak) that David sinned in being conceived and borne; for these being the works of God and nature, are good. But David was a sinner, because he was conceived and borne in sin, as himself confesseth. 2 They err, in saying, the soul is the subject of sin: for neither the soul alone, nor the body alone, but the whole man (which differeth from both, and consisteth of both,) he is the subject of sin. Neither doth the body without the soul, nor the soul without the body commit sin: but the man while the soul is in the body, sinneth, 2 Cor. 5, 10 and as the soul was not created but in the body, Zach. 12, 1, so when it departeth from the body, it sinneth no more, but goeth for judgement, Heb. 9, 27, Eccles. 9, 5, 6, 10. 3 Whereas they allege, that wickedness is from the heart, Mat. 15, 19, it is spoken of living men consisting of soul and body: Madness (as Solomon saith) is in their heart while they live, and after that (they go) to the dead; Eccles 9, 3. And where they say, the soul comes from God, the matter of the body from the parents; they lay not down the truth fully. For though the soul is created of God, and is not materially from the parents as the body; yet the parents give occasion to infuse the soul, (for without corporal generation no soul is created,) and so the soul may in some sort be said to have the beginning from Adam, though not of any matter from him. The essence of is of God; the subsistence of it is from the parents, from whom it hath the manner of subsisting in the body. 4 Though the soul as it is created of God is very good, (as the body also respected naturally is good) yet they err in saying, the body sinneth not till it be infe●ted with the soul by transgression of a law; whereby they mean actual transgression after it knows the law. For first, it is not the body, but the man (of body and soul) that sinneth as before is showed. Secondly, the body is not infected with the soul, but both body and soul are infected with sin, to wit, that inbred and inhabiting sin which came from Adam, as before is proved from Rom. 5. And this sin man hath, both by imputation and inherence, before he actually transgresseth the law, Rom. 5.14, Psal. 51, for that which is borne of the flesh is fl●sh, joh. 3.6.5. They notoriously sl●nder us, that we should affirm the very matter or substance whereof David was made, to be sin: We affirm no such thing. The matter or substance we say is good, as every creature of God is. Sin is an evil accident cleaving to the substance, to the body and soul of man. Of like falsehood it is, that we should affirm David to confess in Psal, 51. that the substance whereof he was made was sin. Neither David nor we ever so spoke. So the Argument which by consequence they frame touching the substance of Christ's body, that it should be sin, is frivolous, collected from a fiction of their idle heads. For if no man's substance be sin (as we firmly hold) much less Christ's.  
After this, they cast a stumbling block in the way, and would have us show how infants that have sinned, and are under condemnation of hell, can be reconciled to God but only by faith in Christ jesus: and if they cannot but by repentance and faith, then are they all left under condemnation, not for any law that th●y have broken, but for their father Adam's sin.  
Answ. 
Pag. 122.  That all have sinned, and are under condemnation, is proved by the Apostle, Rom. 5, 12, 18, how infants can be reconciled to God, he also teacheth, namely through the gift by grace, by one man jesus Christ, Rom. 5, 15, 18. The manner if it be showed, I fear these men will not receive it: for they that have so kicked against the pricks touching all men's fall and sin in Adam; how should they receive the doctrine of restauration by Christ. Howbeit I will endeavour to show it, if it do no good to them, it may to others. 1 The faith and repentance which they require in infants, namely actual, is not to be found: as such actual sins are not found in them, as are in older men. The one of these exemplifieth the other, as the first Adam figured the second, Rom. 5, 14. By the first Adam we have sin, Rom. 5, 12, offence, v. 15, disobedience, v. 19, ●udgement, v. 16, death, v. 14, condemnation, v. 16. By the second Adam (Christ) we have grace, & the gift by grace, v. 15, the gift of righteousness, v. 17, the free gift to justification, v. 16, even to justification of life, v 18. By the first Adam we have three evils, 1 imputation of his sin: 2 corruption of our nature: 3 guiltiness of death temporary and eternal. By the second Adam we have three opposite good things; 1 imputation of his righteousness, 2 regeneration (or renewing) of our nature, 3 and deliverance from death temporary and eternal. As the corruption or viciousness that we have by Adam, is in the bud or spring, in the beginning (not in the full growth,) and inclineth us to all actual sins: so the regeneration we have by Christ, is in the spring and beginnings thereof when we ●re infants, and inclineth us to actual faith and obedience. And thus repentance and faith are in Christian infants in their bud or beginning, inclinatively: even as impenitency and unbelief are in Adam's infants, in their beginning, and by inclination. If any man ask with Nicodemus, how can these things be? Let him consider, that as he knoweth not the way of the wind, or of the spirit, or how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child, even so he knoweth not the works of God, who maketh all; job. 3, Eccles. 11, 5.  
Lastly, to the many examples of God's judgements upon infants, as at noah's flood, 
Pag. 122.  the burning of Sodom and Gomorrah, etc. they answer, though they had bodily death for the sins of their parents; yet they perished not with the wicked in hell. For of this (bodily death) other unreasonable creatures, as well as infants, have always had their portions. All fl●sh must die, and death is loss to none but to the wick●d: to the godly and innocent, death and all afflictions of this life, are not worthy of the glory that sh●ll be showed.  
Answ. 1 In that they grant, Infants have bodily death for their parents sins, they contradict their own plea before from Ezek. 18▪ 20, the soul that sinneth it shall die: the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father etc. for there the Prophet speaketh even of bodily death and miseries in this world, whereof the jews complained. And unless they confess●, that infants are sinners in their parents, they cannot maintain the justice of God for kill infants, and that oftentimes with strange and horrible deaths. And if they grant that infants are sinners, they cannot with any truth deny but hell is their due, unless they be redeemed by Christ. And by infant's death, we certainly conclude that they are sinners, from the Apostles ground in Rom. 5, 12, 14, & 6, 23. and that for their sin they may and shall be cast into hell (unless Christ save them) is evident by Christ's doctrine, in joh. 3, 3, Except a man be borne again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God. And that infants are there employed, is plain, because an infant is borne a man, as Christ speaketh joh 16, 21, and being borne a sinner, Psal. 51, Rom. 5, must be borne again of the Spirit, or else shall not see the kingdom of God. If it see not God's kingdom, it shall see the devil's prison; for a Limbus or third place will no where be found. And how these men can exempt wicked infants from hell, otherwise then by their own fancies I know not: ●he Apostles taught no such doctrine, when without exception of infants, they call the old world that perished, the world of the ungodly, 2 Pet. 2, 5, and reckon none saved but No and his house, Heb. 11, 7, 1 Pet. 3▪ 20, 21, and tell us that Sodom, Gomorrha, and the Cities about them, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire, jude v▪ 7. But these presumptuous men will control the judgements of God, and tell us that which no Prophet or Apostle ever taught, that all the infants in those cities suffer no such vengeance: yea, though God himself promised that if but ten righteous had been found in Sodom (wherein were many times ten infants) he would not have destroyed the city for ten sake, Gen. 18, 32. 2 The reason which they would ground upon, because other unreasonable creatures as well as infants have always had their portions in bodily death; this reason is brutish, and beseemeth not men. For no unreasonable creature is a sinner, as all men in Adam are sinners: no unreasonable creature hath a soul immortal infused of God, as all mankind hath: no bruit beast shall be raised from the dead, as all men shall, both old and young, to life or death eternal. And when a beast dyeth it hath an end both of welfare and misery, so hath none of Adam's children. What comparison then is there between men and beasts? Where they say, death is loss to none but to the wicked; it is true. And hereupon it followeth that seeing infants are wicked, (as is formerly proved) until they be made righteous by Christ, and borne again; death is a loss unto them; and a gain to those only (whether old or young) which are made partakers of the grace and gift of righteousness, by one jesus Christ, Rom. 5, 12,— 17.   

Of Baptising Infants.  
AGainst baptising of Infants the adversaries first lay this ground, 
Pag. 129.  Baptism pertaineth only to them that declare their repentance and faith to those Disciples of Chri●t that baptise them. This appeareth by john Baptists doctrine and practice, Mar. 1, 4, Mat. 3, 6, and Christ's disciples, Joh. 4, 1 & 3 22, by Christ's commission for all nations, Mat, 28, 19, Mar. 16.16, by the Apostles practise, Act. 2, 38, 41 & 8, 12, 36 etc.  
Answ. That baptism pertaineth to such as declare their repentance and faith, is true; and the Scriptures alleged prove it. But that it pertaineth to such only, is untrue: and none of the Scriptures which they bring, do so teach The infants of the Church, which cannot declare repentance or faith, are also to be baptised, as after shall be manifested.  
That the practise taught by the foresaid Scriptures, is to be perpetual; we grant: and they needed not have taken pains to prove it.  

Pag. 131.  Infants (say they) may not be baptised, because there is neither commandment, example, nor true consequence for it, in all Christ's perfect Testament, etc.  
Answ, This we deny: commandment there is for it in Math. 28, and Mark 16, & necessary consequences from many Scriptures confirm it; 
Pag. 132.  as shall be proved.  
Baptism (they say) is in that a good conscience maketh request unto God, 1 Pet. 3.21, it is of repentance for remission of sins, Mar. 1. ●● the washing of the new birth, Tit. 3, 5 etc. If it cannot be proved by the Scriptures that infants have their hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, have repentance, faith etc. they ought not to be baptised.  
Answ. Their argument hath only a show, no substance of truth. For first a man might frame as good a reason thus: Circumcision is not that which is outward in the fl●sh, but that of the heart, in the spirit, Rom. 2, 28, 29, it is the putting off of the body of the sins of the flesh, Coloss. 2.11, it sealeth the righteousnese of faith which they have, Rom. 4.11, and the circumcising of the foreskin of the heart, Deut. 10 16, to love the Lord etc. Deut. 30.6. Now if it cannot be proved by Scripture that infants have the l●ue of God in their hearts, the righteousness of faith, the putting of of the body of sin etc. they may not be circumcised, and the●r circumcision is nothing. If this be not a good argument to keep children from circumcision, the other is no better to keep th●m from Baptism. Secondly, Christian infants have the graces they speak of, repentance, faith, regeneration &c, though not actually, or by way of declaration to others; yet they have through the work of the Spirit, the seed and beginning of faith, virtually and by way of inclination; so that they are not wholly destitute of faith, regeneration etc. though it be a thing hid and unknown unto us after what manner the Lord worketh these in them, Eccles. 11, 5. Which I further prove thus. If infants naturally are some ways capable of Adam's sin, and so of unbelief, disobedience, transgression etc. then Christian infants supernaturally and by grace, are some ways capable of Christ's righteousness, and so of faith, obedience, sanctification etc. But infants are capable of the former evils by Adam: therefore they are capable of the latter good things by Christ. That they are capable of the former, is before proved (where we treated of original sin) by Rome 5, Psal. 5 1, joh. 3, and many Scriptures. The consequence, that therefore they are capable of the latter also, ●o wit of Christian graces, is thus manifested. 1 Because the first Adam was a figure of the second Adam Christ, so that as the sin of the first Adam, his fault, disobedience, and death for it came on all his children, both by imputation and infection or corruption of nature: so the righteousness and obedience of Christ cometh on all his children, both by imputation and renewing of nature, unto life and salvation, as the Apostle compareth them, Rom. 5.12.15.16.17.18.19.21. 2 Because infants being by Adam sinners, children of wrath etc. must be borne again of the spirits, or else they cannot see the Kingdom of God, joh. 3, 3.5.6. But the Christian infants dying in infancy shall see the Kingdom of God, and not be damned (as the adversaries grant) therefore by Christ's doctrine they are borne again of the spirit: and so must needs in some measure have repentance, faith, holiness, without which there is no regeneration. Again, that infants have the faith and love of God in them, and regeneration in their measure is thus proved. They to whom God giveth the sign and seal of righteousness by faith, and of regeneration, they have faith and regeneration: for God giveth no lying sign, he sealeth no vain or false covenants. But God gave to infant's circumcision, which was the sign an●●ale of the righteousness of faith and regeneration, Gen▪ 17.12 Rom. 4.11▪ & 2.28.29, Coloss. 2.11. Therefore infants had (& consequently now have) faith & regeneration, though not in the crop or harvest by declaration, yet in the bud and beginnings of all Christian graces. They that deny this reason, must either make God th● author of a lying sign and seal of the covenant to Abraham and ●is infants: or they must hold that infants had those graces then, b●t not now: both which are wicked and absurd to affirm. Or t●ey must say, that circumcision was not the sign and seal of the righteousness of faith, and then they openly contradict the Scripture, Rom. 4.11.  
Moreover, as the Apostle in Rom. 5, compareth our natural estate in Adam, and our spiritual estate in Christ, so may we in this case. If we cannot justly object against God's work in nature, but do believe that our infant's are reasonable creatures, and are borne not bruit beasts but men, though actually they can manifest no reason or understanding more than beasts, (yea a young lamb knoweth and discerneth h●s damn sooner than an infant knoweth his mother:) then nei●her can we justly object against God's work in grace, but are to believe that our infants are sanctified creatures, and are borne believers not infidels, though outwardly they can manifest no faith or sanctification unto us. And, why should it be thought incredible that God should work faith in infants? If because we know not or perceive not how it can be: let us consider, that we know not the way of our natural birth, and other earthly things Eccles. 11 5. joh. 3, 8, how then can we know heavenly things? If we make question of the power of God; nothing is impossible with h●m. He made all things of nothing; he can make the dumb beast speak with man's voice, Numb. 22, he can make the babe in the mothers' womb, to be affected and leap for joy, at the voice of words spoken to the mother, Luk. 1.44, and can he not also work grace, faith, holiness in infants? Hath Satan power by sin to infect and corrupt infants (as is before proved,) and shall nor God have power to cleanse from corruption, and make them holy? If we make doubt of the will of God herein, behold we have his promises to restore our losses in Adam, by his graces in Christ, as he showeth in Rome▪ 5, that he will circumcise our heart, and the heart of our seed to love him, Deu. 30 6, we have the seal of his promise, in giving circumcision to infants, to signify and seal the righteousness of faith, Rom. 4.11, Gen. 17. And we have assurance of all his promises, and of that to Abraham & his seed in particular, to be confirmed unto us (not abrogated or lessened) by Christ, 2 Cor. 1.20, Luk. 1.72.73 etc. Gal. 3.14 etc. Wherefore they are but a faithless and crooked generation, that notwithstanding all that God h●th spoken and done in this kind, do deny this grace of Christ to the infants of his people, and the seal or confirmation of this grace by baptism now, as it was by circumcision of old.  
But they proceed to plead against the truth thus, 
Pag. 13●.  Regeneration is a turning from sin to God, Rev. 6.11. 1 Thes. 1.9. Tit▪ 4.5 Repentance is a sight and knowing of sin by the law a confessing and sorrow for sin, etc. Faith is th● ground of things hoped for, etc. Heb. 11.1. and is accompa-with obedience, jam. 2. Let them either now prove, that infants are turned from sin, see, know, confess and sorrow for it, believe the promises of God, etc. or they say nothing.  
Answ. They reason ignorantly and perversely, not only against the light of God's word, but of nature. As if some brutish person should plead thus. A man is a living creature that hath a reasonable soul; and the proper affections of a man as he is a man, are the faculty of understanding, of thinking, capableness of learning, of remembering, faculty of reasoning, of judging and discerning true and false, good and evil, of approving and improving, of willing & nilling, of speaking, of numbering, etc. Now let them which affirm that infants are borne men (as Christ doth in joh. 16.21.) prove that infants do understand, do think, remember, judge, discern good and evil, approve, will, speak, etc. or else they say nothing. Were not such a disputer worthy to be laughed and hissed at? who requireth the actual use and manifestation of humane affections and faculties in infants; which are in them but potentially & in the seed and beginning: and because th●y cannot declare these things by their works, therefore he denieth them to be of the generation of mankind, or borne men into the world: or that they have the faculties of men at all in them any manner of way? Even such is the argumentation of these erroneous spirits against the truth of religion. For as before they reasoned against the sin, transgression, and condemnation of Infants, (contrary to Paul's doctrine in Rom. 5) because infants actually understand not the law, nor transgress against it; and will not consider how they are sinners originally in Adam: so now also they reason against the grace of Christ in infants, and his work of regeneration in them; because they cannot outwardly manifest the effects of regeneration or fruits of faith, (such as the scriptures that they allege do require in older persons) & will not understand that these graces are in them through Christ and his spirit, but in the beginnings only (as I have formerly proved) and are not in them as in those of full age, who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. And here I desire to know of the Anabaptists in their next writings about these matters; first when they think that children (who in their opinion are borne without a●y sin) begin to be sinners, whether at 2.3.5.7. or other years: and when they can justly reprove a child for sin, if it show in word, deed, or gesture any thing contrary to the law of God, as if it swear, curse, lie, disobey parents, take another's goods, be froward, angry, or the like. Yea let any of them tell me (if he can) when he himself first fell from his innocence and became a sinner, being none before; by what act or transgression of what commandment. It is strange that an innocent man should fall from his innocence, and not know when and how. Secondly let them say, whether every child so soon as it beginneth to be a sinner, hath not remedy for the sin by Christ; and so whether it it be not capable of repentance, faith, regeneration, etc. and consequently of baptism, so soon as it is a sinner. Thirdly, seeing they insist so much on the perfection of the ordinances of the new Testament, as of the old, (which thing I willingly grant) I desire to know whether (as God appointed the eight day for the circumcising of a child after it was borne,) Christ hath apppointed any day, month or year for a child to be baptised after it is borne. If they say none, but when the child can manifest repentance and faith: then what manifestation hath Christ prescribed, whether if the child say it repenteth him, & he believeth, it is enough, or what rules and ordinances Christ hath given, by which we may certainly know that now (and not before or after) a child is to receive baptism, as a repentant and believing sinner: and let them tell us at what age of their children they or any of them hath first baptised his child unto remission of si●s. These things are needful to be known, that we may walk by rule; and being not yet signified (to my knowledge) in any of their writings, I desire for my information, and for the better clearing of these controversies, that they would set down their doctrine touching these points. For it is required of all parents to bring up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, Eph. 6.4. this they cannot do aright, unless they know when first they begin to sin, and consequently when first they begin to believe. If they blame a child for sin while it is an innocent, they commit iniquity: if they keep a child from Christ and Christian baptism when it is a repentant & believing sinner (which may be so soon as it is a sinner) they wrong their child most sinfully, to condemn that which Christ justifieth. These things are worthy of serious consideration both in respect of our children's estate, and of our own.  
And now ere I proceed further to answer their cavils, I will show two commandments for the baptising of infants: the one given of old to our fathers, the other given by Christ.  
1. That which was once commanded of God, and never by him called back, is now still to be done; as it is written, What thing soever I command you, observe to do it, Deut. 12.32. But God commanded the outward seal of his covenant of grace to be given to the infants of his people, as in Gen. 17.12.13. He that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, etc. and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. And this commandment touching the substance of it, and outward sealing of the covenant, hath never by him been abrogated. Therefore it is still to be continued, and our infants (by virtue of that commandment) are to have the seal of God's covenant.  
The common objection that this proof is not from Christ's testament, but from Moses writings, is of no weight. For Moses wrote of Christ, joh. 5.46. The Apostles said none other things than those which the Prophets and Moses did s●y should come, Act. 26.22. Christ came not to destroy the law or the Prophets, but to fulfil. Math. 5.17. Paul proveth our justification by faith in Christ from Abraham's example written by Moses, as written not for his sake alone, but for us, Rom. 4.3— 24▪ Therefore the example of Abraham's infants circumcised, is writ●en for us also. To manifest this reason more fully, I lay down these particulars, 1. That the covenant then made with Abraham was the covenant of the Gospel, which we now have. 2 That circumcision the seal of the covenant then, and baptism the seal of the covenant now, are one and the same in substance. The first is proved thus, Paul saith, The Scripture foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the Gospel unto Abraham, In thee shall all nations be blessed, Gal. 3.8. Aga●ne, when circumcision was instituted, the covenant was, Thou shalt be a father of many nations, etc. Gen. 17.4.5. this promise (as belonging to the faith of Christ) is applied to our state under the Gospel, Rom. 4.13.16.17. and is by Paul there opposed to the Law. Moreover the covenant with Abraham was, that the Lord would be a God to him and to his seed after him, Gen. 17▪ 7. this promise implieth blessedness to him and them; for Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, Psal. 33.12. and this blessedness cometh on none by the Law, Rom. 4.15. Gal. 3.10.11.12. and that he should be a God unto us, and we his people, is the sum of the Gospel, Heb. 8▪ 10 2. Cor. 6.16. Reu. 21.3. The difference between the fathers and us, is, that they had the Gospel in promise; we have the same Gospel in performance, Luk. 1.69.70, 72.73. etc. Act. 13.32.33. & 26 6. They believed in Christ that was to come; We believe in Christ who is come: Their faith and ours is one in substance, Heb. 11. Gal. 3.9. That circumcision and baptism are also one in substance (though differing in outward sign) is thus manifested. Circumcision was the sign of faith and holiness, Rom. 4.11. & 2.29. Col. 2.11 Deut. 10▪ 16. Baptism is the sign of faith and holiness, Act. 8.37.38 Rom. 6.3.4 etc. Circumcision was the first sign and seal of entering into the covenant: Baptism is so now. We now being buried with Christ in baptism, are said to be circumcised in him, Coloss. 2.11.12. which plainly manifesteth them to be one and the same: even as their other sacramental signs, are said to be the same that we now have, in respect of the things signified, 1. Cor. 10.1.2.3.4. 1 Cor. 5.7.8. Forasmuch then as the covenant with Abraha● and with us, and the seal of the covenant then and now, are one in substance: it followeth, that the commandment then to give infants the seal of the covenant, being never repealed, bindeth us to give them the seal of the covenant at this day. The exceptions which the adversaries make of the difference between circumcision and baptism, shall be answered after in their place.  
2 The second commandment for baptising of infants, is in Mark. 16.15. Go preach the Gospel to every creature; he that believeth and is baptised, shall be saved. Math. 28.19. Go teach all nations, baptising them, etc. In this commission of Christ are two things, the preaching of the Gospel to every creature, to all nations; and the sealing of the same by baptism. The Gospel belonged to infants, & they are necessarily implied in the first: therefore baptism belonged to infants, and they are as necessarily implied in the later. Christ biddeth them proclaim or preach the Gospel: but what the Gospel is, is not here declared, we must gather it from other scriptures. The Gospel (or evangely) is the glad tidings or joyful declaration that the promise which was made unto the Fathers, God hath fulfillled the same unto us their children: the promise, (I say) concerning Christ, and the redemption of the world by him, as these scriptures teach, Act. 13.32.33. Luk. 1.54.55.69.70.71.72.73. etc. Act. 2.38.39. & 26.22.23. Luk. 4.18— 21. So the Gospel (which is the good tidings of the fulfilling of the promise) is as large as the promise was: whereupon, not in the forementioned scriptures only, but in many other places, the Apostles refer the Gospel to the promise (or promises) made of old, as, It is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed: Rom. 4.16. and Now we, brethren, as Isaak was, are the children of promise, Gal. 4.28. and, Christ was a minister of the circumcision, for the truth of God, to confirm the promises (made) unto the fathers: and that the Gentiles might glorify God for mercy, Rom. 15.8.9. and, That the promise by faith of jesus Christ, might be given to them that believe, Gal. 3.22. and, Paul an Apostle, etc. according to the promise of life, which is in Christ jesus, 2. Tim. 1.1. and many the like. Not in general only, but the particular promises at several times, are showed to be accomplished in the Gospel; as the promise to Adam, Rom. 16 20. from Gen. 3.15. to Abraham, Luk. 1.55.73. Rom. 4.16.17.18. to David, Luk. 1.69.70. Act. 2▪ 30 31. to Israel by Moses, Samuel, and other Prophets, Act. 3.22.24▪ 25 Luk. 1.70. so that all the promises of God are yea and Amen in Christ, 2. Cor. 1.20. And for the point in controversy, the promise of grace and salvation to Abraham and to his seed, Gen. 17.7. is by the Gpspell showed to be confirmed, Luk. 1.55. Act. 2.38▪ 39 Gal. 3.14.16.29. But the promise to Abraham's seed implied his infants, Gen. 17, 7, 10, 12, therefore the Gospel (which is the compliment of that promise) implieth our infants: and so the Apostle saith, the promise is to you and to your children, Act. 2.39. And the sign and seal of the promise was given to Abraham's children in infancy, Gen. 17, 10, 12. therefore it belongeth to our children in their infancy: and we are said to be the children of promise as Isaak was▪ Gal. 4.28▪ But Isaak was the child of promise in his infancy, and had then the seal of the promise in his infancy, when he was but eight days old, Act, 7, 8, wherefore we also in our infancy are children of the promise, and have right to the seal of the covenant even then, or else we are not as Isaak was. And thus Christ commanding the Gospel to be preached, commanded the fulfilling of the promises to be preached, even all and every one of the promises, without excepting any: and so commanded the promise of grace, and accomplishment of it to the seed of the faithful even in their infancy to be preached. Likewise commanding the seal of the covenant to be applied unto all within the promise, as freely and generally now as ever it was of old, not excepting infants: he commanded infants to be sealed by baptism, as they were sealed before by circumcision. And seeing all believers are by his commission to be baptised: the infants of the Church being believers (in respect of the beginning of faith, though not actually) as I have formerly proved, they are also to be baptised by virtue of Christ's commission, Mark. 16. Math. 28. that so the promises unto the fathers may be confirmed, and the Gentiles (as well as the circumcision, that is, the jews) may glorify God for his mercy, Rom. 15.8▪ 9  
Now I will proceed to answer their exceptions; beginning first with this about circumcision, and the covenant with Abraham.  
1 There was a commandment for circumcision, 
Pag 145.  Gen. 17. there is none for baptism of infants.  
Answ. This is before disproved, and a commandment showed Mark. 16. For the sealing of the seed of the faithful in infancy, was a part of the Gospel; seeing the Gospel is the fulfilling of the covenant and promise made to the fathers, and to Abraham in special, Act. 13 32, 33. Luk. 1.55.73. If it be objected, that baptising of infants is not there particularly expressed: I answer, neither are other parts of the Gospel particularly expressed th●re: but the Gospel's in general being to be proclaimed, all parts of the Gospel's (whereof sealing the infants is one) are necessarily implied. Note also that things are taught & commanded sometime in scripture, though not in express words: as the trinity of persons in the unity of the Godhead, the resurrection of the dead (as Christ proveth) was taught in Exod. 3. Eternal life in heaven, and eternal death in hell are not expressed in Moses law: nor that they should have Synagogues in every city for the people to meet on the Sabbath. Neither in the new testament is it taught in express words, that Christ is coessential, coequal, coeternal with the father: or, that his death and obedience is the merit of our righteousness, or satisfaction for our sins: nor expressly commanded that women should receive the Lords supper, nor example that any did: with sundry other things which though they be not expressed in plain words, yet are they sound to be proved by arguments from the scripture.  
2 That commandment included males only, children or servant though unbelievers, and excluded all females, though believers so doth not baptism.  
Answ. 1 It is untruly said that servants unbelievers were to be circumcised: they feign this, the s●ri●ture tea●heth them not so, but the contrary. For circumcision was the seal of the righteousness of f●ith, Rom. 4, 11, and should it be set upon unbelievers, which had no righteousness▪ no faith? So God should be made the author of a false and lying seal: to signify and to assure the things which were not. Again, every circumcised person was to eat the Passover, and had all other privileges of Israel's law, Exod. 12, 48, 49. the Passover signified Christ, and the eating of it life by Christ, 1 Cor. 5.7.8. joh. 6.57. But no unbeliever had these benefits. And if unbelievers and Israelites had communion together in circumcision, passover, and other holy things, than was the Church of Israel no communion of Saints, but a mixture with all sorts of infidels, whosoever would, contrary to Exod. 19, 5.6. Levit. 19, 2, & 20, 7. Deut. 14 ●, 2, & 26.18, 19, Levit. 20, 26, 1 King. 8.53. Though females (wanting that part of the body) were not outwardly circumcised, for that foreskin which was not, could not be cut off: yet may we not say they were excluded, for than they might not have eaten the passover, Exod. 12.48. They were within the covenant (D●ut. 29, 10, 11, 12) and implied in the males. As the men had that sign of purification (according to the nature of the male) which women had not▪ so women had another kind of purification (according to the nature of the female) which men had not, Levit. 12. Each ●●x had their portion in the things that figured their redemption by Christ, according to their several natures. Therefore when the outward sign was changed from circumcising to baptising, whereof the female is as capable as the male; both sexes are baptised, Act. 8.12. So infants now are as capable of baptism, as they were of circumcision, there is nothing therefore to debar th●m from it.  
3 The law required circumcision to be performed on the eight d●y: so doth not the law of baptism.  
Ans What of this? the law of baptism appointeth no day at all for any: shall none therefore be at all baptised? The law required the Passover to be kept on the 14 day of the first month, Exod. 12 The law of Christ appointeth no day when to eat the Lords supper: yet it is the same in substance that the Passover was, 1 Cor. 5.7, 8, so baptism is the same in substance that circumcision was, Coloss. 2.11, 12. and as all may now eat the Lords supper, which might then eat the Pascha: so all may now be baptised, which then were circumcised.  
4 But when faith is manifested, then is baptism to be performed.  
Ans. Th●y mean by manifestation, profession with mouth; and by than they mean not before that time. This is denied, and formerly disproved, and they have no one word of God to confirm their doctrine. 2 Though infants manifest no faith by their own mouth, yet the mouth of God manifests them to have faith in the beginning or feed thereof, because he testifieth them to be holy, 1 Cor. 7, 14, which is not without faith: and testifieth them to have grace and righteousness by Christ, answerable to the corruption and unrighteousness which they have by Adam, Rom. 5. as is before declared.  
Again th●y say, 
Pag. 145.  Neither circumcision nor baptism are seals of the covenant of life and salvation: that whi●h is now the seal, was ever the same, which is the h●ly spirit of promise, 2 Cor. 1, 22, Ephes. 1, 13, & 4▪ 30.  
Ans. A bold untruth contradicting the Apostle, who calleth the sign of circumcision, the seal of the righteousness of faith, Rom. 4. 1●. and righteousness of faith is life and salvation, Gal. 3.11. Ephes. 2▪ 8. and the covenant which circumcision sealed, was that the Lord would be their God, Gen. 17.7.10. and so he would give them life and salvation, Reu 21.3.4. Whereas they except, The Spirit is the scale: it is true; but they should observe that it is an invisible seal in the heart; whereas Paul speaketh of an outward visible seal, which is also a sign, and on the body. Again, the covenant may have more seals than one: so that if the Spirit were an outward seal, yet might circumcision be a seal also of the same thing. Moses calleth circumcision a sign or token, Gen. 17.11, but he no where calleth it a seal▪ yet Paul calleth it a seal, because in truth it was so, and more than a bare sign. For a sign is to make some other thing known unto us, as the doole-stone or land mark is for distinction of grounds: or it is further to put us in mind of things formerly done, as the stones at Gilgall were for a memorial to Israel how their Fathers passed through jordan, Ioshu. 4.20.21.22. But a seal goeth yet further, and certifieth or assureth of any promise or gift. Now because circumcision was such a sign as assured unto Abraham his righteousness by faith in Christ the promised seed: therefore the Apostle rightly calleth it a seal. Upon which ground we also rightly call the Passover, Baptism, and our Lord's Supper Seales, because they are such signs as certify and assure us of forgiveness of sins, and of righteousness and salvation by Christ. And from this we have a most certain ground for the baptism of infants: because baptism is no more now, then circumcision was of old, namely a sign and seal of righteousness by faith. And if infants had such a seal under the promise of the Gospel: how should it with any colour be denied now under the performance of that promise? unless we will say, Christ hath not confirmed the promises made unto the fathers, contrary to Rom. 15.8. 2 Cor. 1.20.  
Further they say, 
pag. 146.  There is but two covenants, the Law and the Gospel, the Old and the New, Gal. 4. The old Covenant, the Law, was made with the children of Abraham after the fl●sh, and had circumcision in their fl●sh for a sign thereof. The new covenant the Gospel's, is not made but with the one seed, Gal. 3.16. that are of the faith of Abraham. The children of the fl●sh are not they to whom this covenant is made, Rom. 9.8 the children of the fl●sh must be but out, etc. Gal. 4 30. so that the covenant with Abraham and his children after the flesh, was not the covenant of life and salvation; it was the covenant of work, of the Law. etc.  
Ans. In this their plea, there is a little truth, but much error and delusion. It is true, there were but two Covenants, the Law and the Gospel. There is sophistry and delusion in their saying the covenant of the law was with the children of Abraham after the flesh: for as after the fl●sh meaneth natural generation, so Isaak, jakob, and all the Israelites, even Christ himself was abraham's child after the flesh, Math. 1.1. Rom. 1.3. & 9.3.4.5. yet were not they aliens from the covenant of the Gospel. But as the fl●sh meaneth corruption of nature, Rom. 8.1.8.9. and as men have no other generation of the Spirit, but of the fl●sh, john▪ 3. vers. 5.6. in this sense it is true, that the children of the flesh are not the children of God, Rom. 9.8. and they are under the Law, not under the Gospel. But this is nothing against the truth we maintain. For Isaak who was Abraham's seed after the flesh in the first sense, but after the Spirit, and by promise in the second sense, he was circumcised in his infancy, Now all the Christian Church are as Isaak, children of the promise, Gal. 4.28, and our infants though by nature (as it is corrupted) they be children of wrath, Ephes. 2, yet by promise and grace in Christ, they are children of God, Rom. 5, and therefore are to have the seal of the covenant of grace in infancy, as Isaak had; even as by Abraham's justification, the Apostle proveth the justification of us all, Rom. 4.3.22.23.24.  
Error it is that they say, Abraham's children had circumcision in the flesh for a sign of the old covenant or Law For first, the Law was given by Moses, job 1.7. many years after Abraham, and could not disannul the covenant with Abraham, or make the promise of none effect, as the Apostle plainly teacheth us Gal. 3.17. Christ also saith, Circumcision was not of Moses, but of the fathers, job. 7.22. Secondly, the covenant which circumcision sealed, was that the Lord would be a God to Abraham and his seed, Gen. 17.7.10, this was the covenant of the Gospel, Heb. 8.8 10, Rev. 2 1.3. Thirdly, Circumcision was the seal of righteousness of faith, Rom. 4 11, but the Law is not of faith, Gal. 3.11.12, therefore circumcision was a seal of the Gospel promised, a seal of the covenant of grace.  
Whereas th●y say, the new covenant is not made but with the one seed, Gal. 3.16, it is true, & maketh against them: for that one seed, is there showed to be Christ: not Christ in his own person only, but Christ with his Church, which make one mystical body, 1 Cor. 12.12. Eph. 5.30.31.32. Now the infants of the Church, are by the covenant of grace of the body of Christ, even as by nature they are of the body and stock of Adam, as before (in the treaty of Original sin,) we have proved by Rom. 5, so that the new covenant is made with them also, and therefore the seal of that covenant is due unto them now, as it was in Abraham's days.  
N●xt this, they go about to prove, 
Pag. 147.  That the covenant whereof circumcision was a sign, Gen. 17, was not the same which we have now in the Gospel: because the Lord saith, it is not the same, Jer. 31.31, Heb. 8.6. it is a new covenant that we have under the Gospel.  
Answ. It is no marvel though these men so often slander us, when they dare belie the Lord himself. Neither doth the Prophet, nor the Apostle (in the places by them cited, or) any where say, that the covenant which Abraham had, and which was sealed to him by circumcision, is not the same which we have. I have before proved them to be one in substance by Gal. 3, and Rom. 4.11. The covenant spoken of by jeremy, was made when God took them by the hand to bring them out of Egypt, jer. 31.32, Heb. 8, whereas the covenant with Abraham was many years before, Gal. 3.17. Therefore the covenant made with Abraham by promise, is the same that we now have by performance and confirmation of that promise's, Luk. 1.54 55, 72▪ 73 Rom. 15.8.  
Again they say, 
Pag. 148.  though Abraham himself had the covenant of grace promised him, by which promise he had salvation in the M●ssiah to come; yet ha● he not the ordin●●●●s of the new covenant which we have: and therefore none of his seed in the fl●sh could be partakers of that which he had not himself.  
Answ. They grant enough to their own condemnation: for if Abraham's covenant was of grace and salvation by Christ; then was it not of the Law (as before they pleaded) for that causeth wrath and damnation, Rom. 4.15, Gal. 3.10.12. We plead not for the same external Ordinances or manner of outward dispensation: but for the same substance of the covenant, which was of faith, not of works; and so of the Gospel not of the Law, as Paul teacheth us, Rom. 4. Gal. 3. The Israelites Passeover of the Lamb, and our Passeover Christ: their feast of unleavened cakes, and ours, (1 Cor. 5.7.8.) differ apparently in the outward Ordinances. So their bread of Manna from heaven, ours of wheat from the earth; their drink of water from the Rock, ours of wine from the Grape, (in the supper of our Lord) how greatly do they differ in the outward things: yet were they the same spiritual meat and drink both to them and us, even Christ: as the Apostle teacheth 1 Cor. 10.3.4. So Circumcision and Baptism, differ much in the outward rite and sign; but not in the substance or thing signified.  
Yet cease they not their idle contention, but further say concerning us, 
Pag. 148.  They speak untruly [in saying that the covenant which this new is not like, is that Law given upon mount Sina, Exod. 19 not that in Gen. 17.] Mark the words (in jer. 31, Heb. 8,) Not like the covenant that I made with their fathers, when I took them by the hand to bring them out of Egypt, which is mentioned in Exod. 3, not Exod. 19, than did God appear to Moses, and commanded him to take them by the hand and lead them out of Egypt, where the covenant is mentioned in ver. 6, I am the God of thy fathers, Abraham etc. I am come to deliver them &c. to bring them into a good land etc. which promise was made unto their father Abraham.  
Answ. The untruth and ignorance is in themselves that so reason. For there was no covenant made in Exod. 3. Let the place be veiwed. Though if there had then a covenant been made, it were nothing to our purpose; because Abraham was dead many years before, and we reason of the covenant made with him and his seed, whiles he lived, Gen. 17. But in Exod. 19.5 etc. treaty is of a covenant to be made: in Exod, 20 etc. the Laws are promulgated. In Exod. 24, 7, 8, the covenant is made up and dedicated. And that this was that first and old covenant which should be abolished, as jeremy foretold, the Apostle doth plainly manifest. For having showed the promise hereof in Heb. 8.8.— 13, he prosecuteth the same matter in Heb▪ 9, showing the differences between the first covenant and the second, or the old and the new; and how a covenant (or testament) must be confirmed by blood and death: which for the new was by the death of Christ, Heb. 9.15.16, and for the first, it was with the death & blood of bullocks and goats, wherewith Moses sprinkled the people, v. 18 19.20. And this was that action recorded in Exod▪ 24, done at mount Sina. Moreover observe here these men's fraud: jeremy speaketh of a covenant made; they tell us of a covenant (or promise) mentioned in Exod. 3, as if to make a covenant when they came out of Egypt, and to mention a covenant or promise made many years before with Abraham in Canaan, were all one. That which is alleged of the land of Canaan promised in Gen▪ 17, 8, is true, as a type or figure, but not as the main thing there intended. For Abraham himself had no inheritance in the land of Canaan, no not so much as to set his foot on: Act. 7.5. how then did circumcision seal that to Abraham, which God never performed to him? Is not this to make God's promise to him, vain? The Apostle is a better expositor, who saith, that circumcision sealed to him righteousness of faith, which he had before, Rome 4.11, and telleth us, how by faith Abraham sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange Country, and looked for a heavenly city and country, which he understood to be figured by that earthly land: Heb. 11.9.10.16. And if ●h● possession of Canaan was that which circumcision sealed, than Abraham's servants; yea and all his sons by Keturah, and all proselytes of other families, that were circumcised, were deluded with a vain promise: seeing none of all these had ever inheritance in Canaan, but only the Israelites the posterity of Isaak, which were numbered in Numb. 26▪ 2.— 53.  
Again, they except thus. The covenant is made in Gen. 17, 
Pag. 150.  with Abraham and his seed, not with every faithful man and his seed. Is every faithful man Abraham? What proof for that? It is well if we be Abraham's seed etc.  
Answ. The exception is frivolous: for by virtue of that covenant with Abraham who circumcised his infants, Isaak his son, jakob his son, all the Isra●lits in their generations, and every faithful Proselyte of the heathens, circumcised their infants. So the faithful now, who all are Abraham's seed, and heirs by promise, G●l. 3.29, do seal their infants with Baptisms, as of ●ld ●h●y did with Circumcision, for the promise is to such and to their children Act. 2.39. When Paul bringeth Abraham's example for justification by faith, Rom. 4. if any should trifle and say, What is that to us? We are not Abraham: the Apostle telleth, it was not written for his sake alone, but for us also, Rom. 4.23.24. So say we; that Abraham gave his infants the seal of the covenant, it is not written for him alone, but also for us.  
But they proceed and say; 
Pag. 151.  In Rome, 4, 21, Abraham received the sign of Circumcision, the seal of the righteousness of faith which he ●ad, when he was uncircumcised, that he should be the father of the faithful etc. This proveth that Abraham received Circumcision to seal up his fatherhood of the faithful; not that he received it to seal up his faith in the Messiah, which he had 24 years before: but a seal of his faith in believing God, that he should be the father of many Nations, Gen. 17.4, Rome, 4.17, and this was imputed to him for righteousness, Rom. 4.22.  
Answ. They are blind, and would make blind. 1 There is no faith that can be imputed to any man for righteousness, but the faith that is in the Messiah; as the Apostle proveth at large, in Rom. 3, 21.22.24.25. and Rom. 4. Gal. 3.2 And Abraham beleeeving the promise of a seed, which belief was counted to him for righteousness, Gen. 15.5.6. believed Christ principally, as his seed after the flesh: for otherwise how could all nations be blessed in him, that is in his seed, as God promised, Gen. 12.3. Gal. 3.8.16. 3 The Apostle disproveth their vain gloss, when having showed how Abraham's faith was counted to him for righteousness, Rom. 4.19.— 22, he annexeth, that this was written for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe in him that raised up jesus, v. 23 24. But if Abraham's faith had not been the faith in Christ, the Apostles argument from his example had been impertinent.  
Finally they say, 
Pag. 152.  Abraham received Circumcision as none received it: and faith was required of none to Circumcision: but faith is required to Baptism: & therefore these be but men's dreams, & chaff in stead of wheat.  
Answ. In deed they would give us chaff for wheat. They would have us believe that Abraham's circumcision sealed his fatherhood, not his faith in Christ: which dream is before refuted. They would teach us two or more circumcisions, one which Abraham had, another which other men had. But as there is one Lord, one faith, one baptism, Eph. 4.5. so we find but one circumcision, which all our fathers received. They would persuade us, that whatsoever Paul saith, that circumcision was the se●le of the righteousness of faith, Rom. 4.11. yet faith was required of none to Circumcision. But who will believe this their dream? Will God seal righteousness of faith to them that have no faith? This is to make God the author of vain and worthless seals. If it sealed not to men righteousness of faith, what sealed it? Not the land of Canaan, for (as is foreshowed) no child of Abraham by Keturah, no Proselyte had inheritance in Canaan: no nor Isaak, nor jakob, who were but strangers in the land as Abraham was, Heb. 11.9. Not the covenant of the Law, for that was not given till many years after Abraham, neither could any man have righteousness by it, but wrath and curse, Gal. 3.10. But had not error blinded their eyes, they might see that the covenant sealed by circumcision was, that the Lord would be a God to them and to their seed after them, Gen. 17.7. and this was the covenant of grace in Christ, Heb. 8.8.10.  
Against Peter's doctrine in Act. 2.38.39, where he saith, the promise is made to you and to your children; they cavil thus, 
Pag. 136▪  Whereas many stumble at the word Children, conceiving that it is meant of Infants, it is here and elsewhere used often in the Scriptures for men of understanding: Act. 3.25, etc.  
Answ▪ How struggle these men against the light! It is true, that the word Children often meaneth men of understanding: but meaneth it not infants also? The word seed, used in Gen. 17, often implieth old persons also: will they therefore infer, that the promise and seal thereof to Abraham's seed, belonged not to his seed in their infancy? So neither is there any reason to think that the promise to the jews and their children mentioned in Act 2, is meant only of men of understanding, and not also of their children in infancy. For when the Apostle speaketh of the promise to them and to their children, concerning Christ and remission of sins by him, and sealing the same by Baptism: he hath evident reference to the promise made of old to Abraham, which concerned the same things, and was sealed by circumcision: as appeareth by comparing Luke 1.54.55.72.73 etc. Galath. 3.8.16.  
Whereas the Apostle in 1 Cor. 7.14, calleth a believers children holy; these men expound him thus: 
Pag. 136▪  If your children in your own judgement be holy, and you do not put them away when you are converted to the faith, but use th●m still as your children, etc. then may you keep your wives being holy, they being of a nearer natural bond than your children, and use them still as your wives etc. Their reason of this interpretation is; Because holiness sometime signifieth when a person or thing is set apart or sanctified to the believer, 1. Timothy 4.5, Titus 1.15. Thus is the unbelieving wife holy, and thus are the children h●ly, and not otherwise.  
Answ. That children are thus sanctified to the believer is true: but in saying, and not otherwise, they do violence to the Apostles doctrine, and the truth is not in them. For first he meaneth not the children to be holy in the parents' judgements; but telleth them his own judgement, they are holy; and useth it as a reason to confirm his former doctrine. Secondly, he meaneth not in respect of putting the children away from civil use as children; for so no mor● should be said for the children of the faithful, then for their infidel servants: for Philemon might and did retain Onesimus for civil use as a servant, before he was converted to Christ, Phillip v. 10.11, etc. and believing servants might dwell and converse civilly with unbelieving masters, 1 Tim 6.1 2, Yea misbegotten children and bastards were not to be put away in respect of civil use: for who should nourish or bring them up, rather than their own parents? 2 Sam 11 4.5, & 12.14.15 etc. Thirdly, they corrupt the Apostles reason, which is not to this effect, If you may keep your children, than you may keep your wives: But thus, your unbelieving wives you may keep, for they are sanctified unto you, because the children which you beget of them are holy: and so the holiness of the children is an argument and proof that they might still retain th●ir unbelieving wives. Fourthly, they change the Apostles word am●ss●: he saith not of unbelieving wives that they are holy, but sanctified to the believing husbands; but the children were holy. Fif●ly, the sanctification of meats, & purity of other things, mentioned in 1 Tim. 4.5 Tit. 1.15, is not meant of religious sanctification, but for civil uses: whereas the children of believers are otherwise holy, namely, in respect of the covenant of grace and Church of God, as is abundantly proved before, by Rom. 5, where, as they have naturally sin and unrighteousness by Adam, so they have holiness and righteousness by the grace of God in Christ. Also by Gen. 17, compared with Rom. 4.11, where abraham's (and all faithful men's) children, are with their parents in the covenant of grace, and have the seal of the righteousness of faith. And upon this ground doth Paul strongly prove the believers might keep their unbelieving wives, because the children which they had by such, were (by reason that one parent was a Christian) holy, to wit, with holiness of the covenant made with the faithful and their seed. And in this respect the children of those that are in the covenant, are said to be borne unto the Lord, and to be his children, Ezek. 16.8.20, 21. whereas in the other respect, all children in the world are the Lords, Exod. 19, 5. And so the children of the Church are called the holy seed, differing herein from the seed of other peoples, Ezra 9.1.2, which if th●se opposites had understood, they could not thus have stumbled at the Apostles words, and wrested his meaning.  
But they plead further, that the Apostle saith not, else were your Infants, but else were your Children unclean, but now they are holy: so that all the children of unbelievers are as holy by this place as infants, etc. and so must be baptised.  
Answ. Herein they seek to pervert the strait ways of God. 
Pag. 138.  As if they should say: God (when he made with Abraham that everlasting covenant which Circumcision was a seal of) said not that he would be a God unto him and to his Infants after him, but unto his seed, Gen. 17 7, so that all the seed of Abraham (Ismaelites, Edomites &c.) were as holy, and as well within the covenant of grace and to be circumcised, as the Israelites which were the generation of Isaak. But they should observe that the covenant of mercy passeth from the fathers to the children from age to age, even to the thousand generation, if they love God, and keep his commandments: whereas if they ●ur●e away and hate him, he visigoth their iniquity, Exod. 20.5.6, Ez●k. 18 9.10.13. Children of believers when they are borne of th●ir parents, (and all are borne infants) are all in the covenant with their parents; and were of old to be circumcised, are now to be baptised. If the children be of years when their parents enter into the covenant, either they assent and enter into covenant with them, or they descent and enter not. So Isma●l Abraham's child, being taught of his father to keep the way of the Lord (Genes▪ 18.19.) and not disobeying, he was with his father circumcised at thirteen years of age, Genes. 17.25. Likewise all children now assenting unto and walking in the faith with their parents are to be baptised at what age soever. But when Ishmael fell from his obedience, then was he cast out of Abraham's house, and was no longer counted for Abraham's seed, but in Isaak was his seed called, Genes. 21.10.12. Ishmael was still Abraham's seed and child in nature, according to the flesh; but he continued not still the child of the covenant, Galath. 4.29.30, nor Abraham's seed according to the promise. Even so, if children of believers now being of understanding, do refuse the faith of Christ, or fall from it, they are to be kept out of the Church▪ or cast out from it: and so the seal of grace and salvation belongeth not unto them, (Ezek. 18, 24, 2 Chro. 15.2, Matth 3.7.9.10,) as it belongeth to all the infants of the faithful, and to all their children (of what age so ever) that receive the faith of Christ, and abide in it with them. And these men greatly mistake if they think we hold children are to be baptised, or are holy, because they are our children by nature, (for so they are children of wrath, Eph. 2.3,) but they are holy, and to have the seal of salvation, because God hath graciously accepted them into his covenant with ourselves: and keepeth them in it, until they fall from faith and obedience of Christ; even as we ourselves continue in the covenant, whiles we continue in the Christian faith, and no longer, 2 Tim. 2.12. As we are the children of the first Adam, we are all sinners, disobedient, unrighteous and under condemnation: but as we are the children of the second Adam (Christ) we are all holy, made obedient, righteous; and heirs of salvation, according to the Apostles doctrine in Rom. 5▪ 12— 21.  
Against an other proof for baptism of Infants, gathered from Paul's words in 1 Cor. 10▪ 1, 2 etc. where he speaketh of all the Israelits Baptism in the cloud & in the sea: they struggle with little reason or colour of truth. For (to omit their discourse of Paul's scope in bringing that in, which no way cleareth the controverse) they tell us. 
Pag. 141.  1 That Moses did not at all wash them with water in the cloud and sea. 
Pag. 142.  2 Th●t this of Moses is called baptism by comparison, as Noah's Ark is called the figure of the Baptism that saveth us: for as the Ark saved those in it from drowning: so the Israelites were all under the cloud and in the sea, and therein baptised or safeguarded from destruction of their enemies. 3 That it pleased the Holy Ghost to say they were baptised in the sea and cloud, because the cloud and sea was their safety, as noah's Ark was: And as Christ saith, they are baptised that suffer for his sake. So there is as much warrant to enjoin infants to suffer persecution, because it is called Baptism: as to baptise them, because the cloud and sea is called Baptism.  
Answ. How many wrest and wind are in these men's words? First, they say, Moses did not at all baptise them with water. And why? Was there no water (think they) in the cloud and in the sea? Let them consider Exod. 14.24.25. compared with Psal. 77.16.17, etc. and they may see there was water enough in the cloud: and they will not say (I think) that there was no water in the sea. All outward baptising or washing, must be with water or some other liquor. If they were not baptised with water, what other liquor were they baptised in? not with blood, as in the Baptism of suffering death for Christ's sake, which they impertinently mention. Not with wine or strong drink: for they found none such in the wilderness. If they can show nothing but water to baptise them in, let them deny no more (for shame) that they were baptised with water. God spoke to our fathers by the Prophets at sundry times (or in 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  sundry parts, as it were by piece meal) as the Apostle teacheth Hebrew. 1.1. By Moses he showed how the cloud removed from before Israel, and stood behind them, (as they passed through the sea) and gave them light, but was darkness to the Egyptians: and from this fiery cloudy pillar the Lord looking, troubled the Egyptians, and took off their chariot wheels, that they drove them heavily, Exod. 14.19.20 24.25. This being briefly and obscurely told by Moses, God after enlargeth by Asaph another Prophet, who showeth the manner of it; how not only the waters of the sea saw the Lord, when they fled and parted; but the clouds also (from above) poured out water when they reigned; the skies sent out a sound by thunder, etc. thus the ground being softened with the rain, occasioned the chariot wheels of the Egyptians (sticking in the mire) to fall off, and hindered their pursuit: 
Rom. 16.25.26.  Psa. 77.16.17, etc. After this the Apostle (taught by God's spirit) manifesteth the mystery which before was kept secret; namely how this passage under the cloud (which reigned) and through the sea was a baptism to the Israelits: 
1. Cor. 10.1.2. &▪ Mark. 1.5. Act. 16.33.  even as Christian men's washings in rivers or vessels, was a baptism to them. And as the manna which Israel ate, and water from the rock which they drank, was the same spiritual meat and drink which we have signified by bread and wine in our Lord's supper; so their washing in the cloud & sea, and our washing in vessels or rivers, is spiritually the same baptism. From hence we gather the baptising of our infants by two arguments: 1 All our fathers (saith Paul) were baptised in the cloud and sea: therefore (say we) infants: for seeing there was no other baptism but that in the cloud and sea, such of our fathers as than were infants were at that time baptised, or else many of our fathers (even all the infants of many thousand families) were never baptised: which is contrary to the Apostles doctrine. And if infants had baptism under Moses, it cannot (with any colour of reason) be denied them under Christ. 2. In that the Apostle teacheth us, that the extraordinary and temporary sacraments (or seals of salvation) which Israel had, were the substance and truth which we now have, though Moses doth not so express: it followeth upon like ground, that their ordinary seals, namely Circumcision and the Passover, were the same in truth and substance with baptism and the Lords Supper which we now have. And being the same, as infants had circumcision then, so they are to have baptism now.  
Secondly, whereas they say that of Moses was called baptism by comparison, as if it were not properly baptism; they swerve from the right way: it was as truly and properly baptism to them, as ours is to us, though the manner of administration differ: even as their Manna and water were as truly and properly the sacrament of Christ's body and blood to them, as bread and wine in the Lord's supper are to us. Otherwise the Apostle should not say truly, that hey were the same. 1. Cor. 10.3.4.  
Thirdly, noah's ark is not called the figure of baptism, as these corrupters of scripture tell us: but baptism (saith the Apostle) is a like-figure (or antitype) 1 Pet. 3.21. So that the saving by water of eight men in the Ark, was a type or figure: and the saving of a few now by water in baptism, is an antitype, or like figure: both of them figuring salvation by the death of Christ. Fourthly, neither do these men set down the reason fully and rightly, why they are said to be baptised, namely, because the cloud and sea was their safety as noah's ark was; for though it may in some sense be granted that these were th●ir safety, as baptism is our safety (for it is said to save us, 1 Pet. 3.21.) yet properly th●y were said to be baptised in the cloud and sea, because they were in them sacramentally washed from their sins, & planted together in the likeness of his death, burial, and resurrection, as we are now by baptism, Rom. 6.3.4▪ 5. The cloud served them for three users, 1. to protect and keep them safe, Esai. 4.5.6. 2 to guide them in the way that they should go, Numb. 9.17. etc. Exod. 13.21. and these two were ordinary, 3. to baptise them by pouring down water, and this was extraordinary, and but one time in the red sea, for aught we find. And in this respect Paul saith they were baptised in it. Fiftly, their last speech of enjoining infants to suffer persecution, as well as to baptise them, is spoken with a wry mouth: for as we enjoin not infants to be baptised, though we baptise them; so can we not enjoin them to suffer persecution. But this we say and know, as infants are baptitised into Christ, so oftentimes they suffer persecution for Christ: being with their parents afflicted, imprisoned, banished, etc. yea and bereft of life itself, so that they have even the baptism of blood or martyrdom also.  
Whereas we find mention of whole households to have been baptised by the Apostles; from which example it is probably gathered that infants also were baptised. Against this they dispute thus, 
Pag. 143.  1. There are many households in which there are no infants.  
Ans. This is true: and it is also true that in many there are infants. Therefore this argument is propounded but as probable, not as certain.  
2 They say, It is most sure as the Apostles practised in one household, so they practised in all. But in the jailors house they baptised such as they preached the word unto, and such as believed, Act. 16.31.34. and this is most plain that infants cannot hear nor believe, etc.  
Ans. It is not most sure, but altogether unlikely, as themselves, I think, 
Mat. 10.13 14.  will acknowledge. For there is no likelihood that all households to whom the Apostles preached, did believe every one in them, 
1 Cor. 7.13.16.  though some did. And they grant that none but believers were baptised. So than if the goodman of the house, and the men only believed, there none but men were baptised: if women only believed, they only were baptised. Therefore the Apostles practice was not always alike in respect of the persons that they baptised. So for infants, such houses as had none, we easily grant that no infants were there baptised. But such as had infants, their parents believing, we hold that their infants were baptised; for there is no exception of infants at all in any place of the Apostles Acts. The bar which they put, that infants cannot hear nor believe, is soon removed. We know infants can hear, though not with understanding: we know also (and have proved before) that they believe, though not actually or professantly. And this faith begun in them in their regeneration, is a sufficient ground why infants should be baptised, as I have formerly manifested.  
Finally, 
Pag. 143.  unto Christ's words Mark. 1●. 14. suffer ye little children to come unto me, etc. for of such is the kingdom of God: they say, It is not s●yd, Infants are of the kingdom of heaven, that is, obeyers of the Gospel, Luk. 4 43▪ but that they that enter into the kingdom of heaven, must become as little children, for of such like is the kingdom of God. And, This is Christ's meaning, men must be converted and receive the kingdom of God as a child. etc.  
Ans They speak like children in understanding. 1. The people brought young children properly unto Christ, not men converted & become like children: Mark. 10.13. For the children the disciples rebuked the bringers: for their rebuking Christ was much displeased, and said, Suffer the little children to come unto me What reasonable creature will now deny that Christ speaketh here of children in years, not of old men like children. The children that were brought, Christ took up in his arms, put his hands one them & blessed them: may we think he took up aged persons. 2 The reason why he would have such children suffered to come to him, is, for of such is the kingdom of God, Mark. 10.14 If he had not meant this of young children themselves, but of men like children in some condition; there had been no weight in his words: but the people might have brought unto him upon that ground, doves, and serpents for Christ to lay hands upon and bless: for as godly men must in some things be like children, 1. Cor. 14▪ 20. so must they in some things also be like serpents, and like doves, Math. 10.16▪ 3▪ They wrest the t●xt, when they expound f●● of such is the kingdom of God, thus, for of such like: as if Christ meant n●t the children properly, but ancienter men like such children. They might even as well say, that when Paul writeth, I beseech thee, being such a one as Paul the aged, (Philem. v. 9 that he speaks not this of himself, but of some other man▪ like himself, that made request for Onesimus. But ignorant and unstable men will pervert all scriptures to their own perdition. That infants of the faithful are indeed of the kingdom of God, is before proved from Rom. 5. and many other scriptures.  
Now whereas Christ blessed the children; they tell us, he baptised them not, which we grant: but if they which were by nature children of wrath and curse, were now by grace made children of blessing in Christ; then were they in deed of the kingdom of God, and such as might receive baptism the sign and seal of blessedness.  
Lastly they say, It is a blessing to infants to be created, to live, to grow in stature, wisdom, etc. to have their sight, their limbs, etc. so that Christ's blessings extend as well to this life as that which is to come.  
Answ. All God's benefits for this life and the next, are in deed blessings: But Christ blessed not those children with any such worldly temporal blessings particularly; but gave them the blessing of God in general: and men are too presumptuous that will without due proof restrain that to some particulars which the Lord hath not restrained. We know that our blessedness from God in Christ, is our eternal salvation, Rom. 4▪ 6. etc. It was his l●st farewell to his beloved disciples to lift up his hands and bless them, Luk. 24.50. and it is the sum of the Gospel, that in Abraham's seed (that is Christ) all nations shall be blessed, Gal. 3.8. This grace Abraham's infants had, this grace Christ gave to little children: and the same he vouchsafe to continue unto us and to our children throughout their generations: preserving us and them from the curse of Anabaptistrie, whereby so many errors are sparsed, scriptures wrested, and souls perverted unto destruction.  
FINIS.