ΔΙΑΤΡΙΕΗ ' ΠΕΡΙ ' ΠΑΙΔΟ-ΒΑΠΤΙΣΜΟΥ OR A CONSIDERATION OF Infant Baptism: Wherein the Grounds of it are laid down, and the Validity of them Discussed, and many things of Mr Tombs about it Scanned and Answered.  
Propounded to the Consideration of the Church of God, and Judgement of the truly Religious and Understanding therein.  
Together with a Digression, in Answer to Mr Kendal; from Pag. 143. to the end.  
By J. H. an unworthy Servant of Jesus Christ, and Preacher of the Gospel to the Congregation at Lin Alhallows.  
While they made ready he fell into a trance, and saw Heaven opened, and a certain Vessel descending unto him as it had been a great sheet, knit at the four corners, and let down to the Earth; Wherein were (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) all four footed beasts of the Earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air: And there came a voice to him, Rise Peter, kill and eat, etc. God hath showed me that I should call (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) no man (of what ever Age, Sex, Nation, or condition, for so far the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will reach) common or unclean.  Acts 10.10, 11, 28. 
Suffer little Children to come to me, and forbidden them not, for Of Such Is The Kingdom Of Heaven. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the Kingdom of God As A Little Child, he shall not enter therein.  Mat. 19 14. with Mark 10 14, 15. 
Try all things; hold fast that which is good:  1 Thes. 5.21. 
LONDON, Printed by J. M. for H. Cripps, and L. Lloyd, and are to be sold at their shop in Popes-head Alley, near Lombardstreet. 1654.   

To all Conscientious, Judicious, Faithful men, whether Paedobaptists or Antipaedobaptists, to whom these shall come; Grace, Mercy and Peace from Jesus Christ.  
Men, Brethren, and Fathers,  
I Propound unto your consideration this ensuing Discourse upon this much-discussed point of Infant Baptism, not that I conceive myself able to instruct you, but because I desire the point may be well looked into and further scaned, that the truth of God therein may be made more evident to all, that what is Christ's may be owned and more cleared to be his, and what is of Antichrist may be discovered and thrown down, and that the Churches of God may be established in more Peace and quietness in this matter, to which things by my forwardness I would provoke others that hitherto have done little or nothing herein. I have herein acted to my little ability, according to the talon given me, searching the Scriptures about this matter, rather than old Ecclesiastical Authors, of whom I am not so richly furnished, as many others be, and amongst whom I find difference, and little certainty save in this, That divers testify that the practice of it hath been very Ancient, and none of them point us to any certain known beginning of it in the Church of God. Some rather disliking it unless in some cases of supposed necessity, and others commending and pleading for it, none that I find wholly condemning it, I mean none of primitive standing within the first five or six Centuries at least; for the manner of Baptising Anciently they seem more clear that it was usually by plunging or diping in their heads, save that some did it but once, some thrice; but I question whether their practice be at all obliging, I conceive not further than the Scripture hath tied us. I would not willingly abet any Antichristian practice, and as unwilling am I to condemn that that is Christian: how I conceive it to have ground and bottom enough in the Gospel and Apostolical writings, I have here expressed; if any of you see further into it either pro or con, I desire not to shut my eyes against it, but yet further to weigh what shall by any of you be propounded to the Church hereabout, and therein to myself, who shall God assisting, engage that if any or all the Antipaedobaptists shall substantially Answer and confute what I have here propounded, I will (unless God give other and further light yet) never more Baptise any Infant, but I conceive they will not do it, but leaving myself and endeavours to God's blessing and your perusal, I am bold to subscribe myself  
An unworthy servant of Christ, and of you for Christ's sake, John Horn. From South Lion in Norfolk. Ianu. 25. 1653.   

A Table of the Contents of this Book.  


Baptism considered in its 

1 Kind's; viz. as 

1. With Spirit. Pag. 1.  
2. With Fire or Affliction.  
3. With Water, and so as an outward Ordinance, p. 2. the thing chief enquired into, and therefore further spoke to in its    
2. Grounds; Both 

1. More general; the grace of God in Christ towards men. p. 2.  
2. More Special, The Commission, for it given 

1. To john.  
2. To the Apostles.      
3. Ends; Both in respect of 

1. God and the Baptizer. 4  
2. The party baptised. 4, 5    
4. Subject, which is principally sought after; and therein whether Infants be of its Subject. Whereabout therefore, 

1. Nine Observations out of the Scripture are laid down. 6, 7  
2. Whether the want of express Precept or Instance mentioning Infants be sufficient ground of excluding them, is spoke to Negatively in six Considerations. 

1. By way of Retorsion on the Antipoedobaptists. 8  
2. By showing the Negative in other cases instanced. 8, 9  
3. By asserting Christ less circumstantiate than Moses in outward Ordinances, p. 11. though not less perfect, therefore showed. 11, 12  
4. By propounding to consideration Rev. 11.2. 13  
5. By considering, that some things are couched in Scriptures where they are not expressed. 13, 14  
6. That those things so couched are no less true than if expressed. 15    
3. Divers Scriptures viewed conceived to give ground for Infant Baptism, viz. 

1. The Commission for Gentle-Baptism, Mat. 28.19, 20. p. 16  
2. The Apostles practise in Baptising the Gentiles, Acts 16. p. 35, 36 

1. Cleared from the Antipoedobaptists, 

1. Inferences from it. p. 19, 20  
2. Objections against it. p. 25    
2. Further opened and applied. 26, to 35 Mat. 19.13, 14, 15  
3. That in 1 Cor. 10.2. p. 40 Objections answered. p. 40, 41, 42, 43  
4. The Infants brought to Christ, p. 44. Wherein is considered, 

1. The end of their being brought to him. 45  
2. Their entertainment by him. p. 45, 46  
3. That Assertion, Of such is the Kingdom. p. 50 

1. What meant by Such. 51  
2. What by kingdom. Ibid.    
4. Twelve Objections answered, p. 57 Where also 

About 

1. Positive Ordinances. 70  
2. The use of the Law in them. 73  
3. The Analogy between Circumcision & Baptism 

1. Negatively. 76  
2. Affirmatively. 77    
4. The Covenant made of God to Abraham. 82, 83      
5. Rom. 11.16, 17. 92  
6. 1 Cor. 7.14. 98  
7. Acts 2.38, 39 p. 101. the 39 verse more fully spoke to. 103, to 116  
8. Acts 3.25. Ibid.  
9 john 3.3, 5. 118    
4. Some Arguments from the foresaid Scriptures briefly summed up. 125  
5. Four more general Objections Answered, p. 127. viz. about, 

1. The disorder, and evil members brought in to the Church by it. 127  
2. The want of Antiquity for it. 129  
3. The form of Sprinkling: And so it's further spoke to as to its. ‖  
4. The needlessness of it to Infants. 143 
* Which being occasioned by some passages of Mr Kendal's to Mr I. Goodwin, ushers in the Conclusion with a Digression to the said An●er.         
5 ‖ Form. p. 134         

THE ERRATA.  
Courteous Reader, I desire thee to mend with thy Pen these faults escaped in Printing, which were occasioned through my absence from the Press.  

P. 9 l. 32. for now, r. nor  
22. l. 14. ●. enforces  
24. l. 7. for one of, r. one with 28 for when, ●. whom 35. for so, r. see  
27. l. 35. r. Matth. 28.  
35. l. 4. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
38. l. 38 r. nor yet do I make  
39 l. 27. for I, r. if  
41. l. 20. for not, r. now  
44. l. 10. blot out, as  
45 l. 26. r. Infants) brought to him  
46. l. 30. put the comma after, for  
49. l. 21. for. & 17, 19 r. acts 7.19  
50. l. 13. r, Mark● reads  
51. l. 2. r. conceive  
l. 19 for price, r. grace  
l. 9 for general r. Greek  
56. l. 16. for sincerely, r. scarcely  
57 l. 2. r. for forbidding  
62. l. 32. r. that if there  
64. l. r. for, of it, r. of receiving it l. 3. r. doubling  
71. l. 19 for ye, r. the  
72. l. 34 put out, and; and then. l. 36  
73. l. 7. put the comma after, not l. 27, r. In things  
75 l. 27 for 31, r. 30  
77. l. 25. for All. r, as  
81. l. 2, r. of doctrine l. 4. r. rather than  
89. l. 19 blot out, or Christ  
91. l. 19 for him, r. them l. 22. for, forbidden, r, forbidden  
100 l. 17. r. opposed   

P. 105. l. ●. for in termine, r. intervene  
106 l. 6. for prefer, r. press  
107. l. 5. for or, r. of  
108. l. 11. r not to take in  
110. l. 26. r. as to  
111. l. 4. r. what account l. 11. r. nor was it l. 20. r. and such were l. 37. r. Ephes. 2, 2, 3  
115. l. 31. for through, r. though  
116. l. 35. put out in  
118. l. 23. for more, r. now  
119. l. 1. for where, r. whence l. 19 for her, r. he  
120. l. 20. for mentioned, r. conceived l. 23. for his, r. this  
121. l. 33. for there, r. thence  
122. l. 12. r. in their civil l. 34. blot out, in  
123. l. ●. r. earthy things l. ●. for his, r. this l. 36. r. in consistent  
124. l, ●. for outed, r. noted  
125. l. 5. for cited, r. noted l. 25. r. there is need as to the  
126. l, 22. r. premises  
130. l. 3●. for baptised, r. discipled  
133. l. ●. r. ●eniant l. 22. r. suits not  
134. l. 11. for cleanness, r. clearness  
135. in the margin, r. Novatus aeger 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
143. l. 36. r. John 3  
144. l. 35. for then, r. them.   
The mis-printings and misaccentings in the Greek words are very many too; as, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, p. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, p. 50, etc. But because they that understand Greek will easily perceive them, and how to correct them, and others will understand them never the better though corrected, I have omitted them. Vale.   

Infant Baptism Considered, and the true Grounds thereof laid down, Opened, and Maintained, etc.  
THe Apostle advising, Rom. 14.5. That every one [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] be fully carried, or persuaded in his mind in the things that he acts toward the Lord (as all we do we are to do in his Name, Col. 3.17.) and I having been exercised with doubts and scruples in my mind (the rather by occasion of opposition sometimes met with) about Infant-Baptism, it put me upon a more diligent Search of Scripture, together with other means of satisfaction thereabout. In which search, what I have found, I have here set down, as well for the helpfulness of others that may be exercised with like doubts, as also that it being tried what is found light therein, may be discovered, and others hereby occasioned to hold forth clearer light.  
And first I shall propound what I find in Scripture more generally concerning Baptism, (the want of right understanding therein administering much occasion of the doubts and mistakes thereabout) and then descend more particularly to what may thence be deduced for Infant-Baptism.  
1. First then, I find for the kinds or ways of Baptising, a threefold kind or way, all tending to make up and effect that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, one Baptism spoken of, Ephes. 4.4. the washing, cleansing, and fitting a man for God's everlasting Kingdom. Some call them Flaminis, Fluminis, Sanguinis, to which some add a fourth Sermonis. The Scripture thus,  
1. A Baptism of, or with the Spirit, as Matth. 3.11. Acts 1.5. He shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost, which is the pouring out of the Spirit upon men, on some more plenteously, on others in less measure, according to his good pleasure, to teach, sanctify, and fit them for the inheritance and service they are called to, & to seal them up to the day of redemption, 1 Cor. 6.11. Joh. 16.13, 14, 15. Eph. 1.13, 14. & 4.30. The speaking with tongues in the first pouring out of the Spirit, was neither common to them all, 1 Cor. 12, 30. nor for continuance in all Ages, 1 Cor. 13.8. being but a more miraculous & evident demonstration, that he was indeed poured out upon them, and so of the faithfulness of Christ therein for clearer satisfaction to others, Acts 10.45, 46. & 11.15, 16, 17, 18. & for present usefulness to them that spoke with them, for being fited to carry forth the Gospel to peoples of divers languages, Acts 1.4.8. 1 Cor. 14.21. and also for signs to unbelievers that did not credit that Doctrine, nor receive the Authority of the Scriptures, 1 Cor. 14.22. But the other operations of the Spirit are of more general usefulness & continuance, & therefore this Baptism in that regard is most necessary; But of this is not our business herein.  
2. A Baptism of Fire, or with Afflictions, Matth. 3.11. & 20.22, 23, Luke 12.50▪ called a Baptism because through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ for us, they are not for destruction but correction, they are ordered to us (and by him sanctified) for our cleansing and purging, which being effected according to his gracious mind, we come out of them again, Isai. 27.9. Heb. 12 8, 9, 10. Job. 33.29. Hab. 1.12. of which though all partake not alike, some are more deeply plunged into them, some more lightly sprinkled with them, yet all in some measure partake that will live godly in Christ, and are Gods children, 2 Tim. 3.12. Heb. 12.6▪ 7. Rev. 3.19.  
3. Baptism with water, Matth. 3.11. Acts 10 47. I indeed baptise you with water. To these three, some, as I said above add;  
A Fourth, Of the Word, because the word Baptism sometimes comprehends also the Doctrine baptised into, as in Matth. 21.25, 26. Acts 10.37. And indeed the word is compared to water frequently, and therewith God doth besprinkle and wash the souls of men, and makes them clean, as John 15.3. yet I think this rather accompanies the several ways of Baptism before mentioned, as being that that the Baptism of water obliges to, and seals, that which the Spirit properly baptises with, and by, and that which afflictions are ordered to seal home, and bore the ear of the soul unto, then that the Scripture calleth it by itself a Baptism, however this is not it that our enquiry is particularly about, but about that of, or with water. Concerning which,  
2. Secondly, I find the Grounds thereof in Scripture, are either,  
1. More general and fundamental, viz. The grace of God towards poor lost man testified in the gift of his Son to be the Saviour of the world by suffering for its sin, removing its curse, and procuring life, and blessing for it into himself, John 3.16, 17. & 6.51. according to that to Abraham, In thy seed shall all the Nations and Families of the Earth be blessed. This indeed is the main foundation and ground of all Gods gracious deal with, and dispensations to the sons of men, and of all his Ordinances both before, and since his coming; only with this difference that those before his coming were grounded on, and to mind and lead us to him, as one to come; those since, are grounded upon his being actually come in the flesh, and upon his being perfected through his sufferings, for bringing blessing to all families of men, and saving to the utmost all that obey him; that this word of the beginning of Christ is the foundation of Baptising, in all its ways, is clear, Heb. 6.1, 2. For indeed otherwise no Gospel nor Baptism into it, no Dispensation of Spirit to us; Afflictions had been destructions, not corrections; and so in particular its the Foundation of this Baptism we speak of.  
2. More immediately, and particularly; The Commission given for baptising, which I find was twofold.  
1. One to John called then the Baptist, Luke 3.2, 3. called the Baptism of repentance, because joined with a Doctrine detecting the false confidences, and erring ways of the Jews, from Christ the Seed of Abraham, and the freegrace of God in him, and ca●ling them to repent of them, and turn in again to him, Mat. 3.2. John 1.15.29.  
2. The other, to the Disciples and Apostles of Christ, Mat. 28.19, 20. and between these two I find no difference prescribed as to the form of acting, only in these two things. 1. John's was to be practised upon the Jews only, and so such as were before members of the Church of God. The Disciples upon the Gentiles also for discipling them. 2. John's was unto Christ to be revealed to them, and for revealing him while he was but yet about his work for us on the earth: The Disciples was chief after his Ascension into the Name of Christ, as more fully and clearly revealed, and so into the Name, and to the worship of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, more distinctly opened in their Doctrine.  
3. For the Ends of this Baptism, I find it is,  
1. Negatively, Not to distinguish between chaff & wheat, the spiritual, and carnal seed, that's Christ's own work, not his servants, Mat. 3.12 & 22.10, 11, 12. nor to approve the state of every such person as is baptised, & seal to them an undoubted enjoyment of Eternal life, or that they are really, and in Spirit one with God & Christ, or the like.  
2. But Affirmatively. 1. On Gods, and the Administrators part, ministering in the Name of God, and of Jesus Christ, 2 Cor. 5.19, 20.  
1. To hold forth, ratify, and confirm the truth of the Contents of the Gospel, and so to witness to the grace of God in Jesus Christ brought unto men, so John not as a man barely, but as a Preacher and Baptiser witnessed to Christ, and so were the Apostles to witness to him in all their Ministration as God himself doth by them; John 1.7.15.29. & 15.26, 27. 1 John 5.10, 11. yea, as all the Ordinances of God both before, and since his coming, stand upon him as the gift of God's love to man, so as the Cherubims of old to the Mercy-seat, they all look and witness to him, Rom. 3.21. Heb. 10.1. And so in Baptism particularly, God, and the Administer as from God, holds forth intimately the uncleanness that is in men one or other, by their natural birth, or humane actings, the emptiness of all their own righteousness though after the Law; And that in Jesus Christ by his death and resurrection for them there is forgiveness and redemption for them, and blessing, even righteousness and life brought unto them, which in submitting to him, and his Government, they shall certainly receive from him, and that he will by his Word and Spirit, so wash, cleanse, and sanctify them, as to make them meet for fellowship with God, Ephes. 5.25, 26.  
2. To testify and declare, that neither God nor they (in case they be guilful in the receipt of this Ordinance, and grace tendered there with) do hold them bound under the guilt of former, either natural, or actual pollution, so as to hold them out from his Church, or Kingdom, but do remit all past, so as not to refuse to admit them to fellowship with themselves in his Church, its ordinances, and blessings, as they be capable thereof. So I look upon that in Acts 22.16. Wash away thy sins, with Acts 10.28. Mat. 18.18. 2 Cor. 5.19.  
2. On the Baptized's part it is, 1. That he might have the promises held forth, sealed, and ratified to him. 2. To disciple him to Jesus Christ, and so subject them to his Regiment, teaching a way of worship appointed and taught by him, Matth. 28.19, 20. Disciple all the Nations, or Gentiles, baptising them, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, unto the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; that is, unto the receipt, belief, and acknowledgement of the Doctrine of God, as so distinctly made known, and into the worship of him, the only true God, the Father by, through, and as made known by, and in the Son, his Mediation and Doctrine, declared and opened by the Holy Ghost in the Gospel, and in his power working therethrough in the heart, teaching them to observe all things that I command you, etc. Even as the people of Israel in being baptised in the cloud and sea, were obliged to believe and obey Moses, and the Lord as ordering them by him, 1 Cor. 10.12. and so also by being circumcised, Gal. 5.2.3. And herein they that are baptised, are baptised into the death of Christ, to expect all their life therethrough, and follow him therein, and do in this sense put on Christ, Gal. 3.26, 27. that is, An Engagement an Obligation to listen to, and believe on him, as they have him declared, and are capable of listening to, and believing on him, and so a professed subjection to his order, and to worship God by him, and take content in the grace in him, even as being further baptised by his Spirit in the opening the truth to their hearts, and shedding his love abroad therein, they more really and spiritually put him on by way of actual confidence, and faith in him, as their righteousness, rejoicing, and complete redemption and salvation, and his virtues by being conformed to him; and the more yet by being also baptised with trials and afflictions, Rom. 13.14. Ephes. 4.21, 22. Rev. 7.13, 14, 15. 3. To admit the baptised into the Church, and Kingdom of God, and so to have the Name of God and of Christ put upon them. So Matth. 28.19, may also be understood, Baptising them into the Name of the Father, etc. So as that they may have the Name of the true God upon them, be, and be called the people, or Church of God, Christians; as of old the Name of God was by Circumcision put upon Israel; and so also to bring them under the protection, help, and blessing of that Name. For where God's Name is put upon, and owned by any people, God hath respect unto them for his Names sake, and for that cause often spares, helps, and blesses them, that he might glorify his Name upon them, and make other people know, that it is better to be his people, worshippers, and callers upon him, and under his protection, than any other Gods, or powers whatsoever: To this purpose are these Scriptures, Psal. 124.8. Ezek. 20.9, 14. etc. Jer. 14.7. Isai. 48.9. Psal. 115.8, 9 4. And so to distinguish them from all other peoples that are not baptised into the Name of Christ, and receive not his Gospel, as Acts 11.26. Isai. 63.18, 19 And to oblige them to unity in judgement and affection amongst themselves, as 1 Cor. 1.10.13 I beseech you, Brethren, by the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, (which is but one, and is upon you all) that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgement. Not to say, I am of Paul, I am of Apollo's, I am of Luther, I am of Calvin, I am of Arminius; to make and maintain Parties, Sects, and Factions, in the Church; but every one to own truth from, or by any one, and singly follow after it, and all own themselves only obliged to Christ, and his Name, and to every one to each other for that Name sake; whence it follows, were ye baptised into the Name of Paul, that ye should only cleave to him, and neglect, and slight all other the servants of Christ for Paul's sake, and only follow and cry him up. Which might be applied to our divisions, were we baptised into the Name of Luther, or Calvin, or the like, and so to divisions nearer home. The being all baptised into the Name of Christ, should make us all adhere to Christ, and to receive his truth by any one he speaks it by, and love one another for his sake, according to that also, Ephes. 4.3, 4, 5.  
4. Concerning the Subject of Baptism, the thing principally inquired after in this Discourse. 1. I find not any Scripture in so many words say, That Infants are to be baptised, or instancing that the Apostles did baptise Infants. 2. I find not any Scripture expressly or intimately prohibit the Baptism of Infants, or denying that they were baptised. For, 3. I find not any Scripture say, That only believers may be, or were baptised, or none but such as have repent, do confess their sins, profess faith, etc. 4. I find indeed, that in the first practice of Baptism, it being preached to men of age and understanding, with the doctrine it baptised into, they being persuaded to receive that doctrine, and be baptised into it, did some of them confess their sins, 
Mat. 3 6. Acts 8.38, 39  others, profess their faith, And such were baptised, having not ever before they, or their Forefathers been instructed into that doctrine, or been baptised thereinto. But, 5. I find not that either John, or Christ's Disciples ever turned away any that came to be baptised of them. That Position of the Antipedobaptists, That John Matth. 3. turned away the Pharisees and Sadduces, is without proof. It's true, that divers (yea, prabably most) of the Pharisees contemned his Baptism, and rejected the counsel of God against themselves, Luke 7.30. but neither John, nor any other servant of Christ, is ever said to have rejected them therefrom. John in that Matth. 3. indeed takes them up more roughly than he did some other, as more needing it, (and yet Luke tells us, he said the same to the multitude, Luke 3.7.) but withal says, he baptised them. For so are the words, I indeed baptise you, Mat. 3.11.6. Thence I find too, That the Subject of this Baptism was not a truly spiritual seed of Abraham, born of the Spirit, either as administered by John, or Christ's Disciples; for john calls them he baptised, a generation of vipers, an Epithet too harsh for persons truly regenerate, 
Luke 3.7  and says, he baptised them not upon their repentance, or that had repent, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, unto repentance, that they might, or instructing them, that they should repent, Matth. 3.11. And so not upon faith, but saying, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, That they should believe in him that is to come, Acts 19.3, 4. Thence also it's said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not upon, or after usually, but for, or unto the remission of sins: Yea, John plainly intimates, that he admitted chaff as well as wheat into the floor, and such as should be burnt in unquenchable sire, Matth. 3.12. he baptising such as still received the Name of Publicans; yea, all the people, the generality doubtless of them, Luke 7.29. & 3.21. And for Christ's Disciples, they baptised and discipled such as our Saviour that well knew them, tells us, did not believe, John 6.64. yea, such as were in the gall of bitterness, and bond of iniquity after their baptism, Acts 8.23. yea, they brought into the house all they found, good and bad, Mat. 22.9, 10, 11, 12. & 13.47, 48. 7. I find indeed, that once the Gift of the Holy Ghost preceded Baptism, viz. in Cornelius, and his friends, Acts 10.44 48. They being uncircumcised Gentiles in the flesh; and therefore God to demonstrate that they were thenceforth amongst the Gentiles to be admitted into the Church by Baptism without Circumcision, (the want whereof was no impediment to him for having fellowship with them, and to take away scruple from the believing Jews, that they might also admit them to their fellowship without it) poured forth his Spirit first on them, whence Peter says, Can any forbid water, that these should not be baptised that have received the Holy Ghost? But 8. I find that usually persons were baptised before such receipt of the Holy Ghost, as Mat. 3.11. Acts 2.38, 39 & 8.12, 13, 16. Yea, 9 I find that divers being converted had their whole families baptised with them, as Acts 16.31, 33. & 1 Cor. 1.16. And some the faith of whose family before Baptism there is not the least mention of, as Acts 16.14, 15. But now happily it will be said, That here is enough said against Infant-baptism, because it's granted that no Scripture expressly says, that Infants were, or aught to be baptised; which is indeed the great pillar upon which Antipedobaptism leaneth, nor matter they that no Scripture says, they were not, or ought not. For what is not written, say they, is not to be believed, or practised. Concerning which, I propound to further consideration. 1. Whether that Maxim strikes not down one main pillar of theirs. For if what is not written, is not to be believed, then it's not to be believed that all that were baptised were capable of faith, or (rather) actually professed it before Baptism. For it's not written, that either all in the Jaylours' house, or that any in Lydia's house beside herself professed it before Baptism, Acts 16.15.33. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, believed in, ver. 34. is of the singular Number, and agrees with the Jailor, & so is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, rejoiced, and word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (house wholly) is such, as concludes not all in the house actually either in believing, or rejoicing, it may signify as well in, or concerning all his house, as with them all as companions in those actings. The Prophet calls the women with their sucking Infants to assemble solemnly, & to humble themselves before the Lord, Joel 2.12. 14, 15. And Nineveh men & beasts are said, to cry to God, and put on sackcloth; and yet its certain that neither the beasts nor Infants were active in those repentings, & solemn humiliations. And as for Lydia's house, not a word of any of them hearing the word, or believing before Baptism. And the like we might say of the household of Stephanas, 1 Cor. 1.16. Therefore if nothing is to be believed that the word is silent in, why press they upon men to believe that all that were baptised did profess faith, and repentance first, seeing it's more than can be proved? 2. It's to be examined, whether it be true and right or not, that we are to believe, or do nothing but what we have some express Command of Christ, or example of the Apostles in terminis, to warrant us in. I suppose it's not every way currant: for by that rule it's not lawful for a man that is a Christian to take upon him the Office of a Magistrate, or Civil government over Christian people; For neither hath Christ, not any of his Apostles in express terms commanded it, nor did any of the Apostles practise it. The like we might say for keeping the first day of the week, or any one set day for a Sabbath, for translating the Scriptures into our English tongue, and for women's partaking of the Supper, though a thing generally allowed of, even by the Antipedobaptists. If a man of a contentious spirit lifted, he might make as great stirs about it to the disturbance of the Church, as is made about Infant-baptism, for there is neither express Command of Christ, or practise of the Apostles, or Churches in their times in which there is express mention of women's participation of it in all the Scriptures, no more then for Infant Baptism. The institution of the Supper was at the Passover (whereof neither is there any where express mention that any woman ever did eat) with the twelve Apostles or Disciples who are numbered up and named, Mat. 10. and its evident enough they were all men, and it was to them that he said, Take eat etc. and drink ye all of this; and do ye this as oft as ye eat it, etc. in remembrance of me. If any shall say that that all was a representative of the whole Church, he may happily say true but more than by any express Scripture he can prove. I know no one expression in Scripture that says either let women participate of it, or that women did; and that's as much as is mainly urged against Infant Baptism there were its true three Thousand converted in one day, and then they continued in breaking of bread, Acts. 2. but that any of them were women is no more expressed, then that when it's said all the people were bapeized, there were some Infants amongst them, in the fourth of the Acts. vers. 4. where the number of the men is said to be five Thousand (which is conceived to be the number of them in general that were converted, and not only of those that were converted at Peter's second Sermon there mentioned) the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, males, men of the Masculine sex. We find again, Acts. 20.5.6. that the Disciples came together to break bread, but that there were any women amongst them is not expressed, the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of the Masculine gender too, whereas the word for a woman Disciple is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Acts. 9.36. and though its true that we have a Rule, that the less worthy gender is comprehended in the more worthy, yet that neither proves that where ever the Masculine is used the Feminine too is comprehended (for that's evidently false, as might be by hundred of places showed) now that it's so there, unless it were first proved that there were some of that less worthy gender at that meeting. I know again that the Apostle bids that a man should examine himself and so eat and drink in that Supper, and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is utriusque sexus, may be applied and often is to men and women both, yet there is no express mention of women, and forasmuch as it's often used of men only without inclusion of women (as in John. 3.1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. There was a man named Nicodemus, 1 Tim. 2.5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the man Christ Jesus. So in Mat. 19.5. Mar. 10, 7. and Ephes. 5.31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a man shall leave father and mother, and shall be joined to his own wife. So joh. 7.22. On the Sabath day ye circumcise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a man; surely women were neither circumcised, nor had wives. See the like in Heb. 5.1. every high Priest is taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from amongst men. Heb. 7, 8. there they that are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, men, take tithes, and ver. 28. The law made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, men priests. In all which places, it is evident that men signifies men of the male kind only (now seeing it is so I say) any man that would stand as stiffly against this, as some do against Infant baptism, might puzzle his Antagonist to prove that it is there to be taken for men and women both, especially too, seeing he bids them or affirms of them, whom upon examination he admits unto that ordinance, that they do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 annunciare, declare or show forth the Lords death, when they participate, and it's expressly forbidden women in the same Epistle, Chap. 14.34, 35. to speak in the Church, or Congregation. And whereas it may be said again, that the Epistle was writ to all the Saints in Corinth, and all that call upon the Name of the Lord Jesus, it might easily be replied (and truly too) that all things in the Epistle are not therefore applicable to every one of them its writ to, as that in chap. 1.8. That they were enriched with every thing in Christ in all utterance and knowledge and came behind in no gift, seeing he says in chap. 8. All have not this knowledge: and chap. 15. Some of them had not the knowledge of God. Yea its plain, that some things ●n it concern women and not men, as about silence in the Churches, and covering their heads, cap. 11. & 14. And other things men and not women, as in the same Chapters, however its evident that here is no express commandment nor practice of the Churches related, in which there is express mention of women's partaking of the Supper, and I think all Churches agree about it, that its lawful and good that they partake of it. So that the bare want of express command in so many words or of the like express mentioning a thing as practised by the Apostles, is no sufficient ground to conclude a practice sinful, they that make that their rule in approving or condemning practices might make as great disturbances in other things that are warrantable enough as well as in Infant Baptism. For,  
3. It's to be considered further, that Christ is not so circumstantial in his precepts or injunctions of outward mere positive Ordinances as Moses was: Moses, or rather God to and by Moses, sets down to every pin and peg in the Tabernacle, how it must be made, and delivers more circumstantially the commands of Circumcision and Passover as the age and time in which they were to be done, how often and in what form, but so doth not Christ, he hath not by himself or by his Apostles set down at what certain age a man should be Baptised, or eat the Supper, nor in what Form, whether all the body or some part of it must be dipped, or washed in Baptism, how often and upon what times of the year the Supper is to be taken, nor in what gesture. He hath not bounded the Church thus in the circumstances of his Ordinances. Nay he hath not as we noted before, said any where, ye may, or ye may not (in terminis) Baptism Infants, or ye must not Baptism men till they have first believed.  
Now whereas its commonly objected, Object. that this is to make Christ a less perfect and faithful mediator and dispenser of the things of God than Moses; in my mind it's ignorantly spoken, and they that so object consider not in what the faithfulness and perfection of Christ's ministration above Moses standeth. For,  
1. Sure his faithfulness stands in this, 
Sol.  That he discharge all that Office that his Father hath imposed upon him, be it what it will. Now if his Father no where enjoined him to such circumstantiateness in his Ordinances, he is not chargeable with unfaithfulness if he do not so circumstantiate them.  
2. Moses was a servant and amongst servants, and his Law was a ministration of servitude, and though to sons also, yet to sons under age, and nothing different from servants in respect of tutelage, even the most believing of them: 
Gal. 4.1, 2. Heb. 3.2, 5.  But Christ is the Son in his house, in which are sons also not under that or the like tutelage, yea his people are to him in the capacity of a wife or Spouse. Now whether is greater perfection to lead to, and leave at, more liberty in external matters not moral, or to bind up to more servitude and with more charges. Servants and Scholars may have every part of their work set them with more formality or exact mention of every punctilio, especially while under none age, but a wife or son more grown, may be left more to liberty and their discretion, and not so bound and tied up with outward formal precepts. Nor follows it thence, that then we have greater liberty to sin; 
Rom. 4.15.  for, where no Law is, there is no transgression: there is no sin in those things but whit stands in crossing a positive Law, or binding upon men, that as a Law, that he hath left at liberty and not bound us to; these things being applied only to things of external Form and Ordinance, not to the things of the inside and Spirit, and what flows from thence of moral practice, such as the love of God and man with the branches of it, which are due from us, though God should not expressly by word enjoin them to us, there being a Law of Nature and Grace too, to enjoin us thereunto.  
3. But to come more up to the business: In the Law was a less discovery of love, and more of service in carnal things, shadowing out those spiritual things in which the love of God was more brightly to be evidenced: In the Gospel is more discovery of Love, and therefore more spirit, and less carnal service. As the Sun growing higher, the shadows shorten; So the Gospel being now more clear, the shadows of external Ceremonies or Documents are less insisted on.  
4. The time of the Law being as the time of Infancy, and less growth in understanding, and the time of the Gospel as the time of riper years; as men grown can take hints of things, and perceive the Speakers mind in them, when little children need to be told plainly every circumstance: So then, the Ministration fitted to those times needed to be more circumstantial; whereas now having the light and help of those former Documents, some hints in Scripture may declare the Will of Christ to our understanding, where there are no such exact express mentionings of it. So that that Objection vanishes. It's so far from being Antichristianism, and a denying of Christ come in the flesh (as some would have it) to say, that Christ is less exact in the matters of external Forms, rhat it's rather Antichristianism, and a tacit denial of him come in the flesh, to make him so exact in Forms. And yet something of Form he hath left us too, we being not yet come to full age, to perfection in knowledge and fullness of Spirit, but much carnal yet. And I acknowledge and believe, that what Ordinances he left us we are not proudly to despise, slight, altar and change, as if needless to us, or matters to be ordered merely by our wills; but it becomes us to wait upon him in them, not setting up our Posts by his Posts, nor yet being more holy than God and Christ, 
Ezeck 43.8.  and more strict and circumstantial than he hath been in prescribing them to us.  
4. Yea I propound to Consideration that passage, Rev. 11.1, 2. where it's said, A Reed like a Rod was given to John, and the Angel said to him, Rise and measure the Temple of God, and the Altar, and them that worship therein; but the Court that is without the Temple cast out, and measure it not, for it's given to the Gentiles. By the Temple of God, is plainly in the Scriptures meant the Church in union and fellowship with Christ by Faith and Spirit, as he is the Altar and Sacrifice, and they that worship in it are the particular Saints worshipping and adoring God in the Mediation and Sacrifice of Christ, and in the unity of Spirit with Christ and one another; that's the Temple worshipping: These are to be measured with a Reed like a Rod or Sceptre; these are to be cared for peculiarly, and the proportion of them diligently to be taken, both Temple and Worshippers; God will not have an inch of them lost, nor will he have any defect or redundancy in this spiritual Worship; according to this men are to be reckoned of, accounted and esteemed the Zion of God. By the Court without the Temple, is meant that into which all the people come, (for it's an evident allusion to the Temple of old,) the external outward profession with the things of it, the worship of external Services or Forms; this is not to be measured, with such exactness to be insisted on and proportioned to the true Worshippers, as if they were to be known, or men to be reckoned such by that, but to be left out as given to the Gentiles, the profane Heathen in hearts; it's given to them to come in thither, to have the Name of Christ, and of the outward Court, whence (as those things that were done in the outward Court were said to be done 
* 2 Chro. 6.24. Psal. 12 2. with Luke 1.10.  in the Temple) 
† 2 Thes. 2.4.  Antichrist is said to sit in the Temple of God; namely, in the outward Court of external Profession, yea in every various Form, trampling under feet the Zion and Jerusalem of God. And it's considerable to me, whether all the stir and hurly-burly about external Forms and outward Ordinances, is not men's endeavouring to measure the outward Court, and to take it from the Gentiles (that worship not at the Altar and in the Temple) to whom yet it's given: and if that be not, what it is I would be willingly informed.  
5. I consider, that things not plainly expressed in the Scriptures by way of Precept or Example, may yet be couched therein; and the truth and lawfulness of things may be rightly deduced from places that plainly in words affirm them not. As for instance; Christ proves out of the Books of Moses to the Sadduces (who are said to have accounted no part of the Scripture Canonical but them) that the dead shall rise again; whereas in all those Books there is not one expression of the dead rising: He proves it as contained in the bowels of that saying of God to Moses, I am the God of Abraham, 
Mat. 22.32.  and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And so the Apostle proved from the Scriptures the needlessness of Circumcision to the believing Gentiles, though there is not an expression openly saying it through all the Prophetical Writings; but he shows it by considering the ground and end of Circumcision, and some other truths of Scripture whence he deduces it. The like may be said of women's partaking of the Supper, and a Christian man being a Magistrate. Yea the very Denyers of Infant Baptism take, or pretend to take, this course in what they say against it. For there is not (as we said before) one express saying, that Infants should not be baptised, or that none but Believers actually, or such as profess Faith and Repentance should be baptised; or that all rhat were baptised, did so believe or profess: only they speak of some Instances of former practice of the Apostles baptising such, from whence they draw those deductions, and with which they make a great noise, and easily take silly women and simple people that cannot see into the Scripture depths, nor well understand reason according to Scripture: Though they may exclaim against deductions in others, yet they are full of them themselves. It's not said (in terminis) Baptise Infants, or that the Apostles did so, therefore they may not be baptised; which is but like that, It's not expressed that women received the Supper in the Apostles times, or that Christ instituted it for them also, therefore they ought not to eat of it: Or that of the Sadduces; Moses no where mentions the Resurrection of the dead in all his Writings, therefore from his doctrine it cannot be proved.  
6. Things couched in Scripture grounds, and thence deduceable, are no less truths or warrantable than truths plainly expressed. As it's as very a truth couched in Moses his Writings, that Abraham, and so the dead, shall arise, as it is in the Apostle's plain saying it, though not so easily by every one perceived. And so, that Jesus is the Christ, is a truth as really couched in the Prophetical Writings, as if it had been in so many words expressed, though there is no such plain expression in all the Prophets. The like may be said for Justification by Faith without the Works of the Law, as Paul hath thence gathered and proved substantially, though such an express saying is in none of them Scriptures to be found. It's true, by the Apostle they are made evident to be truths, but not made truths by his evidencing them; they were there couched and contained before his searching them and bringing them out, nay they could not rightly have been deduced thence, if they had not formerly been there couched. Now they that see not the truths couched in say, nor pierce to any truth but what is plain in the saying, they cry out that such things are falsehoods that they cannot there see; not because they are so, but because they see them not as they lie there couched. As the Sadduces clamored against the Pharisees, that their doctrine of the Resurrection of the dead was an Error, not delivered to them from God by Moses their Lawgiver, because they could not see it in his Writings, though there it was, and there Christ found it: and as the false Apostles clamored against Paul, about the doctrine of Justification by Faith without the Works of the Law and Circumcision, upon the like grounds, and with as little reason. And this Consideration might at least stop the clamorousness of men, that, with the fool, 
Prov. 14.16.  rage and are confident upon this ground, merely that the Scripture hath no such open and manifest expression, lest by their rashness they deny truth contained more hiddenly in the Scriptures, and trouble the Churches of God needlessly, as the Sadduces did. I grant, it's true, that there is no truth couched in Scripture, and thence to be deduced, that doth contradict or evacuate any plain express truth of Scripture: any collection from Scripture contradicting the open saying of Scripture, is to be rejected as not rightly deduced; for the Scriptures, though in some places they may seem, yet in no place doth deny or contradict itself in other places: But many truths are couched in Scripture, that are not so openly expressed in plain say as some others be, as we before instanced. I conceive if those called Anabaptists did seriously consider this (and yet this is as plain and undeniable a Truth as any can be pleaded for) it would make them more sober towards others in this point of Infant Baptism, and not so vainly to vapour, and so proudly to insult, as some of them do in their own conceptions of the undenyableness of this ground for denying it, viz. that it's not plainly expressed in any Scripture Instance or Precept.  
And now let us in the next place see if any ground for it may be found couched in the Scriptures: and therein first of all let us view the Commission given by Christ to his Apostles for Gentile-Baptism.  
1. That Commission we find in Mat. 28.19, 20. All Power in Heaven and Earth is given unto me, go ye therefore disciple ye all the Gentiles, baptising them into the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you, etc. Where, first, we have to be noted, the ground of this Commission, in Vers. 18. All Power is given to me in Heaven and Earth; that is, Though as the eternal Word I had all Power over all Creatures before, they being all made by me, Joh. 1.2, 3 Col. 1.16. yet could I not with consistence with my Truth or Holiness order all of them, or any of lost mankind, as now upon the account of my Death and Resurrection I am in the nature of man impowered to do: had I not died and risen for men, I must have destroyed them all for ever; but as virtually upon this account before, so actually now and in the nature of man am I invested with Power and Authority, as of Lordship over all Creatures, to order and dispose them as I please agreeable to my Father's Will; so over Mankind, to help and save them, and make all things subservient to my designs about them: Therefore also have I Power to make new Orders, and grant out new Commissions what and to whom I please, as also to protect and defend them that I employ in the execution of my said Orders and Commissions: Therefore I command, require and commissionate you to be my Servants and Messengers in the Work that I please to enjoin you; Go ye therefore. And further, For as much as by virtue of my Death and Resurrection for all men, I have ransomed all men, even all the Nations of the world out from under the power of the sentence to death and condemnation, to which the Covenant, broken by Adam as soon as made with him almost, did bind them over; so as that now, that Sin and Law notwithstanding, you and what ever Death by occasion thereof falling upon them, I can save any of them in looking up to me; and for so much as that is the way to their life and happiness, the only way to it, that they be obedient and subject to my Government, and believe on me; * God having given all Nations to me for mine inheritance, 
Psal. 28 8. Isai. 49.7. Acts 4.12. 1 Cor. 1.21. & Joh. 1.4.5.9.  and the utmost ends of the Earth for my possession, and me to be his Salvation to the ends of the Earth, No other Name given under Heaven by which they can or may be saved: and for as much also as the light of the knowledge of God by me as the eternal Word, in the fullness of time to be made flesh suffer and die, held forth to them formerly in the Wisdom of God, they by wisdom knew not, but the light shining in darkness they do not comprehend: It's therefore my pleasure to send a plain Declaration of my Mind unto them, and not only to reserve that privilege to the people of Israel, as formerly, (the partition wall between them and all other Nations being broken down by my sufferings.) 
Ephes. 2.15.  Therefore, Go ye, my chosen servants, and Ambassadors, Disciple all the Gentiles, baptising them into the Name, etc.  
Here than secondly, we have the Commission itself, wherein baptism was first by our Saviour appointed to the Gentiles, as a medium of their being discipled to him. I confess baptism was practised before, and that too upon all the people, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Luke 3.21. people of every sort at least, a word large enough to include infants too, Deut. 31.12. Luke 9.13. with Matth. 14.21. Judas 5. but to our purpose this commission is more pertinent, because it was given for the baptising of the Gentiles, and discipling them, and so its rather to be read, All the Gentiles, (as the same phrase, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is translated in other places, as Acts 15.17. Rom. 15.11. 2 Tim. 4.17. and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gentiles, commonly) they having sufficient warrant before for discipling and baptising the Jews in the former practising of baptism by John, and themselves upon them, and the commission given them, Matth. 10. when the Gentiles were expressly excluded. No other being to be baptised, but such as were of the visible Church of God before, Children of the Kingdom, upon whom the name of God was called, and so baptism was not to them the way of taking into the Church and Kingdom of God, but for further instructing, and taking in further them that were somewhat instructed in it before: for that's clear that the people of the Jews were already in the visible Church, the Vineyard of God, and Children of the Kingdom, as in Matth. 8.12. & 21.42, 43. The hedge was yet about them, and the clouds reigned upon them, etc.  
But now unto the Gentiles, (not fore-proselited and circumcised) baptism was the way of taking them in, and declaring and owning them to pertain to the Church: nor do we read of any Gentile, or Heathen, coming into the visible Body and Company of the Church, to be accounted of them by any other way or medium of outward institution after Christ's resurrection, circumcision being not practised upon them and theirs in their admission, as was formerly used in proseliting them. Indeed that the false Apostles stood for, and would have had the way of their entrance and admission still: in which two it is observable, that they make no mention of circumcising their infants, but that they, the Disciples, aught to be circumcised, as was the manner of Moses; and Paul speaking to the Galathians, says, They constrain you, and would have you to be circumcised, Gal. 6.12, 13. not mentioning infants, and yet it is certain that it was the manner of Moses to circumcise the infant male of all that came in, and so by that rule they are included under the words You, and Disciples also; they were reckoned as parts of them in the external profession. A man might as colourably wrangle and plead that the false Apostles desired only the circumcision of the actual believers of their Gentiles, and not of their infants, because they never mention their infants, and because Paul says, But they desire to have you circumcised; as that they baptised such only, and not infants, because there infants are not expressed in the mention making of their baptism. If the Apostle include their infants in the word [you] speaking of the way of admission into the Church which the false Apostles pleaded for, than I see no reason or colourable ground to exclude them, when they speak of the way in which the true Apostles did admit them. Nor find I any such argument used by the Apostle against the Gentiles circumcision (which yet were it as the Antipedobaptists say, would have been a good one) as this, viz. that in case we admit circumcision according to the custom of Moses, than we must bring in infants too into the Church again, which are as uncapable of being members of the Church now, as dogs or swine, (as some of the Antipedobaptists are ready over rashly to say,) this would presently have struck the nail on the head; for they that were according to the will of God circumcised, were taken thereby into the Church of God, the Kingdom of Heaven, according to the outward visible Court. Had this been a known principle or maxim amongst the professors of Christ, and had Christ and his Apostles taught them such doctrine, as that children are to be no part of the Church instituted by him, there had been no ground for the false Apostles to have stood upon circumcision after the manner of Moses. And no doubt but the Apostles would have made use of such an argument against them, had there been such a Maxim, seeing it would easily and evidently have confuted them, and served to settle the Church in peace in that hot contention. The exclusion of children from admission into the visible Church, would have broken in pieces the ordinance of circumcision, that appointing all the male children to be circumcised, and so to be admitted into the visible Church with their parents. The general silence of this argument against them in so hot a contest, and when the Apostles writ so much to the believers to settle their minds against circumcision, and its doctrine, as also of the Jews, and false Apostles, taxing the Apostles with casting out, and rejecting children, is to me as good or better an argument to prove that there was no such Maxim, as the exclusion of infants from the visible Church, than the general silence of infants baptised is to prove that there was no infants admitted by baptism. But to return to the Commission for discipling the Gentiles, Go, disciple all the Gentiles, etc.  
The Antipedobaptists find two Arguments here to exclude children.  
1. That our Saviour says, they are first to be discipled before they be baptised, and that children cannot be.  
2. That the word them, [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] agrees not with [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] Nations, or Gentiles, it being neuter, but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, masculine; but it rather agrees with the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, included in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, them, Disciples. Of these two things I confess they make a great noise, but when they are examined there appears no cause for it. For,  
1. To the first it may be said, not only, 1. The order of words is not always the order of actions therein spoken, for if so, then John baptised before he preached (which they will in no wise admit:) For it is said, Mark 1.4. That John was in the wilderness baptising and preaching the baptism of repentance. If the order of words show the order of actions, than John baptising before he preached the doctrine of baptism, baptised some that did not believe that doctrine; for how should they believe it before it was preached, and so by that way of arguing they get nothing, and yet this they often make use of, as again in that of Mar. 16.16. He that believeth and is baptised, shall be saved. See, say they, believing is before baptising, no man must be baptised till he have first believed, not considering that by the same way of arguing, men must first confess with their mouth to salvation that Christ is the Lord, before they hearty believe to righteousness that God hath raised him from the dead; because such is the order of words, Rom. 10.9. If thou confess with thy mouth that Jesus is the Lord, and believe in thy heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. And yet who sees not that that should be a vain confession of his Lordship, and not to salvation, as ver. 10. that proceeds from a heart, not first believing that Lord. And by the like way of reasoning, when our Saviour says, Joh. 10.16. Other sheep I have that are not of this fold, them must I also bring, and they shall hear my voice; because he first mentions bringing them, before their hearing his voice: it should follow that they must first be brought by him, (namely, to that fold, as follows, and there shall be one fold, etc.) before they hear his voice. Well then, let us so take it, but by what manner of action must they then be brought by him to the fold, that is, to his Church, whereof his Disciples were the members: if not by causing them to hear his voice, for that follows after their being brought, (though usually to that he himself goes out to them with his servants, to call and bring them in, Prov. 9.3, 4. with Luke 14.21.) then sure it is by his servants baptising them in their infancy, before they be capable of hearing him, for by what other action men should be brought to his fold before hearing him, I cannot tell, and if that be the action to go before, let it pass for an impertinent place to our business, but so we shall get much more by the bargain, if not, let them show us how else he brings them before they hear him, or else quit this manner of reasoning from the order of words. But I say not only this may be replied to it: but also,  
2. It's not true, that Christ bids them make them Disciples first, and then afterward baptise them. For the words are not going Disciple and baptise, but going Disciple, baptising, etc. And it is usual in such manner of speaking, for the Participle to declare the manner of or some mediate act unto the thing spoken of in the precedent Verb: as to give some instances. The Apostle, Tit. 1.11. says of the Circumcision, That they subvert whole houses, teaching things that they ought not, etc. was not teaching things they ought not the way by which they subverted whole houses? not that they first subverted them, and then taught things they ought not; but first taught things they ought not, and then, yea thereby, subverted them: so in the same Chapter, describing a Bishop, he says, He must be blameless as the Steward of God, not selfwilled, etc. a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate, holding fast the words of life. Will any rational man say, that he must first be all those things before he hold fast the word, or rather, that this is the way to be all that, holy, blameless, just, etc. So Heb. 12.1, 2. Let us run with patience the race set before us, looking unto Jesus. Must men first run with patience before they look to Christ, or rather is not this looking the way and means to that patiented running. Running with patience 2 springs from that looking to Jesus, 
The like may be seen in Matth. 14.25. and 15.9 30. and 20.8. and 21.22. & 22.12.29. etc.  not e contra, So 2 Tim. 3.13. wicked men, & deceivers shall wax worse & worse, deceiving & being deceived. Deceiving & being deceived, is that in which, & by which they wax worse & worse. The like is in the Commission formerly given them for preaching to the Jews, Mat. 10.7. Going, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Preach, saying, the Kingdom of God is at hand, and ver. 5. He sent them away charging, or having charged them, saying, Into the way of the Gentiles, enter not. I might multiply like speeches to this purpose, Ephes. 5.15, 16.26. and 6.14.15.16. etc. but I shall only add one or two of their own urging, viz. Matth. 3.6. The people were baptised of John in Jordan confessing their sins. Do they gather thence, that because confessing their sins, follows these words, they were baptised, that therefore they did not confess their sins, till after they were baptised, or that men ought not so to do till then, or rather, do they not say, that they first confessed their sins, and upon that were baptised; and so that the Participle following the Verb, holds forth an act done before the act spoken of in the Verb. So when it's said, Luke 7.29. The Publicans justified God, being baptised with the baptism of John, say they, not thence that the being baptised was the way in which they justified God. I might mention also, Acts 8.3. Saul made havoc of the Church, entering into every house, haling out men and women, and committing them to prison. Can we not have understood such a speech as this, Go, proselyte the Gentiles, circumcising them, teaching them to observe all the Law of Moses: And can we not in like manner understand this, Go, disciple all the Gentiles, baptising them, and teaching them to observe all things, that I have commanded you. Disciple them in this way, viz. Baptising them into the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and teaching them to observe what I have commanded you. So that its evident, that the phrase disciple, Baptising, holds forth, for infers at least not such understanding of what is said, as that they ought first first to be discipled, by teaching and brought to actual believing that were to be baptised with water by them.  
To the second, that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not agreeing in Gender, with the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but rather with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, instructs us, that only Disciples, such as profess faith and repentance ought to be baptised, it's very weak. For the Scripture usually puts the following Adjective, or Relative to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Masculine Gender, as having more respect to the nature of the thing signified, viz. mankind, or Gentiles, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, then to the word signifying, as in Acts 13.48. it hath for its following Adjectives, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, both of the Masculine Gender. In Acts 15.17. we find, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in Chap. 21. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In Chap. 26.17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In Chap. 28.28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In Ephes. 4.18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Rev. 2.26. and 19.15. and 20.8. in all those places its relative following it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and those are all the places save one or two in which the Relative to that word is perspicuously discernible in its Gender: so that unless we will say, that the Gentiles which Paul was sent to, and that had their understandings darkened, and that Christ shall rule over with an iron rod, and that Satan shall deceive, and gather together to battle against the Saints, are all people fore-discipled, believers, or professors of faith and repentance, that observation of the change of Gender will do nothing.  
Now these two main Fortresses of the Antipedobaptists being smitten down, the Commission will not prove their assertion, nor hinder the taking in of Infants unto Baptism. For now it appears, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, all the Gentiles were to be discipled by baptism and instruction. So that this word is as large as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to include women to the Supper, to include children to this discipling, and baptism; for there is no doubt but there were children too of the Gentiles and Heathen; and of them there is no exception or exclusion. They were to bring into the house all that they found, as in Matth. 22.9.10. And it may be minded, that neither here nor elsewhere it's said, He that believes shall be baptised, and till a man believes let him not be baptised, but going disciple all the Gentiles, baptising them, etc. So that we may note, that the Apostles had authority and commission for discipling any Gentile, baptising him into the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, etc. Their Doctrine and Baptism concerned all, and were free for all, and aught to have been submitted unto by all without exception of any one or other, and to disciple all thus to the utmost of their power given them they were to endeavour. And this agrees with, and is confirmed by, yea, and in part is grounded upon that truth delivered by the Apostle in 2 Cor. 5.19 where the Apostle writes the Commission given to them of God, with the reason and end of it. God (saith he) was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and hath put in us the word of reconciliation. Now we therefore as Ambassadors for Christ, as if God did beseech you by us we pray you in Christ's stead be ye reconciled unto God. In which we are to mind, whom God was reconciling, and to whom he sent his servants to bring them in, and that is the world, which compared with Rom. 11.12, 15. appears to be Gentiles, the residue of the world beyond and beside his people the Jews. 2. It's to be minded wherein their enmity stood, and what there reconciling is there spoken of, now their enmity lay both on their parts, especially in that they knew not, nor regarded God, nor observed his Law, and ways given to his people, nor came in to be one with them: and then on his part in this, that he admitted them not to fellowship with him in the Commonwealth of Israel, and privileges of his people, and the reconciling them stood in this, That 1. He in Christ broke down the partition wall, the Law of Ordinances that stood against them in their uncircumcised condition, & kept them from the privileges of his Church, and he imputed not their trespasses so against them, to them, as to exclude them any longer, but opened his Kingdom to them also equally as to the Jews, that were naturally as by descent from Abraham, and by Circumcision therein, yea sent out his servants to invite them to come in to his house, and feast therein prepared, and to be one of those that refused not their own mercy out of fullenness amongst the Jews already therein. 
Matth. 22.9.  Now whom did the partition wall the enmity from the Commandments in the Law of Ordinances debar from the Commonwealth of Israel, and so from fellowship with God therein? were they not all the Gentiles, one and other, all the uncircumcision in the flesh? And whom did Christ break it down for? was it not the World, the whole Body of the Gentiles? Was not, and is not the Law of Ordinances taken from them all, so as that the passage into his House and Commonwealth is free and open for them all: And whom then was God in Christ reconciling to himself, not imputing their trespasses, 
Mark. 6.15.  was it not the world, all the Gentiles? Did he not send his servants with the Word of his Kingdom to them all? to hold it forth to all, to every creature, to all Nations, without limitation and restriction, and to reconcile ministerially them, that God in Christ (as in him the partition wall is broken down, and the enmity slain) was reconciling: which Ministry of Reconciliation is executed in discipling them, baptising them, etc. And shall we now set up a partition wall between the Church of God, and any Gentiles that shut not out themselves by their wilful rejection? Or shall we say, That Infants are not Gentiles, or are not of the World when God was in Christ reconciling, and to whom his servants were sent: Did Christ leave a partition wall yet standing between the Church of God, and them, that they should not take them in into unity and fellowship with them? If the servants of Christ should keep them out of, and at a distance from the Church, sure they should be far from putting in execution their Commission for reconciling, discipling and baptising them. Consider this seriously, and so if the Antipedobaptists deny not Christ come in the flesh, and to have broken down the partition wall, or at least that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, and bringing them to himself in his Church, and Kingdom.  
But then it's objected, that then the practice of the Spaniards forcing Droves of Indians to Baptism is warrantable, Object. 1 
Mr. Tom.  and that the Disciples needed to have done nothing else in observance of that Command of discipling, but to baptise, which would serve for a good plea for non-officiating and non-preaching Priests.  
But neither of these follow thence. Not the first, Answ. 1 for though they had Commission to disciple all the Gentiles, baptising them, etc. yet had they no warrant to force any to it, nor did God furnish them with power thereunto, nor had they in times passed to proselyte by force any the Inhabitants of the Nations, they were instructed into that before. For when Christ first sent them out, he bid them tender their peace to men, and if a house was worthy, that is, if there was a Son of peace there, one that peace prevailed with, their peace should rest upon him: yea, if the Housholder did accept their message, and submit unto it, their peace was to rest upon him, and his house; as appears by comparing Matth. 10.12, 13. with Luke 10.5, 6. and 19.9. but in case any house or City received them not, then were they to departed from it, and shake off the dust of their feet against it, for a testimony against them, that they came to disciple them, and bring them into subjection to the faith of Jesus Christ, but they refused it: which direction also we find that they practised, Acts 13. 51. and 16.14, 15.32, 33. etc. so that here is no room for allowing that forcing: we must distinguish between the persons whom they had authority to disciple, baptising, and the course they were to take for excercise and execution of that authority, and then that Objection vanishes.  
Nor 2. Follows it, that then the Apostles then, or the Gospel-preachers now, had nothing else to do for putting that Commission in practice, but outwardly to baptise; for they had something to do to bring them that were not of themselves acquainted with this, and that were naturally averse to it, to be willing to yield up themselves, and their children to walk in this way, and follow after this Name unto which they were to baptise them: They must use persuasions perhaps to Kings and Rulers, not to use their power to resist their discipling of their Subjects to this Name, and to subject themselves, and all their government to it, and so to Masters of Families, and Parents, to yield up themselves unto this Name to be baptised unto it, and to observe the things of it, and yield up their little ones also to be brought up therein; for that's plain they were to take none away by force from under any of their parents, but as they yielded up themselves, or was yielded up to the institution and nurture of the Lord by them: yea, in that it's said, Disciple, baptising them into the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; it's plain enough, that they were to declare and unfold that Name to men that they might know whereto they baptised them, and theirs, and to what they were to instruct and bring up their children, which to men grown must be before baptising them with water, as was the constant practice of the Disciples formerly, and of our Saviour himself, Joh. 4.1. yea, and of the Pharisees too in proseliting men to their religion, though they proselited their children also with them. But this Objection implies, that the framers of it thought there was none but Infants in the world, and so none that could or would oppose their endeavours to disciple them, when Christ gave out this Commission; or that this Baptism was not for discipling them to the Name of Christ, and so to be done as a means to bring the parties baptised to be subject to his Government, externally at the least, and to profess his Doctrine; nor minded they what follows in the Commission, that they are to teach them too to observe Christ's Commands, as of old the Proselytes, even after Circumcision, were to be taught those of Moses. But for seeing better into this, let us consider a little the force of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, disco: we translate it to teach, but not so properly, as all that well have minded the force of the word confess. It's to disciple, to make scholars, or to bring to learn, so that they may become Disciples, and so the Apostles were to endeavour to bring all Nations, or all the Gentiles to that, any of them they might bring to it, and all of them ought so far to have become subject to their Ministration. We find that word twice more used in the active voice, but in neither place is it evident how far it was effectual in the persons acted upon. It's used Acts 14.21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Discipling a good pretty company. They preached the Gospel there, and this was the effect of it, that a good many were discipled, but what, or who, or how far it had effect upon them, is not expressed. It's probable there were divers thereby convinced, and persuaded to join themselves, and possibly their families too, as well as in other places to the Church. It's used again, Matth. 27.57. of Joseph of Arimathea, of whom it's said, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; We translate it, He was a Disciple to Jesus, and that's a truth confirmed by John, Chap. 19.38. But whether that be all the truth, I question, seeing the word is never otherwhere used in that Neuter sense, I propound it to consideration whether we might not as well translate it, He also (though secretly) discipled to Jesus: that is, was such a Disciple as that he also drew in others with himself to him: but which way soever we read it, it's neither any thing for or against the business we have in hand, only I thought good to note it. Once we meet with the passive word, viz. Matth. 13.52 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Every Scribe discipled, brings out of his treasure things new, and old. Where certainly the word Discipled signifies well instructed, made a good Scholar, as it were. For this is a word that hath reference to School affairs, teaching, and learning, and is comprehensive of many acts; as he that puts, or by persuasion prevails with another to put his son to school, though but for the present to be kept in order, yet with intention and design to have him learn as he grows up, doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, disciple, make him a Scholar, as we use to say, and he that instructs such a one so subjected to him, doth also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, disciple, though it be but in the first Rudiments or Elements of learning; and he that doth lead up such a one as in some continuance hath learned the first Elements, and brings him to be proficient, and Master of the Science he instructs him in, doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 still, disciple in a higher and further act; and such a one is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and so certainly is that to be taken in Matth. 13.52. as our Translators also imply in rendering it, Every Scribe instructed unto the Kingdom. So that I conceive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to disciple, contains all the acts from the first to the highest, from the bringing to be subjected to one for learning, to his bringing up to perfect understanding of the things taught, and so it seems to me that in this of Matth. 20.19. it's in that capacity to be taken; and that our Saviour expresses this discipling in all that follows, baptising them, and teaching them to observe all that he commanded: though all this could not be done in so little time as they usually took before Baptism, 
See Act. 16 34.  nor in their baptising them, though that was one act in the performance of it. The very bringing them into the Church, and therein subjecting them to its nurture and instructions, is a discipling them, as appears by Luke 14.21. where this Commission is spoken of in other terms, and for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here, there it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, bring them in hither; and the opening the lessons and mysteries therein to be taught, is still a discipling, or making further Disciples; though that be done by many steps and degrees, as they are able to receive it, till they come to be perfect men in growth and understanding: and even then they are but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, discipled one's too, as we before noted. Whence it appears, that the Apostles and Gospel-Preachers now have more work than the objection supposes: but yet in our usual speaking, the subjecting people to the School of Christ, or to the Church-state, Nurture and Government, is a discipling of them; as we call the bringing a child to school, and to the care, government, and nurture of it, the making him a Scholar: And so in that Acts 14.21. it's applied to the first subjecting men to the way of Christ, as it must of necessity have that in it too in this Matth. 28. Now the Apostles were about this work of discipling in all their preaching, and whole employment; they were endeavouring to disciple, though yet in their teaching, and holding forth the Gospel only; they are not said to have discipled those that rejected it, though they held it forth to them: But it's called discipling, as with reference to, so when accompanied with this effect of bringing men into the Church of Christ, and so putting upon them the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: and upon such their Commission was actually, and more or less effectually put in execution and practice: and such were denominated usually Disciples, a word too of a large latitude in its signification, as the word Scholar is, for we use to call him a Scholar that is put to school, and him that hath begun to learn, though primarily it signifies such a one as hath received, understood, and hath attained to ripe knowledge of the things that have been taught him. So in Scripture they that professed the Doctrine of Christ, and submitted to be his followers, and to learn of him, are called his Disciples, though yet very rude and raw; yea, we read of some that have that Name given them, who yet know not the Alphabet of Christian Religion, Acts 19.3. knew not what they were baptised into, viz. to believe on him that came after John, nor had so much as heard (by their own confession) whether there was a Holy Ghost, or no. And some that turned back from him, when they came at an hard lesson are called Disciples till then, John 6.64. Though yet a Disciple indeed, is one that continues in Christ's word, John 8.31, 32. and denies himself, to that purpose, in the exercise of, or leaning to his own reason, where it crosses Christ's instructions, and the following his own designs, affections and will, where it hinders the practice of his teachings, Matth. 16.24.  
Now whether that Name ever include Infants, may be a question. In Acts 11.26. it's said, The Disciples were in Antioch first of all called Christians. It's very probable, that they called all brought up in the nurture of the Lord, and who thereby were distinguished from the rest of the world, Christians, as the followers of the Pharisees were from their very youth, 
So the Infants of Protestants are included in the name Protestants, the chidrens, or infants of Papists, are called papists to●.  and at beginning called Pharisees, as Paul saith of himself, being the Son of a Pharisee, Acts 23.6. from his youth, and from the beginning he lived a Pharisee, Acts 26.5. And the Pharisees discipled others to themselves, whom they called also Proselytes, Matth. 23.15. And yet it was their manner to proselyte little Babes too with their Parents. Now that Christians also were, and are to bring up their children indefinitely, in the way and nurture of Christ, is plain in Ephes. 6.4, 5. Again in Acts 15.10. Peter under the name of Disciples, upon whose neck the false Apostles would have put the yoke of Circumcision, comprehends their Infants; for its a known thing that they would have had their children circumcised in Infancy too, for that was the manner of Moses. Why tempt ye God, (saith he) in putting a yoke upon the Disciples necks, which neither we, nor our Fathers were able to bear? Nor matters it whether the false Apostles pressed Circumcision upon others, than Disciples, perhaps they might endeavour too to circumcise the unconverted and unbrought in Gentiles; yet that's more than is mentioned. It's to the purpose, that Peter pleads only the Church's cause, that were therein to be yoked, and that yoke was inevitably to fall upon the children of the Believers with them, who now should have been brought up in the nurture of Moses, and to the observation of his Law; whereas otherwise, they were only to be under the yoke and nurture of Christ; and he calls all those in the Churches thus to be yoked Disciples: Nor is that valid, that some say, that the act of circumcising was not the yoke, but the opinion of its necessity; for neither is that true, that the opinion of its necessity, was the yoke put upon their necks, that was rather put into them, then upon them, and made way for their taking the yoke. The yoke was the subjection to circumcision, and the observation of the Law thereupon, as so urged, Gal. 5.3. and this they were to put upon Infants, circumcising them with that intention, and to that end, that they might be subjected to the Law in their after training up. It's true, they felt not the weight of the yoke put upon them, till they being come to understanding, saw the greatness and strictness of it, and began to carry it, but upon them it was put even in their Infancy, and as they grew up, they also felt it. Again, in Acts 20.30. it's said, some would 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, By speaking perverse things, seek to draw away Disciples after them. Draw them away, to wit, from the Church, whose before they were. Now compare this with Tit. 1.11. and there the Apostle tells us how far that extends often, They draw away even 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whole houses, or families. Now that they should always happen upon such as have no children, in them is very absurd, and foolish to conceive, and contrary to all experience: yea, that this especially lights upon the little children who knows not: For as for children or servants fore-principled and instructed, there they often fail, (though often they prevail with such also) but for the little ones in the tuition of their Parents, and as yet but rasae tabulae, empty leaves, fit to have any form of instruction imprinted upon them, they are more sure to be subverted and overturned from the right way, (in which they were destined to be instructed) in the subversion of their Parents from sound Doctrine; and especially this was true of that Sect of the Circumcision there in particular specified, They subverted children too from the Christian institution to the Jewish. Again in John 9.28. We find the Jews affirming themselves to be the Disciples of Moses, (though yet they mistook him, as much as many Christians mistake Christ, who yet pretend to be zealous Disciples to him.) Now how were they made so, but in Infancy, by circumcision, and thereby subjection to his Law and institution, from their youth, in that strict way of the observation of his precepts, as understood by them. Surely the very Infants of the Jews, and Pharisees, were discipled, gradatim, into Moses, and so they were said of old to be baptised unto him in the cloud and sea: so that at least this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Discipling, will reach to Infants also, they are as capable of being baptised to Christ from the beginning, as the Jewish children were of discipling unto Moses, and to be educated in that way, in which it pleased God then to administer the knowledge of himself: yea, they are fit also to be doctrinated, and apt to receive instruction, as they grow up to years of discretion, than men of years that have been otherwise principled, and have much to say against such Doctrine: Thence our Saviour makes them the patterns to which others of age are to be in that respect conformed. Except ye be converted, 
Math. 18 3.  and become humble as a little child, ye cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. And again, He that receiveth not the Kingdom of Heaven as a little child, (viz.) as a little child receives it; for such is the force of such speeches, (as I shall show anon) cannot enter thereinto. Little children, as they have not those great capacities that men of years have, so neither are their judgements so forestalled, or their affections so fore-byassed, with, or to other doctrines, or principles, than those of the Gospel, that men of riper years before the Doctrine of Christ be propounded to them have; nor have they those strong conceits of themselves, and their knowledge otherwise, and therefore more hope of them, then of those grown up, that conceive themselves wise, and yet are not rightly principled; according to that, 
Prov. 27.12.  Seest thou a man wise in his own eyes, there is more hope of a fool, (one that as yet knows nothing at all) then of him. Unless such a one fall back to his first childlike humility, and docibleness, to receive the things of the Kingdom, he cannot enter it: Remarkable is that of Isaiah to this purpose, Isa. 28.9. To whom shall he teach knowledge, and whom shall he cause to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, them that are drawn from the breasts. Besides what principles they then suck in, they are apt to hold fast, according to that, Quo semel est imbuta recens servabit odorem— Testa diu. And that Teach a child (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Infant) in the way that he should go, and he will not departed from it when he is old. The Gospel-Preachers had much ado to persuade grown men to come into the Christian School, wherein Christ is the great Teacher, to be his Disciples, (as such are hardly yet persuaded to learn any lesson of his contrary to what they have formerly apprehended.) A great (if not the greatest) part of the difficulty of the Apostles work stood in that, because they knew not the Name they would have them stoop to; and the doctrine they would have them learn, was novel to them, they had much to say against it, as that their wisemen, Forefathers, and Rulers, neither knew, nor approved it, and the rest of the world would hate them for it, etc. thence they were not, nor would be baptised unto Christ, till they had first assented to the Doctrine. It was their being convicted of the truth, that made them willing to leave the world, and its doctrines, and become Scholars or Disciples unto Christ, and to be initiated under his Government and Teaching. But now it's not so with children born to them that are discipled, their Christian Parents are bound to bring them up in the nurture of the Lord, and they to receive it as they are capable, which also usually they are apt to do, at least so far as to the external profession, and acknowledgement of Christ and his Name, if it be carefully, as is required, put to them; and that profession and acknowledgement with orderly walking, is as much, or more than divers of them had, whom John and the Apostles baptised, Matth. 3.7.11. Acts 8.13. Chap. 19.3, 4.  
Therefore also it seems to me a great absurdity, to require that beforehand of them for their matriculating, discipling, or receiving in that is urged upon those that have been otherwise principled, and have much to oppose which they have not; and to bring an heap of proofs, instancing what such so fore-principled did, to be a rule for those that are not so. It is as inept as if they should allege the Jews proceed in requiring confessions, and acknowledgements of them that came unto them from the Gentiles, to show that the like was requirable of their Infants before their Circumcision; or like as if a man should say, that because God requires of grown men actual repentance, faith, and invocation of him to salvation; therefore he requires them of Infants too, and so that they dying before may not be saved: If God dispense with their non-acting those things through incapacity, and yet saves them, why should it seem irrational that he dispense with the want of such acknowledgements, or with the want of those things themselves, to admit them into the outward Court of his Kingdom: If he dispense with them for the greater, why should we not for the less; especially when we know he did actually dispense with the want of those things in them for admission into the Jewish Church, which yet were there required for their admission into it, that were men of years; and we find no one title of his, that he would have them excluded his Church or Kingdom amongst the Gentiles; Nay, his Commission insisted on is in such large terms, as do abundantly include them. The Jews never had so large a Commission for circumcising Infants as this is for baptising them, though there be not such express mention of them herein: for all the Gentiles comprehends all Infants, male and female too, whereas the Jews were limited to males only; and whereas they were tied to the eighth day at soon, that so they might have a Sabbath pass upon them for their cleansing; now they are clean at any time, those uncleannesses and ways of cleansing being done away in Christ, the Commission gives power to do it to all in discipling them, though through the wickedness of the world rejecting the counsel of God, and refusing to submit to Christ themselves, or to subject theirs to him, they cannot do it to all that their liberty and power extends to; but such surely are guilty of resisting the Messengers of Christ, as either hinder them from discipling themselves, or withhold and forbidden their children.  
From what hath been said, than it appears, that there is no need of searching after particular express mention of Infants to warrant their baptising; for when a man hath a general Commission, what needs the particularising the several branches in it to warrant a man's acting upon them? If, Let a man (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) examine himself, and so let him eat, etc. be warrant enough for women's eating the Supper, because the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in itself comprehensive enough of the female Sex, why then should not, Disciple all the Gentiles, or all Nations here, be warrant sufficient to disciple Infants, baptising them, etc. seeing that word is every whit as comprehensive of Infants? If a man should scruple to baptise an English man, or a Scotch man, because he finds not those Nations expressed in all the Scripture, would not any man laugh at him, seeing the Commission is to all the Gentiles, whereof they are part? Or when it's said, Christ died for all, would it not be a fond scruple to say, It's doubtful whether he died for Infants that die in their infancy, or not? The like is, this to say, What warrant have we to baptise Infants now, when the Commission is, Disciple all the Gentiles, baptising them? If a King should say, Go into such a Country, and subject all the Inhabitants in it to my Government, and protection, putting them into my Subjects fashions, and way of living, it would be a vain thing to say, What should little children be subject to him too, and brought up after the manner of his Subjects? Sure, in bringing all the Inhabitants in, their Infants must needs be included, and be taken for subjects with them, and be brought up after his subjects fashion. And now I hope, I shall not need to say much by way of answer to that Objection, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to learn, but Infants can learn nothing till they begin to be grown up. For so a Proselyte, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is denominated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from coming and joining himself to the Jewish Church, which Infants could not properly be said to do till grown up, and yet they were also with their Parents proselited. So a Subject is he that voluntarily is subject to, and obedient to his Prince, which Infants cannot properly be, and yet they are in the number of Subjects too. But besides this, we have showed that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is rather in its first act to bring into, and subject to the Government of the School, that they might learn, then to make to have learned, (though in its further acts it will reach to that too) and that may be done to Infants now as well as in the times of the Jews. Why may we not rather say, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies that that all are capable of, (that wilfully refuse it not) seeing our Saviour commissionates them to do it to all? Would he bid them do that to all the Gentiles, that they were not capable of having done to them? Nay, we find that little children (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pueri, pueruli, Infants) are comprehended under the same word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, here used in a business, where more action is signified, than the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Disciple, necessarily implies to be required of them, as in Rom. 15.11. with Psal. 117.1. Praise the Lord all ye Gentiles, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and laud him all ye people. Sure one would think children much more uncapable of being sharers in this action, then of being discipled, a word more passive, and yet see how the Holy Ghost teaches us to take them in too in that expression, see it Psa. 148.6.12, 13. Both young men, and maidens, old men, and [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pu●ruli, infants,] children, let them praise the Name of the Lord. Yea, that we may be sure the least Infant is there included, that hath life, See Psal. 150.6. Let 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every thing, or one that hath breath, praise the Lord, or every soul praise the Lord. Reason might object, and say, How can little Infants praise the Lord? much rather then, how can they be discipled to the Lord? the way of discipling being also added by being baptised, a more passive business, and of which they are capable not only as its an outward act upon them, but also as it puts an obligation upon the baptised to believe and submit to the Doctrine and Name of God and Christ, as we shall anon more clearly show; therefore I shall say no more to that here, but pass to another Consideration.  
2. Let us in the next place view the practice of the Apostles upon this Commission: viz. in their baptising the Gentiles, wherein I shall not have to speak of their baptising the Jews, and Proselytes, (such as those in Acts 2. & 8. for the Samaritans and Eunuch were such, else would they have scrupled eating and drinking with them, as afterward they did Peter's with Cornelius) but of the unproselited Gentiles, such as were not fore-brought into the limits of the Church visible, which as yet the Jewish Church was accounted, Baptism being as yet not the first admission into the Church, as then reputed, but into the acknowledgement of Christ the Lord of it already come; for as yet the Jews were not unchurched, as yet the Apostles frequented the Temple, and Christ's Disciples joined with them in observations of the Law, Acts 3.1. and 21.20.22, 23. etc. nor as yet did the Disciples understand the extent of their own Commission, but thought that it extended only to Proselytes of all Nations, till God opened the matter in a vision to Peter, Acts 10. and let him see that all were as clean for his conversing with, and admitting, as the Proselytes of the Circumcision. They might go and preach to any man, converse with any, and upon their accepting the salvation of God, it was to come upon them, and their houses, as before upon the Jews, Matth. 10. God taught him to call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, no one (of what Country, Nation, Age, Sex soever) common or unclean: He might kill and eat any of the fourfooted beasts, for they were all let down to him. Till this, I say, they see not the extent of their Commission. But after the relation of this the rest of the brethren were convinced that God had given also to the Gentiles repentance unto life, & now they began to put in practise their foregoing Commission; for now soon after this Paul and Barnabas were chosen, and sent forth to the Gentiles, and they endeavour upon the Jews rejecting to disciple them: but upon their discipling according to their Commission, some false Apostles, or Believers of the Sect of the Pharisees began to stir up a contention, and to trouble the Churches, pressing upon them that they ought to circumcise those they discipled, Put a yoke (as Peter calls it) upon their necks, even the yoke of Moses Law. About this question then (Paul and Barnabas having begun, and made some progress in their Gentile-discipling) the Brethren sent them to Jerusalem to discuss this business with the Apostles, and the Church there, that there might be unity amongst them, where it was determined by letters that they needed not circumcision to disciple them, or upon their being discipled. After which we first read of Paul and Silas baptising, and the first instance we have of their baptising after that Revelation to Peter of the extent of their Commission, and after the decission of that question about Circumcision, was Lydia, concerning whom the Holy Ghost gives an account of Baptism suitable to the Commission; for it's said, That she hearing Paul, God opened her heart that she attended unto the things spoken by him, and she and her house and family were baptised: without the least mention made of any of their hearing and believing, but she only. After which she says to them, If ye have judged me faithful (not if ye judge us) come into my house. Whereas if the rest of the house were men of age, they might have as well questioned their faithfulness as hers, as being able, if unfaithful, to betray them to evil men as well as she: but not a word of their believing or professing faith; and I am sure there is a word sufficient to include Infants, or little children, except they can be proved not to be of the household. Again, a little after, we find the Apostle preaching thus to the Jailor, Believe thou in the Lord jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house: viz. as the Israelites were out of Egypt, Judas 5. from the wrath of God that he feared upon himself and his, upon the Earthquake, and from the refusing Gentiles condition under darkness, and God's displeasure against them. However God might judge the rest of the world, them and theirs that rejected Christ, yet he believing salvation should come to his house, they should be with him under God's protection; they should at least far much better for his sake, as Potiphars house for Joseph amongst them. Upon that, He bringing them out, Paul preached to him, and to all his house, (which might include infants and children too, as well as Moses his holding forth the Covenant to little ones too, Deut. 29.1, 11, 12. and as it's said, Acts 26.22. That he testified the things of the Gospel to small and great: which words are used to comprehend the youngest infant, with the oldest man, and most decrepit, Revel. 20.12.) And it's added, That he, and all his were baptised straightway. It's true, it's said also, That he rejoiced with all his house, believing in God: but its remarkable, that the words believing and rejoicing, are both of the singular number, as agreeing properly to the Jailers own person, and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, [house wholly verbatim] is such as might be applied to him, with his family, all coming into subjection to the School of Christ, though every particular of his house did not actually believe or rejoice. As when it's said, All judah rejoiced, and all the people of the Land rejoiced, it follows not, that every one, little and great of them, were actual in that rejoicing. A man may be said to do a thing with his house, or whole family, as to keep a Sabbath to the Lord, or to keep a Fastday to him, when yet every one in the family are not actually capable of acting to the Lord. We instanced before in joel 2.16. so 2 Chron. 20.13. the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, house wholly, may be understood to mean, in behalf of them all, with himself brought under the Government and Protection of Christ: he, and all his, (as it's expressly said) being baptised. Now a man, and all his, and a household, are words large enough to comprehend infants also. We read also of the household of Stephanus being baptised, as 1 Cor. 1.16. From which places, we may note,  
1. That we read of more baptised, then are said to have had faith, or to have professed faith before baptism, or then can be proved so to have had or done; as was before noted.  
2. That we have words large enough to include Infants in the instances of the Apostles baptising; words as large for that as we have any to include women's receipt of the Supper. Yea, why may not a man hence argue thus, What the Apostles practised in baptising is lawful to be practised now by us: but they practised the baptising of whole families, therefore so may we, presupposing still that we do nothing by compulsion, forcing the Gospel on them that actually reject it. And if so, than their Infants will fall under Baptism; except we can show that they are not of a family, or that there were no Infants in any of those households baptised by the Apostles, or that Christ or they hath given us precept or example to exclude them in baptising such families as have them; none of all which I am sure can be showed. So that here is another Scripture including them. If it be said, we cannot prove that there were Infants there; I answer, Where the Holy Ghost is silent, there it appertains not to us to inquire. I walk by that that is expressed, I baptise but the family, that that's concealed, I have nothing to do to search for. If the Holy Ghost would have had me put exception in families, than would he some where by precept or instance have expressed that exception, or ground of exception; As that in case there be Infants, than the whole household is not to be baptised; or none may be baptised, but they that first profess faith; but there is no such command or passage in all the Scripture. But it's said, that these instances must be measured by other places, that relate their practice.  
To that I answer, 1. That there may be different practices according to different occasions. Besides, this is the first we read of baptising after the understanding of the extent of their Commission, except of Cornelius, where all in the house too were hearers, and baptised, Et primum in unoquoque genere mensura est reliquorum. And therefore not to be regulated by those places, wherein baptising was upon other grounds, and with less understanding of their Commission.  
2. Their practice in all places is to be measured by their Commission, and not by one another, where occasions (as of single persons, and without families belonging to them) might alter the expressions about their practice.  
3. Nor is there any mention any where of their practice, wherein it can be showed, that they excluded Infants, much less about baptising Gentiles, and bringing them into the Church; so that those exceptions avail not. Nor yet do make their being of a household simply the ground of their being baptised; for I confess there may be divers in and of a household, that in some case, that is, of positive refusing to stoop to the Gospel, may not be baptised; As an unbelieving wife, servant, or child grown, they are by persuasion to be won in, or else let alone. This springing from the foresaid ground of not forcing Ordinances upon men: but I make the grounds of their Baptism, the tenor of the Commission that bids them disciple all the Gentiles, and of the Gospel, holding forth grace to all, one and other, no man being common or unclean in that respect in God's account, but as they render themselves so by their willing rejections of the grace tendered to them, with their being under the tuition of those that profess faith, and subjection to the Doctrine of Christ, and the nonresistance found in them, and the duty lying upon parents to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Whence it is to be noted, that it's said of the Jailor, he, and all his, not all his household, but all his were baptised; possibly some in the house might not be in his dispose, but so many as were his were baptised. If any man say, it's an act of force to disciple an Infant; I say no, of no more force to baptise them to Christ, then to lay them in their cradles, or carry them in their arms; they have no will nor reluctancy against it, ye may do with them what ye will: whence they are a pattern of right entering the Kingdom, He that receives not the Kingdom of God as a little child, etc. They receive it as God, and his people order them into it, and in it. And for their discipling by instruction, they usually, if well educated, drink it in, and submit to it better than others, as to the outward profession at least, as was before said. And I find not that Baptism was ever denied to any that would submit themselves to learn the Christian Profession. For that frivolous objection of some, that they show it's against their wills sometimes by their crying, It's not worth the answering; for by the same reason, we may say, that some of them that are dipped, finding the water cold, do shrink and shudder in their going into it, therefore they are baptised against their wills too: not to mention the like carriages in Infants circumcised, who yet when they came to years of understanding, owning what was in Infancy done to them, were never therefore reputed members of the Church, or Proselytes by compulsion. But I pass from this also to another Consideration.  
3. Though it be true, that we find no express Command to baptise Infants, in terminis, or such an instance of Infants baptised, yet we do find by undeniable consequence, that Infants in the language of the Apostle Paul, and so of the Scriptures, were baptised; so that to that common demand, Where read we of any Infants baptised? we can produce an answer very demonstrative: And that is in 1 Cor. 10.2, 3. Moreover, Brethren, I would not have you ignorant how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the Sea, and were all baptised unto Moses in the cloud, and in the Sea. I pray let it be well minded, All our Fathers, saith Paul, were baptised unto Moses in the cloud, and in the sea. Search the Scriptures, and we shall find that amongst these Fathers, there were many that when they passed through the Sea, and under the cloud, were but Infants, See for this the History in the Book of Exodus. First, in Exodus 10.8, 9 Pharaoh, after several plagues poured out upon him and his people, for refusing to let the Israelites go out of his Land, being persuaded by his servants, calls for Moses and Aaron, and bids them go, and serve the Lord: but would know of them, who should go? To whom Moses gave this answer: We will go with our young, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  and with our old, with our sons, and with our daughters, with our flocks, and with our herds: And whereas Pharaoh then would not condescend to that Proposition, God bringing another plague upon him, brought him to yield to thus much of it, That their little ones might go with them, only leaving their flocks and herds with them. Ver. 24. Only let your flocks and your herds be stayed, let your little ones also go with you: the word is in the original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies parvulus, a little child; so that here we see plainly they had little children amongst those Fathers, that after proved Fathers too of the Jewish Nation: these too passed under the cloud, and through the Sea, and were baptised to Moses in them.  
Object. But here it may be objected, That this was not the Ordinance of Baptism appointed and instituted by Jesus Christ for discipling men to himself, and therefore this is nothing to the purpose.  
Answ. To which I say, by way of concession, That that indeed was not the Ordinance of Baptism appointed by Christ as come in the flesh for discipling men into the faith of him as so come, nor was it (that we find) called a baptising them by Moses in his Writings, but yet by way of Exception, I say it's much to the purpose. For,  
1. The Scripture here, and the Apostle calls it Baptism, and therefore it may not be denied, to have been truly Baptism, though not so instituted by Christ come in the flesh, as that we have to treat of, so that still our assertion is true in the Apostles language, which may not be gainsayed by us, that those Infants were baptised.  
2. Yea, this Baptism is mentioned, and spoken of by the Apostle, as answerable to the Baptism the Believers and Churches of Christ received into the Name of Christ, as a privilege answerable to this of the Gospel-baptism, and a testimony of God's favour toward them answerable to what this Baptism is now to us, and upon that account partly hath it the Name of Baptism put upon it by the Apostle, his intent and scope here being to show that those Fathers were all partakers of like privileges; yea and in substance of the same with the Churches of Christ now, only the difference was in way of Administration, those Privileges and Ordinances being administered by the hands of, or under the conduct of Moses, these, nor by and from Christ himself, come in the flesh, those typing out, or foresignifying Christ then to come in the flesh, these signifying and leading to confess him come in the flesh, and the grace that is in him as so come, and held forth to us by him, which is the same grace (as well as the same Christ, as the Apostle says, ver. 3.) that was pointed to by them, now more clearly witnessed and held forth, than not so plainly. And indeed, if this be not so, that that Baptism was equivalent with, and answerable to this of ours, since Christ manifested in the flesh, as to the substance of it, the Apostles argument as much as ours from it would be rendered invalid: For whereas he brings these instances of them to answer a secret objection (occasioned by his discourse in the preceding Chapter from his exhorting them so to run, as to obtain, and from his setting before them his own Example, how he kept down his body in subjection, lest having preached to others, he himself should prove, or become a Reprobate, Chap. 9.24.27.) That they were called by the grace of God, into the grace of Christ, and baptised into him, and so delivered from that state of enmity, and irreconciledness, in which as Gentiles they before lay; yea, were under his conduct, guidance, and protection, his Church and people observing his Ordinances, and tasting the sweetness of his goodness, and therefore what need of their so running, as if they were in danger else to lose the prize, or to be rejected of God again; the Apostle brings the Fathers of old as instances of people under like favour and privileges, according to the dispensations of those times, baptised as well as they, and eating the same spiritual bread in substance and signification with them, and yet God was displeased with many of them, as follows, ver. 4.5. etc. Now they might easily have replied that the case was far different, that was no baptism in comparison of theirs, their privileges were not like theirs, etc. and so they might as easily have retorted the Argument in that manner, as the Antipedobaptists may to us, if there were not a truth in it, that that was to them as much for that dispensation; yea, the same with this to us as to the main matter or substance. We must either argue the Apostle guilty of a weak argument here, as to his purpose of proving them alike privileged with us, and we notwithstanding our privileges as obnoxious to displeasure from God, in case of unbelief, or unworthy walking, as they, or else we must confess this to have weight in it for this business: viz. That those Infants though not baptised into Christ expressly and immediately, yet were truly and really as to external baptism baptised into the Doctrine of God then delivered concerning Christ, as we be, or the Church of Corinth were; they had that that carries correspondency with, and was answerable to our Baptism.  
3. Yea further, It's to be minded here, That all our Fathers, and so the Infants of them, I mean such of them as then were but Infants, were baptised into Moses, or unto Moses, that is, had an obligation put upon them by those their passages under the cloud, and in the sea, to listen, to obey, and follow after Moses, and his Doctrine, what ever incapacity was in them in respect of years, and want of actual understanding, then while they passed through the sea, and under the cloud, to apprehend, or have made out to them, either what they passed through, or what Moses was to them, or was contained in his Doctrine. And so it clearly evinces, that Infants are not uncapable of being baptised into the Doctrine of God, or Name, Authority, Faith, or Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.  
For first, That that is the meaning of that phrase, I suppose is clear to any indifferent understanding, viz. that by being baptised into, or unto Moses, is not meant, that they were baptised, dipped, washed into the person of Moses, as the matter of their baptism for that was impossible, but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, there, is of the same signification, as in Matth. 28.19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. into, or unto the Name of the Father, and of the Son; so they were baptised into, or unto Moses, Moses being there as in other places, used to signify Moses his doctrine, as in Luke 16.29. They have Moses and the Prophets, let them hear them. So also John 5.46, 47. Though I will not deny but Moses his authority as a Prophet and Conductor of them, authorized of God, is, or may be therein also signified.  
And secondly, I see no reason but an Infant is in every whit as good a capacity to be baptised into, or unto Christ, as then unto Moses: It's all one in substance as to what concerns the business requiring capacity, that was into the Doctrine and Authority of God by Moses; this, into the Doctrine and Authority of the same God by Jesus: that was to be subject to Moses, and his Doctrine, and Institutions, when, and as they grew capable; this into Christ, his Doctrine, and Institutions, when, and as they grow capable. I think no man will deny, that children now are as capable of the outward act of Baptism, to be acted upon them, be it what it will be, whether to be dipped into, or have water poured upon them, as these Infants were then to be carried, or pass through the Sea; and that they cannot now engage as much to be subject to God's Authority in Christ, as then to it in Moses, or understand as much what the Gospel says, as what the Law said then, and much what both alike; I cannot perceive what ground any man can have to deny, except they will say, that Moses spoke more darkly and figuratively of Christ, but Christ more plainly and perspicuously both of himself, and his Father. And if we get but this by this place, That Infants in Paul's own language are capable of being baptised into a Name, or Doctrine, and thereby to be obliged to that Name and Person we have gained, I conceive not a little.  
Some happily will object again, Object. that the Apostle here speaks but of all that eat the spiritual bread by faith, and so that were believers then.  
Answ. But the Text will give no ground for that, for it says not, All were baptised that eat that spiritual bread, much less speaks he there of any eating by faith, but rather only of an eating in a figure; but he says positively, They All were baptised unto Moses in the cloud, and in the sea, and did all eat the same spiritual mea● Beside, that they all eat not by faith, is clear from thence, that Many of them so baptised, and eating, were destroyed for not believing: Compare ver. 4, 5, 6. etc. with Heb. 3.15, 16, 17. etc.  
Object. But the Apostle names here only the Fathers, All our Fathers.  
Answ. I answer, He says not, All that then were Fathers, or all the Fathers amongst them, but All our Fathers: and many of them that were their Fathers, were then little Infants when they passed through the Sea, as before we shown. And again, Had he only meant it of them that were then Fathers, he might rather have said, With them all, one or two excepted: and so small a number seldom makes exceptions,) God was not well pleased. But now he says, but with many of them; because though with all the then Fathers, as that were above twenty years old, some two excepted, he was displeased, yet with the children from twenty years old downward, he was not so, but them he carried into Canaan, and possessed them of it.  
Object. But then by that, children may as well partake of the Supper; for they eat of the same spiritual meat, etc.  
Answ. That's beside our business: yet I say, Children also when capable of examining themselves, may eat the Supper, that condition being expressly required of the Apostle to the Supper, for men in general: Let a man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, examine himself, and so let him eat: but there is no such condition required generally to Baptism.  
I shall nextly consider, what we find expressed by Christ about his will concerning Infants: where I shall pass over that in Mat. 18.1, 2, 3, 4. where Christ makes them our patterns, because we have occasionally spoken of it before, and shall meet with it elsewhere again: that in ver. 6. is considerable, He that shall offend one of those little ones that believe in me. Some are of opinion that Christ speaks that of little children in age, and think Christ reckons them believers in him, because they have no other hope or confidence, excercise no self care, self trust, or distrustful thoughts of God, but are cast upon him, and take submittedly what he order to them; according to that, Psal. 71.5, 6. Thou art my hope, O Lord, thou hast been my trust from my youth, upon thee have I been cast from my mother's womb. So Psal. 22.9, 10. Thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother's breasts, I was cast upon thee from the womb. And as they are Psal. 115.13. and Revel. 19.5. numbered with the fearers of God, Ye that fear the Lord, both small and great. And the scandalising such is the harming them, especially by perverting them to vain hopes and ways. I confess I am not satisfied in that myself, and yet I think there may be something in it, and the rather for that the next foregoing speech doth certainly include little children, viz. when he says, He that shall receive one such little one in my Name, receiveth me. I know Beza's conception is, that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is meant, one that humbles himself as a little child; and that he speaks not there properly of children; but Luke, who is of better authority, says expressly, Chap. 9.48. that Christ said that of that very little babe too, that he took in his Arms, and set in the midst of them: He that receives this little child in my Name, receiveth me. And so in Mark 9.36, 37. expressly, He that shall receive one of such little children, (without mention of any other foregoingly, but the child itself taken into his arms) receiveth me. But I shall pass that, and come to that that's more full, viz. that in Matth. 19.13, 14. where its said, that our Saviour having in the former part of the Chapter answered thee Pharisees about Divorce, there were certain little children, or infants, (in Luke 18.16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, sucking infants,) and its considerable, to what end they brought them; and how Christ entertained them, but chief, what he says of Infants, by occasion of them.  
1. For the end of their bringing, it's in Luke 18. That he might touch them; but in Matthew, That he might lay his hands on them, and pray. Now the laying on of hands especially, when joined with prayer, is an Ordinance or Institution in the Church of God, named after the Doctrine of Baptisms, Heb. 6.1, 2. and therefore, if there be any strength in their way of arguing, that from the placing of words one after another, as baptising after believing, would prove, that believing is to be first found in persons, before they may be baptised; then the same argument would prove that these Infants were formerly baptised; because they came for imposition of hands, a right usually following men's baptism too in the practice of the Apostles, as in Acts 8.17. and 19.5, 6. Nor can the ablest Antipedobaptist give us any certain proof or demonstration, or aught, besides their own presumption, that they were not.  
Indeed I find laying on of hands, used in Scripture, in these three Cases: viz. In healing diseases, Ordaining to office, and sending forth to the work of them, and praying for the Holy Ghost, and his blessings: where it's mentioned to the first intent of healing, it's usually expressed, either to have been to that end, or that that was the effect, as in Mark 5.23. and 6.5. and 16.18. Luke 4.40. and 13.13. Acts 28.8. in none of all which places find we our Saviour joining prayer with it: or that he blessed them he so healed. Only that instance of Paul, hath mention too of joining prayer with it: nor is there any appearing probability, that these came for healing to Christ, as some would conjecture, because mention is made in the beginning of the Chapter, of his healing some. For when there was any healing wrought in the things mentioned, its common for one Evangelist or other to express it; but none of them say any such thing of these. Besides, his discourse with the Pharisees about Divorce, if not also some other, as those in Luke 18. intervened between his healing acts, and these children coming to him. And he was also gone from that place where he had been healing, and come into the house, Mark 10.10. Besides, it's too simple a conceit, that the Disciples should prohibit them upon that ground, for they could not be ignorant that children might stand in need of healing, and be as capable of it as other persons; and it's most probable that it was some conceit of the unfitness of Infants for such a business as they came; for that made them rebuke those that brought them: nor could it be for ordination to office, and therefore it was for the Holy Ghost, or some blessing of his upon them; yea, it's plain it was for blessing, and that is acknowledged by Mr. Tombs to be a greater thing than Baptism. Baptism being but an outward witness to Christ, and the Doctrine of Christ, and a matriculation of them into the School of Christ, that they might be in the way of his blessing: whence to use the Argument that Peter makes use of a majori, ad minus: Can any forbid water that these should not be baptised, that have received the Holy Ghost, etc. So we may argue here, Shall Christ admit them to his blessing, and shall not we admit them to outward Baptism to be brought into his house, and to have his name put upon them, that they may be more in the way of his blessing? when he himself gives them that that follows after Baptism, Object. shall we deny them the former, viz. Baptism having so large a Commission for discipling and Baptism.  
But it's said by some that this was an use amongst the Jews, to bring their children to Prophets, Answ. and holy man to pray for them, etc.  
But if so, then sure the Disciples would not have been so against them, as to forbid them, if it had been an usual matter of honour put upon holy men amongst them; since they were not unwilling to have their Master honoured, I conceive its likelier they had some unworthy, low, and despicable thoughts of Infants, as below their Master's business, and care. Besides, they that tell us of the foresaid use, are fain to fetch it from isaack's blessing Jacob, and jacob's blessing joseph's sons. Strange instances to tell us of father's blessing their own children, to prove that people used to carry their children to Prophets for their prayers and blessing; especially too to prove their carrying Infants to them when as Jacob and Esau both were men grown, or well towards it, when Isaac blessed them; for Isaac was but sixty years old when they were born, and he was now grown old and dim-sighted, so as he could not discern one from the other when he blessed them; yea, Esau was wont to go a hunting, yea, and was married too some time before this. And for the sons of Joseph, they could not be less then about twenty years old, for they were born to him before the years of famine came, Gen. 41.50. two years of which were passed before Jacob came down into Egypt, Gen. 45.11. and yet he lived in Egypt after his going thither seventeen years, Gen. 47.28. Beside none were blessed by them, or by Christ, but members of the Church visible; And therefore, if that may yet be done, (as I think none can find ground to deny it) than they may first be made members of the visible Church, that so it may be done unto them.  
2. For their entertainment. We find the Disciples forbade them that brought them, and would not have had them come to Christ 'Tis likely, as we have said, because they thought it a vain thing, and that Christ would not regard such as they: but its remarkable how ill Christ takes it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (valdè aegre tulit, Pass.) he took it very ill, or was very angry with them: which shows Christ's account of Infants, and great favour to them; as he did also Chap. 18. And as God also testified his love and pity towards them in sparing Nineveh upon that account, that there were so many thousand Infants in it, and it instructs us into this, That Christ will not thank, but take it very ill at that man that shall under any pretence of piety, or otherwise, keep back Infants (or endeavour it) from that that's for them in his Kingdom, and that should make us wary, lest we also run into such like errors about them to incur against ourselves also his indignation. After this it follows, that he called them to him, & said, Suffer little children, or the little childen, to come unto me, and forbidden them not.  
Sure here he approves men's bringing little children to him to be under his care and blessing, who came for all Ages of men, to lighten every one, and despiseth none, no, not the least, but came to save them: And how little children should now be brought to Christ, but by bringing them to his Church and people, with and amongst whom he is yet spiritually present, I cannot see. Note further also, that he calls their bringing them, their coming: for it's not said, That there came little children to him: as if they came of themselves, but they brought little children to him: so it is in all the three Evangelists; nor did the Diciples rebuke the children, but them that brought them; yet here he says, let them come to me. They not resisting, or rejecting his goodness, it's reckoned to them as if they came and desired it, though they in their own persons, did not desire it. Where we see confirmed what we said before, viz. That those things that are required of men of understanding, to receive his blessing, or an ordinance of his to be acted upon them, (as laying on of hands and praying, is an Ordinance of God) are not required in Infants. Men grown must come of themselves, being convinced and persuaded by the truth, or else they are not blessed by him ordinarily, or received into his grace; but here children, though but brought, are said to come, and he accepts and blesses them. For so it follows, Mark 10.16. He took them in his arms, put his hands on them; and blessed them. Wherein it's also to be noted, that he deals with them as with Disciples; for I find not that Jesus blessed any persons else, but them that were his Disciples, in any other place that speaks of his blessing, Luke 24.50.  
I know it's surmised by some, Object. that these were not little Infants, but children that could go; and though he took them in his arms, yet so he did to that that he set in the midst of them, Mark 10.37.  
To which I say, Answ. Even a sucking Infant may be set down on his feet amongst men, though it can neither go nor stand, and that that could do either, is neither said, nor any ways employed, that I can tell: As for his calling them, we see nothing expressed; but by way of command unto his Disciples, It's not, come to me, but let them come to me. Nor have we any thing as said to the Infants by way of instruction of them, but to his Disciples, and them with them only; nor any thing said by them Infants unto him, or to any other: to say nothing that its usual to call an Infant in another's arms: the word is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an Infant, Luke 18.15. which as Beza notes, 
Beza. in Luke 1.41, 44. etc.  Propriè dicitur de partu recens edito: is properly an infant newborn: yea, in Luke 1.41, 44. its used of an infant in the womb, but in 1 Pet. 2.2. and Luke 2. 12.16. and 17.19. it's evidently children newborn. Against this is objected, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signify one capable of teaching, because it's said, Timothy knew the Scripture, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of a child, or infant, 2 Tim. 3.15. To which I answer, That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, may much differ: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies properly, Ever since one's Infancy, since thou camest out of Infancy. Beside, I deny not, that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may comprehend all the Age from the birth, to six or seven years old, before the term of which years a child is capable of instruction, yet it is usually used for children lately born, and it is improbable that these here spoken of were capable of instruction, both because they were brought, and because we find nothing spoken to them for their instructing, which its no way likely that Christ would have omitted, had they been capable of it. The very pleading for that capability of instruction savours of the Disciples disease, who very probably for some such reason forbade them, because they thought them uncapable, and argues that had these men been there, they would in case of their incapacity for learning have joined with the Disciples in prohibiting them.  
Object. But it's said again, that it's but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, those Infants that he would have permitted to come to him, not Infants indefinitely, any infants, but them only.  
Answ. To which I say, that the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enforces no such restriction, as may appear by these instances, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in Math. 28.19. 2 Tim. 4.17. and Rom. 15.11. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ver. 16. All the Gentiles admits of no such restriction by virtue of that article; and so when the Apostle saith, Let us do good to all, and chief to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the household of faith; he limits it not there to some certain believers, as the Teachers, or the like, of whom he had been before speaking: yea, the same expression, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Matth. 18.3. is not these little children, but indefinitely, little children. Whence mark, for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, read (Mark 10.15.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as a little child. So in Matth. 26.9, 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is not some certain present poor, but the poor indefinitely: So that that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, simply in Matth. 19.13. is in Luke 18.15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, where yet it cannot be translated, these Infants. See the like, Mark 7.27, 28. 2 Cor. 12.14. It's not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, these, or those little children: as its usual when the speech is limited to things present, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in Matth. 26.11. is this ointment: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is all these words, ver. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: these, my brethren, Matth. 25.40, 45. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In these two Commandments, Chap. 23.40. The like is to be seen, Mark 13.2. Luke 3.5. and 9 28.44. and 24.18. John 10.19. Acts 3.24. and 4.16. and 5. 36, 38. nor is it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, those children, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Matth. 24.22. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Luke 19.27. but simply, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the little children, or little children.  
2. Though he bid that them very children should come to him, and not be prohibited, yet that he limited not his speech, or the good will to little ones therein declared to them, only is manifest in the ground he lays down, whereupon he would have them to come to him; for that is such as is not tied up to them, but affirmed of children more largely and indefinitely, viz. For of such is the Kingdom of Heaven: and so we come to view,  
3. What he says of Infants upon this occasion, as the ground of his willingness to have them come to him, and of his anger against his Disciples for prohibiting them: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, For of such is the Kingdom of Heaven. Where it's to be minded first, that he says not, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for of these is the Kingdom, lest we should perceive some peculiar occasion not ordinary or common to Infants, but peculiar to these only; some secret thing known to Christ alone, and so should say, it was to be stretched no further, but to them, or them that we can discern to be elected, etc. Nor is it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to them that are like these, the Kingdom of Heaven belong, though many would conceive it so; for that could be no greater ground for children, then for Doves and Lambs coming to him; the general word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 generally signifies of that kind that's spoken of; these, and such as these; whether it be applied to things or persons, not such in an Allegorical similitude. So Rom. 2.2. The judgement of God is against those that do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, such things: that is, those very evils, and such like. So for 3. and chap. 1.32. Gal. 5.21, 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, against such things there is no law: that is, against those virtues and fruits of the Spirit, and whatsoever else is of the same stamp or nature. So also 1 Cor. 7.15.28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, such shall have trouble in the flesh: that is, such as he had spoken of before, viz. they that marry, etc. Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven. The Kingdom of Heaven, what's that? I answer, The Kingdom set up by the God of Heaven, in which he is King, and reigneth by Jesus Christ, prophesied of long since to be established in the house of David; A Kingdom of which the Jews were the children, it was preached to, and the promise of it set before them, yea, they were educated under its Ordinances in part, and to the expectation of it in the more Heavenly things: The Kingdom more fully preached by Christ, and (in its privileges, rise, and growth, and its administration by Christ in the humanity, in a more heavenly way,) then nigh at hand, and ready to be revealed, though not in its height of glory, and large spreading lustre: This is the Kingdom of Heaven, of which there are divers stations and degrees of entrance into it, and divers manifestations of it. viz.  
1. There is the outward Court, the Church visible as visible, or as outwardly privileged by God, and distinguished from other people not in it: or if ye will, the Government that Christ exerciseth in administration of his Heavenly Ordinances and Rites, over men as visibly subjected to the profession of him, the Church-state with its outward Ordinances, the Oracles of God, and his Statutes, and Appointments. So the Church-state of old among the Jews, was part of that Kingdom, that God through Christ, and for him erected: The Wisdom of God had there his House, and Pillars, Ordinances, and Provision, though less heavenly, and more carnal, then as now it's ordered by Christ come in the flesh; and therefore rather called the Kingdom of God, then of Heaven, Matth. 21.43. This Government in the hand of Christ come being more properly both, because as of God so more heavenly, and less carnal, then that before.  
2. The inward and invisible uniting with Christ by faith, and so the Government of the Spirit writing the Law in the heart: The power and privileges enjoyed in the inner man; in forgiveness of sins, peace, joy, conformity to God, etc. And this also is the Kingdom of God, the more inward, more heavenly, and spiritual part of it: and this also is held forth in the first, and the right receipt of the first, with all the documents thereof, and spiritual operations afforded therein, is the way to enter into this step of it. For this is it into which men enter not but by regeneration: Of this the Apostle speaks, Rom. 14.17. The Kingdom of God, is righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. And 1 Cor. 4.20. That consists in power, etc. Into this the believer is translated out of the power of darkness, Col. 1.15. The other step is more visibly upon men that are in it, this more properly in them. They that are but in the former Regiment, may be cast out, and often are for their unfruitfulness, not receiving its instructions, and operations of Spirit therewith, as a little child, so as to enter into this more spiritual Government, Matth. 8.12. and 21.43. that, or the Kingdom of God in that part of it, (for it's but one Kingdom in all its Regiments, as the Temple of old was but one in all its Courts) being like a Net gathering all sorts, and like a man sowing good seed in the field, wherein also the envious man soweth tares, out of which all things that offend shall be gathered, Matth, 13.24.41.42.47. And like to the wedding made by the King for his Son, to which the bidden guests refusing to come, all that could be met with in the highway and hedges were called, and brought, Matth. 22.1.9, 10. yea to that all have liberty to come as the way to enter into it in its higher steps, or more inward Government, and Dominion. But now this second step is yet more holy, and into it may none enter but they that so have received the grace of God, in what is held forth in the former, as to be made an holy Priesthood unto God. The former hath Laws for its Ordering and Government, and in it is the power of Christ to order it, which all aught to obey, and be subject to in their several places and stations, as in other Kingdoms; but these are more visible and outward, as Baptism, the Supper, Exhorting, Teaching, Hearing, Prayer, Communion, Censures, etc. As also subordinate Officers, Bishops, or Elders, Deacons, etc. Its Keys of Doctrine and Censures, its Public Register, and Notary Book, the Scriptures, wherein its Laws and Orders are written and recorded. This latter hath its Laws, the same for substance with the other, but written also more inwardly in the heart, where the Spirit is more immediately Governor and Ruler, and supplies all grace to the soul also: These have fellowship with God, and with Christ in spirit, and heavenly things, as well as one with another in outward Ordinances; which these also have (the inner Regiment being in these who are under the outward, though not in all of them.) These have the inward true spiritual Baptism in the blood and price of Christ, 
1 Cor. 10 17.  sprinkling their consciences, and making their hearts pure; and they feed spiritually upon Christ himself, eat all of that one bread, and partake all of that one spirit in him. So as to be really and inwardly, (though mystically and spiritually) one body, being baptised into it by the Holy Ghost, and made meet for the inheritance; as well as outwardly baptised, and outwardly eating the Memorials of Christ, as the outward Regiment more generally do.  
3. There is also beyond both these, a third step, or way of regiment in this Kingdom, like unto the Holy of holies, that into which Christ himself is really entered, and all they that are in the second form do enter by hope, but not as yet by real possession. The Kingdom in Glory and Power exalted above all other: This is that which is yet to be manifested; Which Christ is gone to receive, and which he shall come in, even in the Glory of his Father, and possess all his Saints that here have followed him faithfully withal. In which the righteous shall shine as the Sun, 
Matth. 13.43.  and be filled with their Master's joy. Christ and they being all manifested in glory, even the glory of God; 
Col. 3.34  so as that as Christ is now admired in himself by them, that spiritually discern him, so than he shall be admired also in all his Saints, 
2 Thess. 1.10, 11.  and they shall be glorified with him. In this all his, and their enemies, shall be put under them, and bow before them, even all that here have persecuted, and hated them; and they shall be possessed of all the happiness prepared and laid up in Christ for them, even their inheritance. The fullness of God, and glory, and perfect freedom from all the bondage of sin and servitude, and from what ever did afflict and trouble them. And this state of the Kingdom Christ shall come in, at his glorious appearance again from Heaven, when he shall raise up all his to meet him, and be ever with him: therefore also it's coupled with his appearance, in 2 Tim. 4.1. This is the Kingdom in its flourish and compleatness, as Solomon in his glory, when as the other two are but the tendencies to this, and like the Kingdom of David in the midst of oppositions. The Keys of the Kingdom in the first state are committed to the servants of Christ, to Peter, and the other Apostles, with their succeeding Church-officers, and they may let in, or put out there, and when they walk in the Spirit in so doing, Christ approveth what they do, and admits too gracious operations of Spirit for blessing his Ordinances to them, or withholds his presence from them as they admit, or put out. But for the other two states, the Key is only with himself, Revel. 3.7. and into them none but he can give admission: Whom he shuts out, to them none can open, and to whom he opens none can shut this state against them. Into the second, he admits by the spiritual Baptism those that receive the grace of God held forth in the outward Court, (and witnessed to by the outward Baptism) rightly and effectually, Matth. 3.11, 12. Those that by the Word and Spirit accompanying it, are truly prepared for him, turned to him, to look towards him, and wait for him, Luke 1.16, 17. and 3.4. And these wait for, and shall in patiented continuance inherit the third; into which no ungodly person, no chaff in the floor of Christ, none without the wedding garment though come into the house, none that work iniquity, though within the outward form and state of the Kingdom, shall find entrance, 1 Cor. 6.9, 10. Gal. 5.20, 21. Matth. 13.41, 42.  
And let this be noted, that though ordinarily when mention is made of the Kingdom of God, and of Heaven preached, and exhorted to be sought and entered into, all these three stations of it are enfolded in one another. As when it's said Paul or Christ preached the Gospel of the Kingdom, or preached the Kingdom of God, etc. yet as that they ultimately aimed at, was the bringing men to the Kingdom in glory, so that they most immediately, and nextly urged unto men to receive and submit to, was the first station, The coming into the Church-state, and submission to Christ in his Government, Word, and Ordinances therein, as that which he set up as the Medium to bring them into union with himself, and so to participation of his glory; as the house in which his Feast is made ready, and in a First-fruits in the regiment of his Grace and Spirit to be partook of by those that duly and rightly receive the outward Ministrations in his Church, the waters where the Spirit moves for the renewing of those that duly and submittedly wait upon him, and wash therein: The Bed of Love wherein the immortal Seed of the Word of God, the Promise and Covenant made to Abraham, is poured forth for the begetting children to him. Under the Regiment of Christ here all aught to come, all the Gentiles are to be discipled, all, (so many as they found without choice, distinction, discrimination, 
Matth. 22.8, 9, 10.  and limitation) are to be brought, and here under to be nurtured that they might enter the second, into which yet none of these do enter, but them that entirely submit to him therein, (as we said before.) Those that obey him, Acts 5.32. the upright hearted, the poor in spirit, the righteous, they that bring forth the fruits of it, and they shall have an abundant entrance, Psalm 84.11. Matth. 5.7. and 18.3. 2 Pet. 1.11. And going on therein shall be surely rewarded with the third, Revel. 2.26, 27. and 3.34. and 3.21.  
Now how the words are to be taken here, appears by what is said, and by what follows in the Text, viz. He that receives not the Kingdom of God as a little child, etc. that receives not, in the present Tense. Now the Kingdom to be now received by us, is that that cometh now to us, and that is certainly the Government of Christ in his Word and Ordinances, as then to them ministered externally by Christ, and as now left unto us in the writings of his Servants, and by such as he hath instructed therein, yet ministered unto us; with all the operations of spirit that come along therewith in convincements and teachings to fit us for entering into the inward regiment or privileges of it in righteousness, joy, peace, etc. This was that that came to the Jews, or approached nigh unto them, Matth. 3.2. and 10.7. Luke 10.9, 11. and 11.20. But they received it not, and some of them that received it, yet not going on to receive it as little children with self-denial, humility, meekness, they could not enter in to the inward regiment, and its privileges, but finding the entrance too straight, turned back again from it, John 6, 60.64. and 8.30, 31, 34. etc. The Kingdom as it shall come in glory hath no rules annexed to it about men's entertaining it, that I know of, but its evident, this of the external Ministration, with the spiritual operations afforded therewith, for bringing us into the state of spiritual union with Christ, hath, and we find that many could not become so far children in simplicity and self-nothingness, as to receive it, it being as ordered by Christ every where spoken against, and we find yet that men not receiving the instructions of the Word of this Kingdom, as held forth to men in the Scriptures, in the reproofs and teachings of it, stick in the form of godliness; nay sincerely attain to that, muchless enter they into the inside of this Kingdom, to have the Law writ in their hearts, and to experiment the peace and joy that is therein. Of such is the Kingdom, the Government of Heaven, and of God. Nay, I know not how to exclude them right to any part of it, if we shall take it for the Kingdom in its Glory, as some do; for then much more should they have right to any other thing in it, as they were capable of having it put to, and vouchsafed them, according to Peter's arguing: But sure he meant the Kingdom of God, as they had the Keys of it, or were to have; and so as they had power of taking in, or excluding, suffering to come to Christ, or forbidding them: and as the blessings of it were to be obtained for, and imparted to them, through man's ministration: for it was not from the after-glory, or inward communication of spiritual grace that they went about to detain them, but from that dispensation of blessing which they were brought to Christ for, in an external way of ministration: And therefore it is meet that we understand his Speech, so as may reprove and correct their thoughts in that for which he faulted them: As if he should say, The Kingdom of Heaven, which I preach, and am instructing you to be my Ministers in, and which I am setting up, and gathering men into, is of such as these Infants, or for such as these whom you thus slight and reject, therefore forbidden them not, but let them come unto me, as to the great King thereof, and Prophet, therein to be blessed by me. As for the phrase. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, we have the like in Matth. 5.3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Kingdom of God is theirs, or of them, they have right to it, and it takes them in. Now shall right be withheld from them to whom its due? Are we authorized to disciple all the Gentiles, baptising them, and that discipling them is a subjecting them to his Kingdom and Government; and hath our Saviour said, That the Kingdom is of such as those Infants: And shall we deny to disciple them thereunto, by baptising them into his Name, to be subject to his power set up in his Church for the nurture of them? Do not they that deny them admission into the Kingdom run into that evil of his Disciples here, or savour of the same root in them, for which Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, was very angry with them, and to correct which, and prevent it for the future, he gave out this instruction. For of such is the Kingdom, etc.  
But here we are encountered with many scruples and objection. viz.  
1. That these children were not brought to Christ to be baptised, nor did he baptise them, or bid his Disciples do it, Object. 1 but he was angry with them for bidding them to come to him, because they therein hindered the occasion of his doing good to men, and because the faith of the bringers was herein to be cherished, and the power of Christ in blessing to be manifested, and the excellent Doctrine concerning little children being capable of the Kingdom of Heaven to be delivered: therefore no ground hence for Baptism.  
It's true, these children were not brought for Baptism, Answ. but for somewhat higher than it; nor read we that he baptised them (for Christ baptised none with water himself) nor that he bid his Disciples baptise them, and whether they were baptised before, or not, in all the people, being baptised, it's not certain; it's not expressed that they were, or were not: but he did that for which they came to him, and by that indeed took occasion to show his good will to men, and cherished the bringers faith that thought he had blessing also for Infants, and especially to open that Doctrine about Infant's capacity for the Kingdom, which should be of further use to the Disciples in ordering the Affairs of the Kingdom. Now upon Christ's words, and specially this his instruction together with his after-commission for Gentile Baptism, we ground the right of their Baptism. But for the cause of his anger, 'tis more probable it was their low thoughts of them; for their error which he rebuked them for, is best to be understood by what he saith for correction of them, had his displeasure been against them for letting him in doing good, or merely cherish the bringers faith, etc. His speeches would have been to that purpose, they would have contained the ground of his rebuking them, as usualiy in all other cases they do. But now its evident they contain the freeness of his grace to children, and their capacity for the Kingdom, and by consequence of his blessing, therefore their fault by in the contrary, their too low thoughts of them, as if unmeet and unworthy of Christ's care of them, and acting in his Kingdom ministration towards them. And no doubt but much of the wisdom and goodness of God and Christ is herein to be seen, in ordering this providence, that so he might take occasion to open his will towards them unto us, in that which he foresaw would be much questioned, and to order it to be so diligently recorded by three Evangelists, that under the mouth of three witnesses, we might be more confirmed in children's right to the Kingdom, and so by consequence to Baptism that takes them into it, and acknowledges their right, and might not keep them out upon such an opinion of them as the Disciples had of them. As for these, it was not perhaps so material to baptise them, they yet being of the Jewish Church, and so in the Kingdom by Circumcision, and especially now when neither he nor his Disciples were about baptising, nor they brought to him for that (which as we said perhaps they had received before.) These things were done and said rather for instruction to his Disciples, for their after-carrying on the business of the Kingdom, then for their present information about them particular children. As usually his Doctrines and Speeches to his Disciples upon any such occasion had a special eye at their fitting for that business, and out instruction. All that discourse in Matth. 18. is plainly instructive to the Disciples about things pertaining to the Kingdom, not only as at that present, but rather as it should be ordered after his departure by them: the determination of that question about Divorce, Marriage, and Continency, was plainly instructive to them too for ordering the Affairs of the Kingdom in those matters too: and this about children follows very fitly for their direction and instruction about them, as also in the same order the Apostle gives hints of instruction about them, 1 Cor. 7.10.14. I say not that the act of Christ then was a standing rule for Baptism. But in his act doing that that is greater than Baptism to them, and in his expressions of the ground of it, & instructions about it, he holds forth a fair intimation of his will, and ground of their admission in the Church-state for the future, as well as formerly they were. Sure it's a far more evident intimation of that, than that saying, I am the God of Abraham, etc. was of the resurrection of the dead to any ordinary understanding. The Commission authorising to disciple all the Gentiles, baptising them, and this telling us expressly, That little children are not to be kept from coming to him, because of such is the Kingdom: They together afford sufficient foundation for their discipling, and admission into the Kingdom, and so for their Baptism. And I think, the words here are such as might justly occasion the Antipedobaptists to question their way whether it will not rather expose them to Christ's indignation to deny admission into the Kingdom to them, than any place they can produce give colour to deny it to them.  
But some say further, Object. 2 Had he given a Command to his Apostles to baptise Infants. He would rather have said, Bring them to me, then suffer them to be brought.  
He neither saith the one nor the other in terminis, Answ. But suffer them to come to me.  
But neither say I, that here is an express command to baptise them, but a declared ground of their right thereto, and a prohibition to hinder them that in faith bring them to Christ, seeing of such is the Kingdom into which Baptism is an outward declarative admission; and in prohibiting them to forbid their coming to him, is an intimate instruction to admit and let them come in to him; yea too further them therein. And I think none can deny, that the coming to the people, or Church of Christ, to be under their care, and ministration is a coming to Christ, in and amongst them; as of old, They that joined themselves to the Church of God, are said to join themselves to the Lord, Isai. 56.3, 6. To Christ in his Church as there protecting, covering, and holding forth life to men, the servants of Christ do call men, testifying both to small and great, 
Acts 26.22.  (which words are comprehensive of the least Infant, Job 3.19. Rev. 20.12.) the grace of God in him. And yet when any man comes upon that call, whether of himself, or brought by others, as these were, should we keep them out, and say, Oh no, the Kingdom is not for you, the grace of Christ is not for such little ones, nor to be testified towards them by discipling them, and admitting them into the Kingdom, till they appear to be elect by showing faith and repentance. We cannot tell whether there be any cover or protection here for them? Is not this to reject the testimony of Christ, that saith of such is the Kingdom of Heaven? Is this to cherish the faith of those that bring them, or do we not therein rather say, They err in exercising such faith, and so with these Disciples rebuke them? Surely we therein fulfil not the Commission that bids, Disciple all the Gentiles, baptising them.  
Object. 3 Answ. On but by this reason they should have the Supper too.  
That follows not: for it's one thing to have the Kingdom given them, and so be admitted into it; and another to have every Ordinance of the Kingdom. If they be admitted into it, and have the care and blessings of it, then have they that which they have right to; then are they in part discipled, and put into the School, where protections, guidance, and learning is to be had. Other things they are to partake of as they they grow fit for it, As the Infants of old at eight days old were admitted into the Kingdom set up in Abraham's Family, 
So say the Hebrew Doctors, See else Ainsw. on Exod. 23.17. See also 1 Sam. 1.22.23.  and Israel's Posterity, though they went not up to the Feasts, till they were able to go in their father's hands. Every one to whom the Kingdom belongs, and that are to be Discipled, and baptised into it, is not therefore by and by capable of every Ordinance and Office in it, no more than every one that is a Subject is therefore to have every privilege of Subjects, as children to make choice of Burgesses, etc. Again, there is a difference of Ordinances, some are such as in which in the form of them persons are but passive, as to be baptised, to be prayed for, and blessed, and such children are therefore more capable of; others are such as in which persons are required to be active, as the eatng in remembrance of Christ, the praying for, and blessing others, etc. Such children are not capable of; yea to the Supper there is an express Command; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Let a man (in general that comes to it) examine himself, and so let him eat and drink: but of this Infants are not capable. But then it's replied, so neither are they capable of that that is required to Baptism, viz. to believe, and repent.  
I answer, There is no such injunction in all the Scripture that whosoever comes to be baptised, should first believe and repent, and then be baptised. Some indeed were baptised with this instruction, That they should repent, Matth. 3, 11. and that they should believe, Acts 19.2. But it's not said, That a man must first believe and repent, and so be baptised, as laying that down for a general rule, as it's in the other, to examine himself. It's again true, That Peter speaking to persons opposite to Christ, and his way, and capable of repentance, bids them, Repent, & be every one of them baptised into the Name of Christ, Acts 2.38. but it's to be minded again, That he speaks to persons that had actually rejected Christ, and that could not nor would be baptised into his Name really, and in truth, Except they did repent of their evil thoughts of him, and carriages against him. 2. That his speech there is applicative to the present people, when he says, Repent ye, and no prescription of a general rule for baptising in general, like that in 1 Cor. 11. about the Supper, as when the Prophet having faulted the people for treading in God's Courts in their wicked ways, bidding them, Wash them, 
Isai 1 15, 16.  and put away their evil ways, do judgement, relieve the oppressed, and then come, it's not safe from thence to gather that none might come into God's Courts, till they had actually put away evil deeds, did relieve the oppressed, etc. and so exclude children of three years old, because as yet uncapable of such actions; so is it unsafe from thence to draw a general rule, That none but persons repenting must be baptised, because he first bids those persecuters of Christ, repent, before he speaks to them of Baptism. 3. It's also to be minded, though in exhorting them to repent, he speaks in the second Person applicatively, Repent ye, yet in speaking of Baptism, he changes the phrase, and speaks in the third Person, And let every one of you be baptised into the Name of the Lord Jesus, a phrase that may be of larger construction than the former. It's not, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Let every one of you repent, and be baptised: nor simply repent ye, and be baptised, but repent ye, and let every one of you be baptised: as if he should say, Repenting, come ye, wholly, all of you, of every age into the house of Christ, or to be Disciples to Christ. While they were so evilly affected to, or thoughted of Christ, they neither entered themselves into his Kingdom, nor yielded up theirs to it, but repenting, they would both be baptised into his Name themselves, and bring theirs in with them, and so every one of them be baptised into the Name of the Lord Jesus. This is that that he would have of them, and and therefore lays down a suitable reason, The promise is to you, & to your children, etc. If they repenting had not yielded up their children to Baptism, they had not been every one of them baptised into that Name; so that that place may make more against such a rule then for it. I know that of Philip to the Eunuch is alleged, Acts 8.37. If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayest: where some gather, That no person may be baptised lawfully, but he that first believes with all his heart.  
But to that I answer, That (besides the want of this verse, wholly in five Copies, (it is observed by Beza, and others; and the omission of it by the Syriack and Arabic Interpreters which doth some what weaken its authority) all that can be safely drawn from that expression, is this, That it behoves men of years that come to Baptism, to be real, cordial believers of the truth of that Doctrine, that they desire Baptism into, and not to dissemble with God, and his servants, and deal hypocritically in what they pretend to give credit to. And that persons so believing, be they of what Nation soever may lawfully be baptised. But it's not safe to conclude thence, That no person till actually so believing may be baptised lawfully; that's more than Philip (if these were his words,) ever said that we find Negative conclusions from such Affirmatives, are not always safely drawn. As to instance, God saith to Abraham, If there were fifty righteous found in Sodom, he would not destroy it: yet we know it was not therein couched as a truth, that unless there were so many he would destroy it, nor is it safe to conclude, that there were not full out ten righteous persons there he would not spare it, because he says, If there were ten such he would; nor is it safe to say, that none but them that actually believe in Christ, and that keep the Commandments shall enter into life, and be saved, and so exclude all Infants as not actually capable hereof, because Paul says to the Jailor, Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved: and Christ to the young man, Matth. 19 If thou wilt enter into life, keep the Commandments. It might have been said to any uncircumcised Gentile, that if he was indeed willing to walk in the Jews Religion, and bear the burden of their Law, he might be circumcised, and yet it followed not thence, that such a saying employed that no person might be circumcised, and so none of his male-seed till actually so willing. So that place shows but how persons of age never fore-brought up under, nor fore-instructed to the Name of Christ, upon their being instructed into it, aught to come, but lays down no general rule for Baptism, as if none till so grown, and so believing, might be baptised; As the other about the Supper contains a general rule for those that are to come to it, the speech being not only applicative to some persons, as those others are, but in the third person indefinite.  
But the phrase is, Not of these is the Kingdom, Object. 4 but of such: that is, Of such in resemblance and spiritual frame.  
Had it been of those, Answ. 1 then we might have conceived the speech limited to those, for some peculiar reason known to Christ, or to the children of the Jews only, that were members of that Church, and therefore Christ saith not so, lest we should mistake him, But of such.  
2. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 generally signifies, Ejusdem generis, aut speciei, or ejusdem conditionis. Such in kind, nature, condition, and not metaphorical resemblance only. We gave instances of it before, and comparing Matth. 18.5. with Luke 9.48. and Mark 9.37. it plainly appears, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, such a one includes, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this very one, and such like, in nature the only place that seems to have it in another signification, to me is that in 1 Cor. 15.48. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: As is the Heavenly one, such are they that are Heavenly: And yet I think its clear there too, that such are they, is more than simply such in Metaphorical similitude, even such in substance, and quality, and condition of body, in the resurrection. Of such, then unless we will straighten the word unwarrantably below its ordinary signification, is of such in nature, disposition, and kind, as well as in metaphorical, spiritual representation also: And it seems to me, that the next words will lead us so to understand it: For when our Saviour saith, He that receives not the Kingdom of Heaven as a little child: Is it not plainly couched in that speech, That little children also do receive it? And that their manner of receiving is a fit platform and resemblance of it in higher steps when we are grown men? It's an usual thing for such manner of speeches to imply a doubting of the Verb, or act spoken of, As to instance, Be wise as Serpents, innocent as Doves: who sees not that there is an employed concession that Serpents are wise, and Doves innocent: and the speech is all one with this, Be wise as Serpents are wise, etc. So Ephes. 2.3. We are by nature children of wrath, as the rest, that is, as the rest are children of wrath, So Ephes. 5.29. and 33. Let a man so love his wife, even as himself, and as Christ the Church. That is, as a man loves himself, and as Christ loves or cherisheth his Church. I might add hundreds of such speeches, yea sometime the Verb is repeated, as Job 10.4. Seest thou as man seethe, Psal. 125.1. As the Mountains are round about Jerusalem, so is the Lord round about those that fear him, etc. And the word [receive] too is used of things of as little action as Infants, As the Altar is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to receive, or not receive its sacrifices, 2 Chron. 7.7. And the Heaven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to receive Christ, Acts 3.21. Yea children are said to have received circumcision, John 7.20 The word there, I confess is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are sometime indifferently used, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Acts 22.18. ●s all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, John 3.11.32. And so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, John 13.20. is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Matth. 10.40. And that children of Christians are every whit as capable of receiving the external Government of Christ by Baptism, as the Jewish children the Government of God by Circumcision, we have before shown; as also how fit they are to receive the instructions and form of Doctrine in the Kingdom of Christ, and submit themselves thereto as they grow up. And it may be seen further in Timothy, who of a child began to know the Scriptures, being trained up thereto by his Mother, and Grandmother, as is most probable; and whether he might not be baptised in infancy too, is wholly uncertain, there is no appearance to the contrary. Paul found him a Disciple when he first met with him, and he was but very young then, Acts 16.1, 2. etc. I am sure Christian Parents are to train up their children in the Christian, as well as the Jewish were in their way of institution, Ephes. 6.4. But I pass this also.  
But this is but however to be extended to elect Infants, Object. 5 such as shall have the Kingdom of God in due time, and therefore he blessed them, and such may be blessed: yea did we know them, we would baptise them too etc.  
To which I answer, Answ. 1. That I find no mention in Scripture of reprobate Infants rejected from the Kingdom, that we should suspect and repute any to be so, and upon such a fear exclude them. As for that instance of Esau, he was not in Infancy rejected from the Kingdom of God, at least in its outward Regiment, or Church-stare; no, nor from possibility to enjoy the eternal state of life, by any thing I can find. All that's said of him while an Infant was this, That he should serve the younger. And I am sure to be a servant to Christ, and his Church, is not to be rejected from the Church, that's not more than is appointed to all Nations. And that was the thing that Jacob and his posterity was chosen unto, to have the Kingdom seated in his seed and posterity, and all others to have blessing in serving him, but curse in despising and rebelling against him: as the Seed promised was of, and in him, and there to set up his Kingdom. As for the same reason all the other Tribes was to bow down to that of Judah, Gen. 49.9. and yet they were not therefore reprobated from eternal salvation: In this respect Jacob is said to have been loved, not personally only, but Nationally in his posterity, even to Malachies time; for in his time that was uttered, Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated, Mal. 1.2. That love to Jacob is brought to prove his love to them, called also by that name Jacob, even as Jacob also while in the womb is called the younger or lesser people; that it might be evident that that was not spoken of his single person only, as men usually expound it, of a purpose of his personal glory, and Esau's personal damnation: for that neither suits the Oracle speaking of two Nations and Peoples, nor could be a fit convincement of his Posterity so many hundred years after that God loved them, not the purpose of Esau's personal damnation be any manifestation of hatred to his posterity, in whose times his Mountains were laid waste: nor suits it with the Scope of the Apostle, who was not speaking of God's electing, or rejecting their persons to eternal salvation, or damnation: nor perhaps of such purposes there at all. But of his rejecting the Seed or Nation of Jacob, (formerly so loved) from being his Church and People through their rejecting the Gospel, his earnest wishes and prayers for their salvation, his endeavouring it also in the Gospel-preaching; his saying, God could yet graft them in again, and that they stumbled not that they might fall, argues, That he judged them not under an absolute decree of eternal damnation, but that he speaks there of their breaking off from the Church in their visible condition, See Rom. 10.1. and 11.11.14.23. So that that Exposition and understanding of it, is a mere mistake of the Apostle, and Prophet. Sure Esau had a birthright, and by that right to blessing too, till he profanely sold it, and was in the Kingdom and Church of God, notwithstanding that Oracle made known to his Parents till he threw himself from it.  
2. Had this been the reason of Christ's blessing of them, than was there less reason for his being so much displeased with his Disciples, 
Matth. 18.11.  they being wholly uncapable of knowing a secret purpose not yet manifested. He had told them, that he came to seek and save that that was lost; and they might know that children were lost too, but of God's secret purpose towards them they knew not. And so this reason might excuse men for not praying for, and blessing their children, because they know not whether they be elect, and so whether the Kingdom be of such as they, or not.  
3. Then should he rather have said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for of these is the Kingdom; and so have put some difference between them, and other children; and shown them that had they been some other children, he would not have been angry with them for putting them back, because not such as these; but for these being elect Infants, or Jewish Children, theirs is the Kingdom.  
Object. 6 Like to that Objection, is another that I meet with, viz. That these Infants might belong to the Kingdom, because such as Christ would bless, and therefore all that can be inferred from it this; That such Infants as Christ will bless belong to the Kingdom.  
Answ. And the same Answer will serve it; for the Disciples might have excused themselves against his displeasure, by saying, Lord we knew not thy purpose of blessing these; and Christ should rather have said, Of these, then Of such: as distinguishing them from other Infants, but neither saith he so, nor of such as I will bless, but of such as these are even before he blessed them, or said he would bless them. Besides, this makes his purpose to bless them, the ground of the Kingdoms belonging to them, whereas he lays down their right to the Kingdom, as the ground whereupon he would have them admitted to his prayers, and blessings; and upon that ground was displeased with his Disciples for hindering their coming to him: yea, that would found the ground of similitude between them, and such others grown men as may enter the Kingdom, not in any thing in the children, but in his affection only to them, in which is identity or sameness towards them and others, rather than similitude; and so the after-instruction is out of the way that speaks of our receiving the Kingdom as a little child, not of secret purposes and intentions in Christ.  
But will you say all Infants belong to it? Object. 7 then the Infans of Turks and Heathens may be admitted into it too.  
To this what my answer is may be seen by what is said before Matth. 28.19. Answ. I wish that since God hath enlarged his Kingdom and Grace to us Gentiles, and that we have put on the Name of Christians, we have not forgot ourselves, or rather the grace of God that admitted us, and put on the Jewish, Pharasaical principles, to count the Indians and Turks, as common and unclean, as their Pharasees counted us. Surely so far as God hath cleansed, we ought not to account common Yea, God hath showed us that we ought not to call any man common or unclean, that is, As the Son of God, Christ Jesus died for all, and risen again, that they that live should live to him; and as God hath to that end also made him Lord of all, and hath given all Nations to him, even the utmost ends of the earth for his possession: and hath given forth Commandment to publish in his Name glad tidings, even the Gospel of his Kingdom to all, and sent his servants in as much as in them lies, to disciple all the Gentiles, (without exception) baptising them into his Name, etc. so bringing them into the obedience of his faith: So, did the whole world yield to his gracious Proclamation, they might be into his Kingdom received, but such as refuse it, refuse their own mercy, and choosing to follow Satan, do abide in his Kingdom, and are out of Christ's. And their Infants are kept out with themselves, not that they may not be discipled, and brought into the Kingdom, or as if the Kingdom was prohibited to them, but because they are not brought, or come not to it; their parents, and those that have the tuition of them hindering them; and God for and by their refuseal lets them go, and theirs with them, and lie in the darkness of the world, which they prefer before his Kingdom: otherwise did even Turks or Indians yield up their children to Christians to be brought up by them in the Christian way, or did God by his providence bring any of them to be under their tuition, they may, yea ought to disciple them, baptising them, and training them up in the instruction of the Lord, notwithstanding that their Parents were, or are Turks, or Pagans. Christ's Kingdom is free for Infants to come into, any Infants, and those that come are to be entertained in it, and not forbidden. They do well that bring them to it to be made Disciples to Christ, and they do evilly that prohibit them.  
Object. 8 By this then children of unbelievers as well as others may be admitted to Baptism: But that your best Reformed Churches will not allow.  
Answ. It's not the inward reality of faith in the Parent that entitles his children to the Kingdom; for of that here it is uncertain, whether those that brought these children, or that were Parents to them, did believe with their hearts in him, and were Disciples to him, though its probable they were such as had an high esteem of him, as a Prophet at least, and so listened to his Doctrine: But it's the grace of God in Christ to mankind that opens the Kingdom to them, and giveth liberty of admission into its outward Court to all that come to it, and tells us Infants appertain to it also: whence the Kingdom now gathers good and bad, but the end of the world when the Net is drawn to the shore will put a difference. Professed subjection to it is enough for our acting towards men of years: For even such as but professed that, were by the Apostles evidently admitted, and that without staying to see the truth of that profession, as is plain in Simon Magus, and in those that were baptised in the same hour, 
Act▪ 16.33.  that they heard the word first in, or very presently upon it, they and their houses; for any that profess that themselves will (as it may be charitably conceived) be willing to bring up theirs in the same way with themselves. Only this we are to mind, that whom we admit, we take in to be under Christ's Regiment, and to be trained up in his Name, and so in his Fathers, and Spirits, in and with him, otherwise we should not disciple, baptising them according to the Commission, and therefore they that will not yield their children up to that, and endeavour it by themselves, or yield them up to the care and endeavour of such as will; their children are deservedly to be refused in this business, because they should not thereby be discipled, or taken rightly into Christ's Kingdom. And yet herein the servants of God are to beware of rashness in judging men's intentions, and ought seriously to admonish and instruct men, even as John did the Pharisees and Sadduces that came to his Baptism. And as the Apostle wishes those that profess themselves believers to bring up their children, Ephes. 6.4. When the Lord and King comes to take view of his Church, he will separate the good from the bad in his baptising, and admitting into the more inward states of his Kingdom, Gathering the wheat into his Garner, and casting out the chaff into unquenchable burning.  
But some object yet further, Object. 9 That Christ acted here as an extraordinary Prophet, and so it was no work of ordinary Ministry, nor rule for baptising.  
To which I answer. 1. That it's said without preof, Answ. 1 or colour of proof, Laying on hands, and Praying, was a work of Ministry, yea of ordinary Ministry, at least it was so in the institution of the Christian Church, and therefore it is by the Apostle mentioned with other ordinary doctrines and practices. 
Heb. 6.1, 2 3.   
2. The rule and ground of baptising must come to us, and hath done so from the great Prophet of the Church Jesus Christ, and is to be searched for in his words and actions. All that he did and said were the deeds and say of an extraordinary Prophet; yea in his Ministration, he acted and spoke usually as an extraordinary one, and yet in those his do and say lie all the grounds of our Religion.  
3. We do not so much look upon, and urge his action, (though that a so is considerable, and testifies his good will to children) as at his Doctrine and Instruction left for us upon that action, as we said before.  
But it's said further: Object. 10, That this place rather affords ground for Episcopal Confirmation, then for Baptism.  
Answ. If for Episcopal Confirmation, then for Baptism much more, as presupposed; for laying on of hands with prayer used in confirmation, was evidently a customary Observation of the ancient Ordinance or Custom of laying on hands on persons baptised: And we read not of laying on hands with prayers and blessings upon any, but fore-baptized one's in the Church of Christ, as instituted upon his Ascension. If then it warrant that Ordinance to children (as I see not how it can be denied) than it presupposes Baptism warrantable to them. Though 2. It's not so much the Act as the Instruction that I insist upon, Of such is the Kingdom.  
Object. 11 But may not children be of the Kingdom, and the Kingdom theirs, and yet they not be baptised? May not Christ mean the spiritual part of the Kingdom?  
Answ. 1 True it is, that a man may be of the Kingdom, and have it, and yet not be baptised with water; As in case one upon his faith presently die, the Kingdom in all its Regiments appertained to him, though he was not admitted into the outward by Baptism. But that's one thing what a man or child may have right to without an outward Ordinance, and another thing what we are to do to them when they come for their right. Divers children might be blessed of God that were not thus brought to Christ, but that was no reason to Christ to deny them his blessing when brought to him.  
2. That the External Ministerial part of it was rather there spoken to, we have showed before. So much of the Kingdom may be given them as may be without any proper action forerequired of them. And as for the Kingdom in its spirituality and glory, that is not of them as they are children in nature, but to that its required that they have a new birth: For the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Unless any one be born of water, and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. However they that are of that, are much more of the outward Court of it, or may be admitted into it by Peter's reasoning, Acts 10.47.  
Object. 12 But Baptism of Infants is merely positive, and therefore so obscure and doubtful an institution of it is without example, and reason.  
Answ. 1 The bringing of Infants up in the truth, and way of God, and for him, is not merely positive, but moral, being part of that duty that God enjoins to parents, and those that bring them up according as they have knowledge and ability; and natural love graciously ordered will lead to it, only the outward Ordinances witnessing and engaging to that truth, and way of God, whether Circumcision, or Baptism, is merely positive.  
2. The Command for Baptising lies not simply here, but in Matth. 28.19. where all the Gentiles are commanded to be discipled, baptising them; and that's a Commission positive enough, large enough to include them, as large as to include women, or uncircumcised ones, that's the Commission for it; and this in Matth. 19 instructs to the clearer understanding of that Commission with reference to children, that they also are to be admitted into the Kingdom. And whereas it's added, that this is without reason, that's not so; for here is the reason for their admission to Christ, which the Commission wills, viz. For of such is the Kingdom of God. As also there is another before the Commission, Matth. 28.18. That all power in Heaven and Earth is given to him; and therefore it's but meet that all ye children as well as others be discipled to him, and baptised unto the acknowledgement of his Name: Which Name also is a Name of grace to all, and so to them, the Saviour of the world, and so of them, as a part of the world. And for example, we have instances of baptising in expressions large enough to include them, as all the people, whole houses, etc. yea, clearly including them, 1 Cor. 10.2.  
3. Divers other things merely positive have less, or as little clear institution by Christ, in any of his practices and say. As the Supper of the Lord is of as positive institution as Baptism; and yet there is as obscure a Command or Example for women's partaking of it: As for this, as we have showed, though its 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Let a man examine himself, and so eat; yet as it's not every one that's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, man, that may upon self-examination eat of it; for a Jew, or Turk, though he should first examine himself, yet without renouncing his former way, and submitting to be one of the Church of Christ, he might not eat of it: So also a Company of men in Church-Assembly, though without women amongst them, are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 too, as well as when women are amongst them. Besides, if that be warrant good enough for women to eat the Supper, because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a word of signification large enough, to include them, then why are we partial to throw Infants out of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, all Nations, or all Gentiles, us the Subject of Discipling and Baptism, when that's every way as large to include them. If it be alleged, that in 1 Cor. 10.17. it's said, We all partake of that one bread, it's easily answered, that that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, we all, is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the clause before. The many that eat that one bread, are one body, and one bread, because they all eat it, and that may be true, though none but men eats it: They being many men are one bread, and one body, inasmuch as they all eat of one bread. The Disciples that eat with Christ were many, and they all o●e bread, and one body, inasmuch as they all eat of one bread, and yet there were neither all the Church of Christ there, nor any women. Besides, That one bread that all that eat of, are made one body and one bread by, may rather be interpreted to be Christ, than the bread in the Supper. So that there is as much Command or Example for admitting Infants to Baptism, as wom●n to the Supper; and for reason there is as much laid down for it as is for them. If it be said of women, That they are of the Body of Christ: so it's said concerning Infants, That of such is the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom being for such, is as good reason for admitting them into it, as women's pertaining to the Body of Christ to admit them to the Supper to remember it. Yea, might we not as warrantably (against all the Hebrew Doctors) affirm, That no woman was to eat of, or did eat the Passover Lamb in Israel, as that no Infant was, or may be baptised, because that being a mere positive Ordinance, its never said, Let women eat of it, or that they did: Nay it's said; None that is uncircumcised shall eat of it: And the Antipedobaptists say, Circumcision reached only to males: And if it be replied, That all the Congregation of Israel was to keep it, Exod. 12.47. we might after the same manner as the Antipedobaptists except against as large expressions for Baptism, as all the people, all Nations, and say, That all the Congregation might mean only of all the males that were all then to meet; for that phrase is used when then there is little colour for including the women, as in 1 King. 12.2, 3. Besides, They might all keep the Feast of unleavend bread, by abstaining from leaven, and yet not by eating the Passover Lamb. All strangers too in their houses were to do the first, but not the second. So for keeping the first day of the week as a Sabbath, of day of rest, and worship to God, and not keeping the Seventh Day yet Sabbath, hath as little positive Command, and less too then this of Infant Baptism. Indeed, we find that on the first day of the week the Disciples met to break bread, Acts 20.7. but he saith, Not to keep it a day to the Lord. Again, in 1 Cor. 16.1, 2. the Apostle bids, That they should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, every first day of the week lay aside something for the poor Saints; but that they should keep it, or any other one day as a Sabbath, not a Word. I might also mention Christian men's being Magistrates, and the lawfulness of making Wars, and of Oaths in the Name of God for Confirmations, but I pass them.  
4. That children should be admitted into the Church-state they had formerly in custom and practice under the Law, and therefore for that there needed less positive institution; only that which was of difference between that state, and the state of it in the Gospel-time since Christ's Ascension was meet to be declared; As that persons should be admitted into the Kingdom of God, and discipled by Baptism, and that the Male-Infants of the Gentiles should not be circumcised; and that females as well as males should be baptised; all which are held forth in the Commission, Disciple all Nations, or all the Gentiles, baptising them: Though indeed it was formerly in use, as the Hebrew Doctors say, To baptise their females in the times of Circumcision. Things that were not to be altered, they might follow the light hinted to them in the Law, in planting the Churches, though yet Christ left them not to that, but tells them plainly, That of such as Infants is the Kingdom that he preached, and set up. And such a hint as that with a large general Commission might suffice for that, considering what had been their practice for receiving in Infants. And in this way the Apostle made use of the Law, and ordered things in the Christian Church with a correspondency, by way of analogy and proportion in like matters to what was ordered in the Jewish Church in divers particulars. As to instance, About subjection of the woman unto the man, the Apostle saith, I permit not a woman to speak in the Churches, but to be in subjection, as also saith the Law, 1 Cor. 14.34. And speaking of the lawfulness of the Gospel-Preachers, receiving maintenance of the people, that they preach to, and labour amongst, he backs his saying, and order with the authority of Moses Law. 
1 Cor. 9.8▪ 9, 10.  Say I these things only, or saith not the Law also the same: For it is written, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the Ox that treadeth out the corn: Thence inferring à minore ad majus: and by way of analogy, that if God regard Oxen, and would have them sustained in their work by them for whom they work, then much more the Preachers of the Gospel that labour for men's souls should be by them also so sustained, 1 Cor. 9.8, 9, 10. Which direction he tells us, is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a bare humane prudence, but a duty approved of God. And so ver. 13. he proves the same thing more plainly by the Order of God in the Law for their Priests and Levites, alluding to Deut. 18.2, 3. with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as if they might well know, and could not reasonably plead ignorance of the mind of God in this matter, from what they read in the Law of Moses before, and without his thus writing unto them. Know ye not that they that ministered the holy things, eat of the holy things, and they that serve at the Altar, partake of the Altar: even so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Lord hath ordered or ordained that they that preach the Gospel, should live of the Gospel. The main substance of the Law is yet observable, though not the particular circumstances of tithes and offerings in that Legal way. We cannot say thence indeed, That tithes are jure divino, but thence we may say, That maintenance by the people, of those that preach the Gospel, & labour in the work of God amongst them is an Ordinance jure divino. And if the people by themselves, or their Representatives, whom they elect and choose to make Laws and Orders for them, do pitch upon that way of tenths to do it in, then is it in that way lawful to receive maintenance of them, that being the way that the people have thought good to observe God's Order in. The like I might say about the Supper concerning the Apostles allusions to the Sacrifices, and amongst them the Passover in his speaking of the nature of it, 1 Cor. 10.18. and 5.8, 9 Yea what else was their choice of Elders in every City, and their laying on hands upon them in ordaining them, but a manifest reference to the Law, and the Order of God therein in choosing Elders over the Congregation, & laying on hands on them so chosen, upon which also followed the spirit of Prophecy, in the first institution of them, Num. 11.24, 25, 26. with Deut. 34.9. And what other precept had they from Christ for so doing in the particular Churches that we read of. And yet see the practice, in Acts 14.23. even as their baptising men, and all theirs, householders, and their households together, seems to be a plain imitation of the circumcising men, and all their males at the first institution of Circumcision and the after-proselyting of Heathens to them. Now whereas some say, By the same reason we should have one universal High Priest, or Bishop too, because they had an High Priest. I answer, So we have, even the Man Christ Jesus, who then was not come in the flesh to be High Priest to them: and that we should have another on the earth follows nor, for they never had two together appointed them. Besides, That all that Order of sacrificing and ceremonies, we have express testimony for the ceasing, but of ceasing to have children in the Kingdom of Christ, or to bring them up for the Lord, as Disciples to him, we have no expressions, but clearly to the contrary, even as they were to disciple them to God's Law and Statutes, etc. Only whereas they had an Ordinance acted upon males only, (yet so as the females were counted of the Circumcision in and with them, as if they had been circumcised too) the Commission is in such expressions as take in both Sexes, and the practice of baptising both Sexes is expressed in Acts 8.12. They were baptised both men and women: Which words are sometimes used to denote both Sexes of any Age, rather than grown Ages only of either Sex, as may be seen, 1 Cor. 11.3.11.12. 1 Sam. 27.9.11. and 31.2, 3. As also in that of Ai, Josh. 8.25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And all that fell in that day of men and women were twelve thousand, even all the men of Ai. We must either say that there were no Infants or children in so great a City, which is no way probable, or say that the words, men, and women, denote or include the several Ages in each Sex. The like I might note on Judg. 9.49, 51.  
But there is no Analogy between Circumcision and Baptism, Object. nor can their grounds be one and the same, that that should be any warrant for this; for neither doth Baptism pertain to the same Covenant with Circumcision, nor succeeds it in its place & room, etc.  
Answ. There is much Analogy between Baptism, and Circumcision, at least as much as between the Priests under the Law, and Ministers of the Gospel, or as between the Altar-worship, and the Supper of the Lord. And so as much ground of reasoning from one to the other here as there, though I confess there is also great disagreement betwixt them. I shall consider both of them, and first the latter.  
1. They differ in the outward rite or matter of observance. Circumcision was a cutting of the foreskin of the flesh, Baptism is a washing of the flesh. That had blood in it, because true blood was not then shed that should make atonement and expiation for our sin, to which that therefore pointed: This hath no blood shed in it, because the true blood that is propitiatory is shed, and no other propitiatory Sacrifice is remaining, only washing and cleansing in the virtue of that that is shed, is now needful. And therefore such an Ordinance only is left to us for our coming into the Church of Christ, as represents that to us.  
2. They differ in the subject of them: That was only upon males, they being only capable of it, and yet so as that females were by way of interpretation included in them, as we noted before; else all the females must have been excluded the Passover, contrary to the Jewish Doctors. But the Ordinance of Baptism is upon male and female both: yea the Jewish Doctors say, it was ever so amongst the Jews, when they proselyted any to them, all their males were circumcised, baptised, and brought an Offering, and all the females were baptised, and brought an Offering.  
3. In limitation of time, Circumcision was required on the eighth day, though in some cases they might omit it then. Baptism is not so strictly tied to a day, or set time. The reason we hinted before.  
4. Circumcision bound over to the observation of the Law given, and to be given to the Fathers, and by Moses; and so to all the whole observation of the Jewish Religion: but Baptism bindeth not thereto, but to the faith and yoke of Christ to observe all things commanded by him, Matth. 28.19, 20.  
5. Circumcision was to bring them under the profession of an expectation of the promised Seed yet to come, and not as then come: but Baptism is to bring men under the profession of the promised Seed, as actually come, and now to us Gentiles, as having accomplished in himself the sin-offering, and work of Sacrifice for our salvation, and so into the Name of Jesus Christ, and of God as known in him, Father, Son, and Spirit, Acts 2.37, 38. Matth. 28.19. In these things they differ, but in the main end they agree.  
1. They agree in this, in being both the way or mediums of proselyting or bringing into an acknowledged unity with the Church in outward profession, and obligation, to observe the worship of God therein according to the respective Administrations of it, now, and then: for as Circumcision was the Ordinance by which persons were admitted and declared to be of the Church of God, and Religion of the Jews, Branches of the stock of Abraham: So Baptism is that Ordinance by which persons are admitted into, and declared to be of the Church of Christ in its external Form, and Government, and become from the Gentiles ingraffed visible Branches of the stock of Abraham too, as shall after more appear: They that should not have been reckoned Branches of Abraham but by Circumcision, are now so reckoned by Baptism. And as that (Circumcision) bound to the observation of the Religion then of God instituted to instruct men to Christ, so this (Baptism) obliges to the Religion, and worship of God, instructing us about Christ, as now instituted by Christ. So that children of Christians being to be brought up in the Christian institution, nurture, and instruction, it follows that they are to be brought up in it, and obliged to it by Baptism; all the children of the Jews and Proselytes were in their way by Circumcision.  
2. They agree in this: That as Circumcision was but an external Ordinance instructing to an internal Circumcision of the heart, and sealing the righteousness of the faith of Abraham that he had in his uncircumcision, viz. That he did righteously in believing in God according to his word concerning the promised Seed, and his blessing of him, and that God would perform his promises righteously to him, and all that walk in that righteous faith of his: So Baptism is but an external Ordinance too, instructing to the inward washing and purifying of the heart by the grace of God in Christ to the meet making of a man to participate of the Covenant, and promised Inheritance; and it witnesses to the same promises partly as performed in the coming, death, and resurrection of Christ, and partly as nigh at hand, and ready to be performed to men in believing on Christ, that promised Seed, as Abraham did: as that all that so do shall be blessed with faithful Abraham, shall have remission of sins, righteousness, the Holy Ghost, and eternal life. And thus it's said, That John witnessed unto Christ the true light: which is to be understood of John, not as a man simply, but as preaching and baptising: so that his Baptism pointed to Christ to believe on him with the promises of forgiveness of sins, and the gift of the Holy Ghost to them that should so do. As Circumcision sealed not the present righteousness of the party circumcised, as if all that received that Ordinance were partakers with Abraham in the righteousness reckoned to him, but to the righteousness of his faith: so neither doth Baptism witness the righteousness of the party baptised; for such may be a generation of vipers; chaff, and not wheat, in the gall of bitterness, and bond of iniquity, but to the faith of Christ, the Doctrine published concerning him, as that He is the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world, and that whosoever believeth in him shall be reckoned righteous, and have eternal life. So that the use of Baptism in its testimony and witness doth nothing more obstruct the baptising Infants, then that attested to, and sealed in Circumcision, obstructed formerly their Circumcision.  
3. There is the same distinction of Baptism, as of Circumcision into outward and inward, and the same emptiness in the one, as in the other, where merely outward. There was a Circumcision of the flesh, and a Circumcision of the heart, and the former without the latter, was no Circumcision in the sight of God for admitting persons to the enjoyment of the righteousness of God: So there is a Baptism in water unto repentance, instructing to that inward washing of the heart, but that alone saveth not, nor maketh a true spiritual Christian more than the other external Ordinance made a true spiritual Israelite: This is but the putting away the filthiness of the flesh, but it's the washing, and so the answer of a good conscience through the Resurrection of Christ, that giveth right to fellowship with God in spiritual grace and glory, and which seals up the soul to the day of Redemption, Matth. 3.11. 1 Pet. 3.20, 21. So that nothing more is in the nature of this Baptism, than was in Circumcision to debar Infants from it.  
4. There was no more compulsion to be used in proselyting by Circumcision, then in discipling by Baptism. The Gentile proselytes were to declare themselves as willing to renounce their false worships, and accept of the Jewish Religion with its Ordinances, as ever we read that any Christian Proselytes, or Disciples did, and yet their Infants were proselyted notwithstanding any want of such personal profession. Thus (as Ainsworth out of the Jewish Rabbins informs us in his Annotations on Gen. 17.12.) was their practice. If they received of the Heathen a servant grown, and he was not willing to be circumcised, his Master dealeth with him a whole twelvemonth more than that it was not lawful to keep him; and if in that time he was not willing, he sold him to the Heathen. And so for a woman taken captive that any had a mind to make his wife, they forced them not to be jews, but dealt with her a whole year to accept their religion, and if she accepted not, they might sell her. This for those under their own power, and dispose, whether bought, or taken captive; but for such as came to be proselyted, they used to inquire diligently, lest they came for by-respects, 
Ainsw. on Deut. 21.12.  as riches, or for dignity, or for fear; and if they find no such thing, than they make known to him the Laws weightiness, and the toil in doing of it above what other people have, to see if they will leave off. If they take it upon them, and withdraw not (unto which there must be some public profession; for it was never done but in the presence of three) then they receive him. So that that confession of sins, or profession of faith, in those that came to Baptism in grown years, was no unusual thing or unlike to the practice of Proselytes in being circumcised to their Religion.  
5. When they came to be circumcised; in coming to join themselves and their families to the Church of God, they came under the wing of his protection; so when men and their families come unto the Church of Christ, and are by Baptism obliged to his yoke and doctrine, they come to under his protection and salvation. Whence these phrases of salvation coming to such a house as where Christ and the Gospel was received, and they were thereupon baptised, as Acts 16.31. Believe in the Lord jesus, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. So in that of Zacheus, Luke 19.9, 19 of which protection nothing but the willing refusals of some party in the house could deprive them.  
6. Circumcision was but once acted upon persons, and that was in their admission into the Church of God, (except in that case of the children in the wilderness, Josh. 5.4.7.) So neither find we any warrant for iterating Baptism, that hath been made into the Name of the Lord Jesus. Indeed there is a place in Acts 19.4, 5. that seems to say that some Disciples fore-baptized were baptised again. But the answer to that is known, that these words, ver. 5. [When they heard this, they were baptised into the Name of the Lord jesus] relates not to those Disciples, but to the people baptised by john, which I confess doth not satisfy me. I think the Text may afford another, and bettet answer, viz. That they were baptised again, because as themselves confess they were baptised into Baptism: For when they were asked into what they were baptised, they say not into the Messiah held forth by john, but into john's Baptism. It's probable that some that thought it necessary for them to be baptised, and yet understood not into what Name or Doctrine, but minded more john's act of baptising or washing them, than the Name or Doctrine declared by him, had come and pressed a necessity of baptising them, as john baptised the people, but held not forth the Doctrine concerning Christ which he baptised them into, and so they were baptised into his Baptism, and not unto the Name and Doctrine of Christ Jesus. And I am the rather induced to believe that this is true, because Paul relates unto them the Doctrine that john baptised into, as a thing which they had not minded, and as that which they could never have been baptised and discipled to, but that they must in knowing or hearing of, that have heard of the Holy Ghost. And besides its said, that When they heard that, (as if they had never heard it before) than they were baptised into the Name of the Lord jesus. And truly it seems to me to be thus with many Rebaptizers, they baptise into Baptism. For the Name of Christ men had been baptised into before, and instructed more or less into the faith of him, even the generality of those they urge Baptism unto, and baptise again; yea there is often nothing concerning this Name of Christ, in which they that are thus baptised by them differ from others; nor from themselves, while content with their Infant-Baptism, only they have been by them baptised upon profession of joining with them in their way and Doctrine and Baptism. Whence its clear that they are baptised into Baptism, or into fellowship with such a man, and his way of Baptism then into the Name of Christ. And whereas formerly Baptism into Christ was the note of distinction between those that acknowledged Christ the Son of God, and Saviour of the world, and looked for salvation by him; and them that believed not so, but worshipped either Heathen Idols, or God in another name, and not in Christ: now they make it a distinction from the generality of them that profess that Name, though in point of faith nothing differing from them, so that its the Name of Baptism that they run out withal, and baptise into, crying, Oh this is Baptism, an excellent and needful Baptism. It's not the Name of Christ that they make the proper Character of their Church, and which they are distinguished from others by, for that they had as much before perhaps, and others have as substantially that profess and own not another baptising. Such seem to me to need rather to return back again from that their Baptism, then to press others to be baptised thereinto, as if it was the necessary thing in which men are to have salvation.  
7. And indeed herein also Baptism and Circumcision agree, That as that was the Note of distinction (Circumcision I mean, as witnessing the righteousness of the faith, and obliging to the Law) between the Church of God, and all other people, so as that all that were circumcised by virtue of that appointment of God, were reputed the Israel of God according to profession; though of different Tribes, Nations, and ways of worship, (as after happened between the ten Tribes, and the two, and so the Samaritans,) so as that though upon their erring from the Law, and right form of worship, they were not therein to be joined withal, yet upon sight of their error, and idolatry, and renouncing it, they might be received into unity of worship with them that rightly worshipped, without a new urging or alteration of their former Circumcision, although done in those times that they or their Fathers worshipped not aright according to the Law which it obliged: So Baptism distinguishes, and was at first the badge of distinction between the Church professing the faith of Christ, and worship of God according to him, and all others, whether jews, or Gentiles, not submitting to the Christian Name, and Institution; and such as retain that Name and profession, and are baptised thereinto, though in their particular beliefs and ways of worshipping in that Name, they have exceedingly erred and corrupted themselves from God, yet need nothing for their having fellowship with those that worship aright in that Name but the renouncing and letting go their departures from Christ in their idolatrous and evil principles, and practices; without any altering or iterating their former Baptism. So that the Analogy between these two, is such as affords ground enough for arguing; as the Apostle did in cases before mentioned, it being a clear case that children are to be subjected to Christ, and brought up in his nurture and admonition: So that the less need of an express Command in a case so like to what was practised constantly before; and which succeeded that of Circumcision too especially, as to us Gentiles. They being now to be taken by Baptism into Abraham's family, or Church, propogated by the holding forth of his faith, who formerly were to have been not so taken in, and joined to them but by Circumcision: Nor mattered it against this that they were for a time together in the Jewish Church, for so was Solomon anointed during David's life and reign, and yet his Successor, and so the Apostles who succeeded Christ in point of Ministration to the Church, did yet minister sometime before his Ascension. Nay, there being no prohibition of this practice of taking in children in express or employed terms, it's as a silent confirming of that order in the following way of admission. Yea, his telling us that the Kingdom is of such as those little ones brought to him, and express bidding his Disciples disciple all the Gentiles, baptising them, amounts to little less than a positive express Order for baptising them.  
Now whereas it's objected further, that Baptism and Circumcision pertain to divers Covenants: Object. The former to a Covenant made with Abraham, and his carnal seed; This is to Christ, and his spiritual seed. That was a Covenant of carnal promises, and earthly enjoyments: This a Covenant of spiritual promises and heavenly enjoyments: therefore none should be admitted into the Christian Church but spiritual stones, real believers. As Circumcision was upon carnal Infants, or natural children: so should Baptism be upon spiritual Infants, newborn babes in Christ. I shall consider nextly (by God's assistance) what substance is in it.  
1. The Covenant that God made to Abraham, Answ. whereto Circumcision was annexed as the sign of it, was a spiritual Covenant containing most heavenly and spiritual promises; As, that in him, and his seed should all the Nations be blessed, Gen. 12.3. which the Apostle calls the Gospel preached to him, Gal. 3.8. That God would be his God, and the God of his seed, and that he should be the Father of many Nations. The former of which is the most spiritual promise set before the believing Gentiles, 2 Cor. 6.16. to be their God. A promise reaching beyond this life, even to the state of Glory. Whence Christ proves by this very privilege of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, That the dead shall rise, even those dead persons, Matth. 22.31, 32. And the Apostle tells us that upon it is grounded, or therein is contained Gods providing them the Inheritance itself, even that City or state of Glory with his seed, that as yet he hath not received, or had not in his life time; Far they died in faith, not having received the promises, Heb. 11.13, 14, 15, 16. Yea, what greater glory or privilege is set before us Christians, or shall be inherited by us in the New-Jerusalem then this? He that overcometh, shall inherit all things, and I will be his God, and he shall be my Son, Revel. 21.7. And they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them their God, ver. 4. And for the making him a Father of many Nations, this the Apostle tells us, takes in the spiritual Seed, even all the believers through the Gospel, or word of promise revealed to him, and now more fully to us in Christ Jesus. Yea at length the world, Rom. 4.12, 13. when they shall all remember, and turn to God, Psal. 22.27. And sure his giving him Christ to be his Seed, that all Nations should be blessed in, and by virtue of union with him multitudes out of all Nations, and in due season the generality of all the Nations to be his Seed, was no carnal, but a most spiritual blessing; and so the Apostle sets it before the Gentiles, as a most spiritual blessing, to be the Seed of Abraham according to promise, and to have him the Father of us all, Gallat. 3.29, Rom. 4, 16, 17.  
But we find that God promised to make him exceeding fruitful, and to give him the Land of Canaan, Object. and this latter called the Covenant, Psal. 105.8, 9, 10, 11. And are not these things carnal?  
Answ. 1 We may understand them carnally, and spiritually both, and both ways true: God made him exceeding fruitful, as a spiritual Father, or as by the Word of promise given unto him, and held forth by him, and in his posterities many were born to the faith of him, and by union with Christ (who according to the flesh descended from his loins, and was held forth in his faith or doctrine) came to be his children, who also are made truly Kings unto God. And the Land of Canaan was not only nor so much the Land in its then estate; for so neither he, nor Isaac, nor Jacob, (nor many of his seed) had it in their life times: For he gave him none inheritance in it, no not to set his foot upon, Acts 7.5. They lived not to enjoy it for their portion, and though his seed after the flesh had it, and dwelled in it, yet that was but a little while, Isai. 63.18. whereas in the Covenant it is given for an everlasting possession: Therefore sure the Glory of Christ's Kingdom in it is the thing mainly promised, and so in the restauration of all things they shall possess it, even the spiritual Seed, when made new, and in a new and glorious way, in the New-Jerusalem, when become the joy of the whole Earth.  
2. Though these promises were fulfilled carnally, out of his loins naturally Kings and Princes came, and many of his natural Seed had, and dwelled in the Land, yet that would not make the Covenant to be carnal: for if promises of carnal mercies in a Covenant make it carnal, than the Covenant in Christ now is carnal too, for therein also is the promise of this life, as well as of that that is to come, 1 Tim. 4.8. Thence the Apostle, Ephes. 6.3. applies that carnal promise of the Land of Canaan with a little alteration to children of the Gentiles now: That thou mayest live long in the earth: answers to that, That thou mayest live long in the Land that the Lord thy God giveth thee. Those temporal promises than cannot make it to have been a carnal Covenant, no more than the adding of promises for the things of this life makes the Covenant in Christ a carnal Covenant. Indeed the Mediation and Ministry of Moses, as a Minister of the Old Testament given by him, was exercised more immediately about those carnal promises, as Deut. 28.1.14. As Types of the more heavenly things, (even as his Law was an injunction of typical carnal Services, and ceremonial Observations, Heb. 98, 10.) To which the Ministration of Christ, and Mediation of better promises, Heb. 8.5, 6. is opposed (as is evident throughout the Epistle,) and not to the Covenant and Promises made with Abraham, to which Circumcision was first annexed.  
3. Though Circumcision obliged to the Observation of Moses Law, when it was given, yet (as the Apostle tells us) it was a seal not so much of the carnal promises, as of the righteousness of Abraham's faith: viz. That God would reckon them the Seed of Abraham, and impute righteousness to them, as to Abraham, in so believing, Rom. 4.11, 12.23. So that the Covenant as circumcision was annexed to it as a Seal was rather as it was a Covenant of spiritual promises: even as to such promises Baptism especially witnesses.  
2. The Seed of Abraham interested in, and heirs of this Covenant, are, and were always not a carnal as such, but a spiritual Seed: Though a multiplication of his carnal seed also was promised in the Covenant, as to his own particular, yet the proper heirs of the Covenant in the righteousness of the faith that circumcision sealed, were only a spiritual Seed, the Sons of promise. The Apostle is clear for this, when he makes Christ the Seed, to whom the Covenant or Promises were made, and that is Christ personally and mystically. Gal. 3.16.29. If ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. And so in Rom. 4.12.16. Abraham is Father not only of them that believe being circumcised, but of those that are Gentile-believers of the uncircumcision also: They that are of the steps of the faith of Abraham, whether circumcised, or uncircumcised, they are the Seed, and the promise is sure to all them. And what more plainly than that in Rom. 9.6.8. That not all that are of Israel, therefore are Israel; nor because they are Abraham's seed are they therefore children; but the children of the promise, they are counted for the seed: that is, They that are born of the promise, or grace of God held forth in the promise or Gospel of Christ: For in his death and resurrection, the promise is said to be performed to us that was made to Abraham, Acts 13.32, 33. There is no branch in the Covenant of Abraham sealed and confirmed to all the natural seed of Abraham, as their proper legacy and portion that God would not fail to give them absolutely, no not in the things that were but external: the Land of Canaan was not the portion of them all, nor enjoyed by them, nor fruitfulness in issue, etc. It's true, all the outward mercies that the natural seed enjoyed; yea, their very beings of his offspring, were parts of the faithfulness of God to Abraham, and they themselves were in a part the fulfilling of the Covenant to him. But those things that Abraham hath heirs in after the Covenant, (heirs of the Covenant promises) were not to the Seed after the flesh, but after the Spirit, Christ, and his members.  
3. That Covenant made with Abraham, is the same that the believers of the Gentiles are under, and it's performed in them, and to them. In them as his seed in Christ, to them as God is their God, and they his people, and shall have the New-Jerusalem, and Canaan with him; as they are blessed with him in remission of sins, and righteousness. And this flows from the former, For if they be his seed, and heirs, than inheritors of his blessings, Gal. 3.14. And if not so, than not his seed, and heirs, if what they enjoy, or are interested in, are other riches than those given to him. Indeed this is peculiar to him, That he is Father of us all that believe, even of many Nations; and so that Christ in whom the seed is chosen, and begotten, is his Son according to the flesh, and was to come of his seed after the flesh. Though in this latter the peculiarity is not his from all others, for many of his seed also had it with him, but from multitudes of his seed, and others that had not so. But the Scripture is express, That the uncircumcised Gentile-believers have interest in the same Covenant in other things, in that it calls them, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of the same Body with the believing Jews, and partakers of the promise in Christ; graffed into the same root with them, and partakers of the same juice and sap; not of other, but the same: thence fellow-heirs, and brethren, Abraham being the Father of them all, in respect of the Covenant. Indeed the Administrations or holding forth of the Covenant, and means for nurturing men up in the expectation, (and enjoyments of it in some beginnings) were divers. There the heirs were under the Law, and all the seed of Abraham after the flesh were to be trained up in that way of bondage under types and shadows pointing to Christ, but now under the Gospel-declaration in a plainer way, and more spiritual, with such Ordinances, as are annexed and fitted thereto; that Law of Ceremonies being accomplished, & so put to its period in the coming & death of Christ. Thence there is a difference both of Gospel-preaching, & Ordinances now from what was then, they having such as might nurture them to the expectation of the promised Seed, the Son of God in his coming in the flesh; we such as witness to him as already come dead, risen, and glorified, and instruct to expect him coming in power, and spirit.  
4. The Medium for begetting and bringing in sons to Abraham according to the Spirit, was, and is one and the same in substance, though otherwise now, then then in its declaration. They were always born of the Gospel, and not of the Law, though nurtured under the Law, both before and after. And the Gospel was the same as preached to them, and unto us, the same in substance: viz. That in Abraham and his seed all the Nations of the earth should be blessed; not in the works of the Law, but in him believed in. To the which faith the Law shut them up, taking away all possibility of life, and blessing in and from themselves, while it discovered their sins, and shown them their obligation under the curse for its transgressions. Indeed than that Seed was preached as to come, now as already come, and perfected for saving us: But always of that Gospel, or Word of God's freegrace, were the true Seed begotten: they were in all times the believers, and not the workers for life, and trusters in their works: And the word of faith was always Jesus Christ, or the Seed that is Jesus Christ, who was yesterday, to day, and the same for ever.  
These things being considered, that difference before objected appears false, and to spring from wrong apprehensions. Thence the inference therefrom follows not, viz. That Baptism must be upon a spiritual Seed, as Circumcision was upon a carnal; both of them in their several seasons have been upon a spiritual, and upon a carnal too. Circumcision was upon a carnal seed in Ishmael, and all the natural Israelites upon a spiritual, when a stranger joined himself to the Lord in love to his Name, Isai. 56.3.6. 1 King. 8.41, 42. And so Baptism was upon the natural, carnal seed, and not spiritual, when the multitudes, even the generality of the people were baptised by John, chaff, as well as wheat; And upon the spiritual, and not carnal seed in the Eunuch, Cornelius, and others of the Gentiles. That inference springs from this wrong conception, that the one and the other, are seals of the Covenant, as due to the parties signed with them: which we have showed before to be an error: Circumcision sealed but the righteousness of Abraham's faith held forth to them, not the righteousness of each person circumcised, and his enjoyment of the Covenant, otherwise then upon condition of his so believing as Abraham did: neither doth Baptism witness the faith of the party baptised, or that he is an heir of promise, but to Christ, and the faithfulness of God in performing his promise in Christ: that we are sinners in ourselves, and need cleansing, otherwise not fit for fellowship with God; but that there is in Christ a cleansing and propitiation made ready for us, that he takes away the sin of the world; and that whoso believeth in him, turning from all other things to God, by him shall meet with righteousness, and forgiveness: they are both of them Ordinances of the outward Court, or of admission into the outward Regiment of Christ's Kingdom, in which men are to wait upon him for instructions and teachings to salvation; and therefore it saith men should believe in him, and having believed, that they should yet go on to do so, and they shall meet with a performance of the blessing of Abraham unto them. The Baptism with the Holy Ghost, is indeed upon the spiritual Seed only, (if we grant them in Heb. 6.4, 5. to have been spiritually born) sealing them up to the day of Redemption: but the outward Baptism is not so limited, it being a more carnal thing acted upon the flesh. Nor say I that persons (Infants, or others) are to be baptised upon this ground, that they are in the Covenant, and heirs of it in a proper sense: but because Christ being Lord and Saviour hath salvation and forgiveness in him for them all, and they are to submit unto him, and be trained up for him, that in minding and holding fast his say faithfully they may become heirs, and inheritors of his Covenant, and Kingdom; as to that purpose we find John instructing the people that came unto his Baptism, That they might be made meet to inherit with the Saints, or to receive the Baptism of the Holy Ghost, and be gathered into the Garner, Luke 3.10, 11, 12, 13, 14. Matth. 3.9, 10, 11, 12. And we find him baptising Publicans, Soldiers, Pharisees, Sadduces: yea, the generality of the people, concerning whom he never saith, That they were therefore the Heirs of the promise, or Seed of Abraham according thereunto, but exhorts them not to reckon themselves so, because of their birth of him, nor think because of their present Baptism, that they were sure enough, telling them, his Baptism was but with water unto repentance, or to instruct them that they should repent; that he admitted one and other, chaff, and wheat; that Christ to whom he witnessed, and instructed them to look, had the true Baptism, that would indeed cleanse and renew them, the Baptism of the Spirit, etc. The like we may observe of the Apostles baptising the Gentiles, That it was a bringing them into the house of God, where the Feast is to be had, into the society of those that acknowledge him come in the flesh, and to be the Son of God, there to attend the Kings coming to them, and taking them into his banqueting Chambers, Matth. 22.9, 10. And he puts the difference between those that are made meet for the Feast by and in his Servants Ministration, and them that are not, and accordingly deals with them. Indeed it's too low a conceit to think that an external Ordinance should seal an internal, spiritual heirship. That's the work of Christ, or Christ by the Spirit of promise. When men in the Gospel hearing have believed, and in attendance to such outward nurture as the external form of the Kingdom affords, are brought into, and made single for Christ; then he seals them with his Spirit of promise, and owns them for heirs, as the Scripture witnesseth, Tit. 3.6.5. Heirship follows his justifying by his grace, which is met with, and received by faith, Rom. 5.1.9. and 1 Cor. 6.11. and then after that follows the Spirits sealing, Ephes. 1.13, 14. Rom. 8.15, 16. Indeed there is a double justifying, washing, and cleansing. One, Ministerial by men, as when a Jew, or Pagan, turning in to the Doctrine of the Gospel to own it, is washed by Baptism, and therein ministerially acquitted, and cleared from all his former idolatry, so that the Church charges it not upon him, as to their carriage towards him. The other is God's act, when a soul in, and through the Gospel, throughly and cordially believing is acquitted and owned of God: Upon this second follows his sealing. It's true, the Jews with all their Proselytes, were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the children of the Kingdom, because in its outward Court, or Regiment, and because to them it was in the first place in its altered form to be tendered, Matth. 8, 12. And in this respect too they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Children of the Prophets, and of the Covenant that God made with Abraham: Which signifies not only that they were the natural Seed of the Prophets, and of Abraham, (for perhaps that they might not all be, there might be many of them who had grown in with them out of other stocks, by becoming Proselytes) but all that were circumcised (as they were) were to have the Covenant first tendered to them, and indeed conditionally made with them; and they were under that part of it that afforded directions and means to them to become of the spiritual Seed, viz. The Doctrine of the Messiah, and the salvation in him, (further explicated by the Prophets in their succeeding generations) and that added Doctrine for Precepts and Ceremonies for instructing unto him, and for shutting them up in sin from all confidence in themselves, that they might be forced to accept of him; this they were under, and children of, and born, and brought up in a way of nurture to seek after, and look for its most glorious promises, which in obeying the voice of God so as to have their hearts circumcised thereby, to walk in the steps of the faith of Abraham, they should also have had made good unto them; as is clear to me in Jer. 11.4, 6. where the Prophet calling upon the people to hear the words of the Covenant, and pronouncing a curse to every one that obeyeth them not, tells them it's the same he commanded them, when he brought them out of Egypt, saying, Obey my voice, and so shall ye be my people, and I will be your God, that I may perform to you the Oath that I swore to your Fathers to give them, a Land flowing with milk and honey. What more clear than that the Covenant of Gods being a God unto them, and taking them for a people, and the things absolutely promised to Abraham, and his spiritual Seed, were conditionally made and propounded to them that were the natural seed and family of Abraham; yea, and so he was also with them to protect and keep them, yea, to circumcise their hearts, and draw them nearer to him, while they were with him: but in forsaking him, and hardening their hearts against him, he also withdrew from them from doing them good, Psal. 81.9, 10, 11, etc. 2 Chron. 15.2. Psal. 95.6, 7, 8. So that in this sense they were foederati, in the Covenant, it was held forth to them upon condition of walking in the steps of Abraham's faith and obedience of faith, and they were taken in under the wing of the Almighty for the nurture of his Law and Doctrine with reference thereunto. In which they were privileged above all other peoples, and distinguished from them, they being an holy people to God, and all others unclean to them unless proselyted to them; and yet the seed of Abraham, to whom the promises were properly made, were as we have seen only the seed according to grace that walk in the steps of the faith of Abraham, to them only God engaged himself to give the righteousness of his faith that was sealed in the sign of Circumcision; and not to any of them that mistaking the mind of God, thought themselves Abraham's seed, because born of his flesh, and therein rested; or because observers of the Law commanded for their instruction and convincement, and there rested, or sought righteousness therein, Rom. 9.6, 7.31, 32. But now the promised Seed being come, who is the heir of blessing, and that brings it down to us, and he having done and accomplished all those things in himself, that those foregoing shadows of the Law pointed to concerning him, they were now to have ceased looking to him, and in stead thereof have come to him, and his institution, even all of them, Mat. 23.37. as may appear clearly in this, That those that rejected him, were old and young, infants and sucklings, included in the punishment denounced upon rejecters of him, viz. desolation and unchurching, Matth. 10.14, 15. and 11.21, 22 23, 24. Luke 19.44. And by this that when they shall come in, the whole Nation shall come in together, Isai. 66.8. but now most of them refused him, and his Kingdom. Whereupon (the partition wall of the legal ceremonial Ordinances being broken down in Christ's death) it pleased God rejecting them again, to set forth his salvation unto all people, and to send his servants with as full and large a Commission for bringing in all Nations into his house, as before they had to invite the Jews that were forbidden, Matth. 22.8, 9 that so he might perform his Covenant and promise to Abraham, in making him a Father of many Nations. Thence that Command, Go and disciple all Nations, or all the Gentiles, (not circumcising them, and subjecting them to the former way of nurture fitted for the times and ages before Christ's actual coming, but) baptising them, and teaching them to observe all things, (not which Moses, but) which I have commanded you. About which rejecting of the Jews, and taking in the Gentiles, that we may yet the better see whether all Infants were rejected from the external Court of Christ's Kingdom, or those only that were in tuition of those that actually rejected it, let us  
5. Consider a little that of the Apostle, in Rom. 11.16, 17. in which he compares Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as having the Covenant, Kingdom, and Worship of God to a root, and the members of that Church or people in that faith or profession to branches growing upon that root, whereof some he says are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, according to nature, born of them, and brought up to that faith and profession: Others, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, besides nature, by nature branches not only of other parents, but originally, or naturally, springing and growing up under other Religions, and so wild. Now he tells us some of those branches were broken off through unbelief, namely from unity with Abraham, etc. in the privileges and blessings derivable unto men in, and through the Covenant and Kingdom given them, and from being owned of God as members of their Family, and subjects of that Kingdom, in which the faith and covenant of Abraham are rightly held forth, and where God's protection is engaged, and so from fellowship too with them that are thereof, and therein, and whom as yet God had not rejected, and cast out therefrom. Which Subjects with their privileges were of a double rank: viz.  
1. Those that are born of the faith of Abraham, begotten unto God, believers in him as he was; and to them by virtue of the Covenant appertained the special presence and blessing of God in justifying, sanctifying, owning peculiarly and absolutely as his people, and making out himself to them as their God to eternal life.  
2. Such as were brought under the tenders of the Covenant, with whom God was dealing, and whom he was instructing to hear and listen to him, and so conditionally holding forth the Covenant to them, but not overcome as yet, to be of his spiritual Seed, to believe and walk in faith as Abraham did. Yet to them he granted the liberty of his Ordinances, and the Instructions held forth therein, and therewith, and such a dispensation of his presence, and operation of his Spirit with them, as in yielding to which, and following on after him therein, they might be brought to the true Circumcision of heart in the spiritual knowledge of God, and so to be of that spiritual Seed, with much patience and goodness towards them, with protection and defence of them against those who for their profession sake would harm them, Psalm 81.9, 10, 11, Isai. 48.17, 18. and 5.3, 4, 5.  
The latter of these (many of them) not being by the operations of the Spirit vouchsafed, brought to believe, and to be circumcised in heart, but contenting themselves with an outward profession after many rebellions of themselves and Forefathers, were broken off from those ordinantial privileges and operations, and protection of God therewith afforded them, and so from the way and means of participating of that juice and sweetness peculiar to the spiritual Seed, much more from the enjoyment of those things themselves. As many of them in their particular persons had been before-time more secretly and indiscernably for their miscarryings in the receipt of, and subjection to the Doctrine held forth from Abraham, and in his house broken off from liberty to the former, who yet possibly might continue in the external profession and society of the Church owned by God unto their deaths: so now after many desires to gather them, and after their many resistings of the Holy Ghost, the generality of them, or the greatest part of their present springing branches with multitudes of their dependant twigs; that is, their posterity, were broken off and unbodyed from the latter also, his servants with their message being sent from them, (to whom God used formerly to send his Prophets) to the Gentiles, and not only the promises held forth to them, but the Church-form-state and privileges delivered to them. And this is to be minded, that the thing most evidently spoken to in this business of breaking off, and graffing in, is that Church-state which is more visible, and outward, with that presence and operation of Spirit that is suited thereto; and not as some say, The invisible state of the highest favour by election, for that those broken off never had, nor could those graffed in been in possibility to have lost, as is intimated in that expression, If thou that art grafted in, dost not continue in his goodness, thou shalt also be broken off.  
But doth not that distinction of Branches that are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Object. and others graffed in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, natural, and contrary to nature, imply that there is a difference put between Jews and Gentiles, as to their children's having right of branchship: the Jews were under the Covenant as they sprang up naturally from Abraham; but the Gentiles only by election, and inward gracious implanting by faith and spirit into Christ, otherwise believing Gentiles children should be natural branches too.  
Answ. 1 The Covenant-state which the Jews naturally sprung up under, was not that election to eternal life, for to that only spiritual-birth entitled them, they being in that regard by nature children of wrath as well as others; and therefore concerning that the distinction into natural and preternatural is not made.  
2. It's true, that no Gentile, or his children, hath so immediate right by nature to branchship in this root, as Abraham's natural Seed had. No Gentile is of this tree or stock but by insition, nor ever was in the times before Christ; which insition is not tied up to election, and an inward gracious implanting therefrom, springing as the Objection says; for as to the branchship in Church-state, the Jews rather had that by election then any other people, they being in that respect called an Elect people, Deut. 7.6, 7, 8. and 10.15. And as for the eternal Covenant-state none are more or less naturally in that then other, it being merely by grace, in which there is no room for fear, lest they be broken off, if the Doctrine of Election be not mainly mistaken. It's plain that that which the one were broken off from, the other were graffed in into, and that from that there is supposed a possibility of some of those graffed ones to be broken again; and its plain that unto that branchship in standing in actual and visible fellowship with Abraham in the institution and profession of the faith delivered to him, as to its substance, and so to the external Church-state and privileges, some came according to nature as born of him, and brought up from their beginning therein, (as out of the true Olive spring naturally many branches that never were brought from other, whereunto it, though even of those branches all may not prove fruitful, and so many be lopped and cut off,) and others by natural growth or birth spring not out of that root and stock, but are taken out of other wild Olives, and are implanted into this fellowship, and thereby have union with, and partake of the sap of the root. Now those twigs which naturally shoot up from these latter are also in the same root with them from which they spring by virtue of their insition into it till some way broken off, though neither they nor their branches from which they spring are originally natural branches to the root, but branches by insition, which this root naturally and originally did not produce. And so in all ages the Gentiles were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ingraffed preter-naturally. When a man became a Proselyte, he became of that stock by faith: by first believing the Doctrine either really or professedly, and so by insition or adoption into that society or tree, and by virtue of that insition all his children that sprung up from him (while in that Stock or Church-fellowship at least) became branches of it too; but yet inasmuch as they sprung naturally from an ingraffed branch, and not from the natural, they were originally ingraffed, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, They have it naturally to be branches of that ingraffed branch, and so they should have been, had it stood in the wild Olive, and never been translocated, but they have it not by nature to be branches of this tree, and such, or so disposed as now, that they have by virtue of their being twigs or branches of an insition: between which and the natural branches, as to right of participation of the juice and fatness of the root, there is now no more difference. Thus it was with the Gentile Proselytes, in regard of the Common matter sealed or admitted to by Circumcision, and thus it is still (by the Apostles arguing there) the Gentile Converts became branches of that stock of Abraham, not naturally, but by insition, by which insition their children come to branchship in that Olive too, and not by nature in respect of the root, and natural stock of the Abraham, to which that distinction of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, natural, and against nature, refer, as is evident to any judicious Reader. So that that difference of phrase makes no more for the denying believers Infants of the Gentiles a branchship in this tree, by virtue of their parent's insition, than it doth to the Infants of Proselytes in former times; a branchship, I say, till by unbelief broken off, for then the case is altered again with them, as with the children of the Jews broken off for the same reason: Which reason is also worth the minding: viz. That those of the natural branches which were broken off, were broken off 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by, or for unbelief, and not otherwise. Well then, if so, than the children of believing Jews were not broken off in Infancy, having neither their own or parents' unbelief to break them off by; not their own, for we never find that God charges Infants with unbelief in themselves, nor doth the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, agree to them, unless we shall say, they are all damned, Mark 16 16. Luke 12.46. Indeed the unbelieving parents that reject the Gospel, and its Ordinances, do of necessity deprive their Infants too thereof, unless anew graffed in again, but that those believing parents laid not in their way. Now if their natural Infants were natural branches of the Olive, and had a standing in the branchstate, till rejecters actually, than they must have the ordinary badge of branches, that is, the external Baptism. Of which I have yet met with no colourable plea to deprive any branch, not yet by actual refusing and unbelief, breaking off himself therefrom, nor by others before off-broken: for I think all grant that, that whosoever is of the Church visibly as to his right to him Baptism may not be denied by us. To which if we add that the partition wall being broken down between Jew and Gentile, especially the believers of both, that which appertains by way of privilege to the one, as to matter of Church-state appertains equally to the other. We shall conclude that their Infants are branches too by virtue of their parents naturalising or insition, 
Ephes. 2.19.  and so have the like right to Baptism. For that this branchstate is the state of visible Churching unto God, and of right to the privileges flowing therefrom in union with the root thereof laid in Abraham, and not as is imagined by some, the inward invisible state of union with Christ, and election, we have in part shown before, and shall (because that's the main thing that can colourably make against what is here said) be further proved.  
For to what hath been said, it may be added, That if the state of branchship here spoken of, was a state of eternal choice and election to eternal life, which the Gentile branches are affirmed to have here, then might they rejoice against the Jews, as in a less fearful case of standing; the Jew stood so as to be broken off, but the Gentile is in no capacity to that, that is indeed ingraffed in; whereas the Apostle tells us, That their standing in this branchship is by faith; so as if they reject that, God would break them off too: Nay he uses it as an Argument of awe and fear, That they were branches beside nature, and the Jews by nature, for if God spared not the natural branches, take heed that he spare not thee, ver. 21. And again he tells us, ver. 28. That as pertaining to the election, they are beloved for their father's sakes, and are shut up under unbelief, that he might have mercy upon them all: But it's for the Gospel in regard of their not accepting that that they are now enemies to him, as if he should directly tell us, that he speaks not here of them according to election, but according to their carriage toward the Gospel, and so they being now thrown off from the privileges of those that receive and own it, those they are broken off from, which otherwise they should have now had also. Such a state of faith and election, as some Antipedobaptists put this branchship in could they not be broken off from. I know against this they have this silly conceit, that they are said to be broken off that seemed to be branches in that stock, or to be ingraffed, though they were never branches indeed; but this is a contradiction in adjecto, to talk of breaking off that that was never in, Nay, to speak of natural branches, as those that were so according to nature, and yet to say, they were never at all branches; sure such an argument would have no terror, nor show of reason, they that seemed to be branches but never were so, were thrown by; then take heed lest thou that standest by faith, be'st thrown by also. And that in ver. 20. of the ingraffed branches, should rather be, Thou mayest happily have neither faith nor standing at all, therefore be not high minded: Then thus, Thou standest by faith, be not highminded, but fear. The like fond conceit they have upon John 15.4. Every branch in me that bringeth not forth fruit, shall be taken away, etc. That is, say some, that pretends to be in me, but is not so at all: As if Christ spoke according to the lying apprehensions or dissimulations of men, and called them branches in him, which only belied themselves, and were no way in him indeed: not considering that there are degrees, and gradations, and diversity of implanting: As one into the trunk and stock of the tree, another step into the very sap, spirit, or life of it. The former is the mean and way to the latter, and in the latter too there may be gradations, some partake of spirit so far in the Doctrine they are brought into, as to bear leaves only, others fruits also, Matth. 13.20. Heb. 6.5, 6. But I shall not spend time and paper about answering so fond a conceit.  
But in the next place consider briefly of that of the Apostle in 1 Cor. 7.14. where the Apostle says, That the children who have one of their parents a believer, are (not only clean as all the Gentiles were made by the breaking down the partition wall, but also) holy. 
Acts 10.28.  Sure as to the more special care of God, and propriety challenged in them by God, then in other children whose parents were both unbelievers, they being as it were born to God. The wife that believeth not, being sanctified in the Husband; namely, 
Vide Beza in locum.  that believeth: (For of such its plain the Apostle speaks, and so some Copies also express it,) which is not only legitimated to him as is commonly interpreted, (for so they were each to other before one of them believed, when yet its never said of two Infidels, that either of them is sanctifiid in the other,) but also set apart, or separated in respect of others to the procreation of an holy seed, Ezra 10.2. And yet this is not in herself, but in her Husband, in regard that he is set apart to act for, and be holy too, and so in point of procreation to propagate unto God, or as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 often signifies, she is so by her Husband, he as it were puts a sanctity upon her as to holy use, or use to procreate for God. As of old, the holiness of the Priests unto the Lord, as to liberty to eat of the holy things, did put a sanctity upon their wives, as to that liberty, who otherwise perhaps might not have eaten of them, being of other Tribes. And so it's for the other part, The unbelieving Husband in the believing wife, else saith he were your children unclean, because believers are to be holy unto God in all things, and if their children should not be holy to them, they would be unclean, not fit to live with them, or to be admitted into the Congregation of the Lord, as of old those that were born of strange women, Ezra 10.12.44. Neh. 13.27, And such as the Jews call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we translate Bastards, Deut. 10.2. but indeed were such as were born of strange women of another religion. As if the Apostle should say, If the same unholiness was in the unbelieving wife, or husband here, to the believing husband or wife, as was in the Jewish state in the strange women, so that these must be separated, and put away from the believers, as well as the strange women there from the Jews, then is there the same course to be taken with your children as with theirs, they may not live with you neither, nor be of the Lords Congregation no more than those might, Deut. 10.2. but now seeing its otherways your children are holy 
* Tam ex seminis praerogativae quam ex institutionis discina. ●ert. de Ani. . Now what was the holy seed there, but the seed set apart for God, the people in his Church, and under his Name, and more peculiar care? There were none that I can find that were called the holy seed by them, but such as were admitted or admittable by their branchship to Abraham into the Lord's Congregation, and thereto appertained. Now the children of one parent believing, (that is, owning and professing the Christian faith, for to all such those Apostolical rules reached) are affirmed to be holy, and therefore admittable sure into the Congregation of the Lord. And that this is thence deduceable appears in this, That no person is ever in Scripture called holy that is without the bounds of the Church of God, but in as much as they are within the bounds of that which is a holy people, consecrate unto God, they are called holy, a holy seed, a holy people. But many things without may be lawful, and persons not of it may be legitimate, but holiness is a Church-word generally in the Scriptures, that in Rom. 11.16. If the first fruits be holy, so is the Lump, if the root be holy, so are also the branches, says this: That if Abraham, Isaac, etc. were holy, that is, set apart by, and for God, to be a people for his Name, so were they that sprung from them, and are under their institution while branches, till broken off; but then they cease to be so, and those that are graffed in through the faith of Jesus come in their room, and have place amongst the branches, participate as much of the virtue and sap of the root for intituling their offspring to the place of branches, and to the holiness of branches, as they that are broken off had for themselves, and theirs before their breaking off, as we noted before, otherwise the branches graffed in beside nature, should not occupy the place, and receive the same sap and juice from the root as the other had, and so should not participate with the natural; but there should yet be a partition wall to sever the one from the other, contrary to the Apostles Doctrine of Christ as come in the flesh; yea, contrary to the constant course of God in former times; for he admitted the stranger Proselytes then graffed in amongst the Jews, the same privileges for their children, as they that were of Abraham's seed had so far as they have Church-fellowship.  
Against this that's said about children's being holy, I find it objected, That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies chastity, in 1 Thes. 4. and therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here signifies only legitimate: which seems to me to be a strange inference, for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thence should rather signify chaste too, and if applied to children while but in Infancy, no man can doubt of chastity in them, at least so as to denominate them unchaste, whether their parent's marriage was holy or not; And if applied to children grown up, they may be chaste, though born in unholy wedlock, or in fornication, and they may be unchaste, though never so legitimate.  
Beside, 2. There is no such cause of such confidence as I see is used in that affirmation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signifying chastity in that place. I think 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies chaste, but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in any place of the New Testament, but as chastity is included necessarily in sanctity. It's thrice used in that Chapter, verses 3.4.7. and I am sure its signification is larger than chastity in the seventh, for it's exposed to uncleanness in overreaching or defrauding a brother in any matter. And I think that when it's said, we are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it's better to translate it in holiness, then in chastity only, we not being called only to, and in that particular branch of holiness, but in and to holiness in all manner of conversation. And holiness including chastity, fornication, and all abuse of the vessel or body might well be thereunto opposed. Surely the Apostle enlarges the use of the body in holiness further than to chastity only as opposed to bodily fornication, in Rom. 6.19. Yield up your members servants to righteousness, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, unto, or for holiness: which holiness is there opposed to uncleanness and lawlessness, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, so that its nearer the Text to say that holiness there signifies a consecration unto God, and to the Government of his holy Spirit: to that or in that, we are called, and so to abstain from fornication, as well spiritual as corporal; though corporal fornication is also a profaning that that was given up to God, as 1 Cor. 6.15. Your bodies are the members of Christ, (given up to be holy for him, and for his service, and glory,) and to be the habitations of his Spirit, (sure that's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in general.) Shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? that's a profaning them in special. We might then as well say that for our bodies to be the members of Christ is only to be chaste, because that's opposed to fornication, as for the same reason to affirm that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies but so much: Yea holiness must needs be more than chastity simply considered, as opposed to adultery, and as it may be a virtue: Amongst the Gentiles, there were chaste persons, as Lucretia and others, but their chastity was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a holy consecrating their bodies to the Lord; and out of that respect an avoiding and detestation of fornication and adultery. So that here is yet nothing of force against what is said about 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that it is a Church word, attributed to persons brought forth to and for God, or separated from others to be more peculiarly a people to him: I say, when it is attributed to persons, as when to other things, it is to things separated for God or his Church's use; and it is yet to prove, that any person is ever in Scripture called holy, that might not be admitted into God's Congregation, and thereupon be accounted of his Church. I shall not spend time about what is alleged out of this or that Author, as their Interpretations or Opinions upon either this or the forenamed Scripture. I see some quote Musculus, Melancthon and Camerarius for their conceptions upon this latter; which (though I reverence them as good men in their ages) I esteem of as small weight against what I have said, as they that quote them esteem of Beza and others against what they conceit. If any man can by Scripture, and solid argument from Scripture, avert what I have said, I shall listen to him, otherwise not.  
With these Scriptures, that in Act. 2.38, 39 well agrees, and by them it may be opened: For the Jews being natural branches, and holy by that their branchship, were therein also children of the Covenant made with Abraham, and so had right to the tender of the choice promises therein, and to have the means afforded by God for nurture thereunto, which God also sent unto them, and would have had them receive, there being nothing but their own voluntary rejection of them that could or should deprive them thereof; and that must needs do it, for they could not be discipled unto and have the Ordinances of Baptism and the Supper, etc. unless they would yield thereto, and that they would not do, so long as they believed not that Christ was sent of God, and the Christ to be baptised unto and saved by: Therefore Peter bids them Repent, and let every one of them be baptised into the Name of the Lord Jesus for the remission of sins, and they should receive the promise of the Holy Ghost set before them, the promise being to them and their children, etc. In which the Apostle doth not prescribe a Rule for all that should be baptised, how much must be in every such one before he may be baptised; but tells us what hindered and letted their being baptised into the Name of Christ, and so coming unto the enjoyment of the promise, viz. their evil thoughts of Christ, and rejections of him and his Doctrine: So long as they stood out against him, and came not under his Government, they deprived themselves of the means of their Salvation, and of the promises of God; He bids them therefore Repent (or change their thoughts) viz. of their unbelieving and evil carriages towards Christ, whose Name they hitherto would not own; and whereas they would not own his Name, nor come under his Government, now to submit to it, and be every one of them baptised to it; even (as I understand it) the whole people without exception; they being all the children of the Covenant, and so the promise being made to them and their children, as to all afar off too, so many as should be called to or proselyted to them; for as yet Peter understood not the breaking down the partition wall. If we should say to the Antipoedobaptists, Repent of your conception, which causes you to make a rent from your Brethren, and be you and yours all subject with the rest of your Brethren to the Name of Christ, and baptised into it; we do not therein prescribe a general Rule what all must do before Baptism, or what others not of their mind should do, or else their children could not be baptised; but we exhort them to lay aside that that hinders them and theirs from unity in way of nurture and subjection to Christ with others, seeing they may lawfully and aught so to be at one, though hitherto they keep at a distance through their own misperswasion. It's a strange mistake that an Exhortation given to some who stood in their own light, and kept out themselves from God freely held forth to them, to put away that their evil thought and way, and accept what God tendered them and theirs, and they and theirs had right to look for, should be drawn into a Rule for others in general in whom there is not that way and evil thought by which they endeavour to keep themselves therefrom, as it's evident in the case of the Infants of Christians. The Apostle Peter would have them lay aside that crooked thought that made them keep themselves and theirs from Baptism, and so from being in the way to enjoy the promises; and we would make use of it to keep persons from Baptism, and from being under the Institution and Kingdom of Christ: He saith, the promise was to them and their children; and the Antipoedobaptists would build up another partition wall between them and us, and say, our children have nothing to do with the promise: or of their own heads limit it to children of age only, when here is no such limitation in the Scripture laid down: And to get a colour for that, they would have the last clause, so many as the Lord God shall call, to have relation to all that went before, or at least to that of their children, as well as those afar off: as if either the Apostle Peter had first exhorted that they should every one of them be baptised in the Name of Christ, etc. and then afterward have laid down a ground that should possibly not include them all, they might happily not be all called; or else confound their children with them afar off, and make them as far off from right to look after the promise, and from Liberty to the Ordinance, as they that were then afar off: Sure that distinction of their children, and them afar off, was needless, if their children were far off from it too. Besides, it's plain, the Apostle reckons the Jews not as already converted, but as Jews not yet cast off, the children of the Covenant, and makes that both here and in Chap. 3 25. the ground of his calling upon them to repent of that their wickedness against Christ, by which they thrust from them what God had provided for them, and gave them liberty to, and so endangered their own breaking off: Yea the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 argues (in my apprehension) that that clause is peculiarly annexed to them afar off, because it signifies a calling to, or a calling a distant person or company to another forementioned company.  
But for fuller understanding of this place, and further confirmation of what is said to it already, I shall take a fuller view of that that is laid down in Vers. 39 For the promise is to you and to your children, and to All afar off, so many as the Lord our God shall call. In which these particulars would be a little more distinctly minded; viz. 

1. Whereof this is brought as the reason or ground.  
2. What the Promise is here mentioned.  
3. Who that you, and your children, to whom the Promise is said to be.  
4. How the promise was to them and their children.  
5. Upon what account it was to them and to their children.  
6. Who are meant by, All that are afar off. And,  
7. Why that is added, and whereto it pertains, so many as the Lord our God shall call.    
1. For the first, I conceive it's clear, that it is added as a reason of both the duties exhorted to, and the asserting of the benefit propounded as certainly to be met with therein: as if he should say, Repent ye of your opposition and enmity against Jesus Christ, for the promise is to you; and by opposing and rejecting him, ye deprive yourselves of the enjoyment thereof: Let every one of you also be baptised into his Name for the forgiveness of sins, for the promise is to you and to your children; and that Baptism into his Name will both testify outwardly your repentance of your oppositions to him, and will be, if sincerely on your part submitted to, a yielding up yourselves and yours to the Regiment and Order appointed by Jesus Christ for you to walk in for your receipt of the promise from him, he having received the promise to make it good to you, and that being his way in which he will have men wait upon him to make it good to them. And indeed it is more generally and directly the ground of men's being baptised into Christ, then of their repenting for their oppositions against him, in this sense, that it's a ground of repenting more accidently, as they to whom it is propounded, and that are to be subjected, discipled and baptised into Christ, are found actually straying in some evil way, from which they must first turn, and of which they must necessarily first repent, or else they cannot be submitters to Christ, and be discipled and baptised into his Name; as was the case of these men of grown years, to whom the Apostle speaks: so that it's the ground and reason of calling upon them to repent; as Repentance was the Removens prohibens, the removal of the hindrance of submission to Christ in his Ordinance of Baptism, and in the after-administration of his Kingdom to them: Whereas directly the promise, and men's title to it (such as is here spoken of, and we shall by and by explain) gives ground of, and calls for men's submission, and being discipled to Christ for the receipt of it, and so of being baptised into his Name, whether there be repentance needful to in termine between them, and that submission to him, or not. Such of them as were from their Infancy trained up in that way of God, and walked righteously therein, and upon the first hear-say of Christ closed with him, or such as had formerly repent, and walked with God before the hearsay or proposeal of that Ordinance of Jesus Christ to them, and upon that proposeal of it kicked not against it, or in a word, persons not needing repentance, (as these did) yet by the virtue of this promise to them in Christ, might and ought to yield up to him, and be discipled in his way of Baptism for the receipt of it from him; And so the promise being to their children, gives ground for their children's being discipled to Christ, by being baptised into his Name, though their children happily were nor, or (their parents submitting to Jesus Christ, and training them up in his nurture) would not need so to be spoken to, and exhorted to repent, as these their parents who had actually swerved and gone from the way of God, and rejected it, were, and needed to be exhorted; And so we find, That Cornelius a man fearing God, and Lydia a woman fearing God, and waiting formerly upon God in such ways as they knew, 
Acts 10.  were baptised: And therefore no doubt but were also instructed and exhorted to be baptised into the Name of Christ, 
Act 16 14, 15.  (the promise belonging to them upon Gods call, as well as unto these, as appears by the Apostles after clause in this Acts 2.39. And to all afar off, so many as the Lord our God shall call,) And yet no mention of calling upon them to repent, that presupposing that the persons we so exhort do actually go on in a wrong and evil way before, which those did not. The foresaid words are also a reason and ground of the Apostles implying to these Jews that They in obeying his counsel, should receive remission of their sins, and asserting or promising their receipt of the gift of the Holy Ghost: As if he should say, Ye shall surely in obeying my counsels, receive the Holy Ghost, etc. For the promise is to you, and to your children, etc. And truly as it is a reason and ground of his asserting these benefits, as consequent to their walking in those foresaid ways, and so of their expectation of them therein, so it also more strongly lays down ground for their so repenting, and letting every one of them be baptised into the Name of Christ, that that tends to strengthen men's expectation of good in such a way necessarily tends also to bring them into that way. But that it is as well a reason of the duty as of the promise annexed to it, we may further see in Chap. 3.25. Where the same reason of their being children of the Covenant, and Christ being sent to bless them, is urged by the same Apostle as a reason to prefer their repenting, and being converted, namely to Christ, to listen to him, as to that great Prophet, and submit to his Orders and Ordinances appointed them 
Acts 3.19.25, 26. . Where by the way before I pass from it, I might note the blindness and gross mistakes of some men, though very bold and confident in their assertions, as of him who is not ashamed to say, That God gives unregenerate men no hope at all, 
Mr. Kendal's Answer to Mr Goodwin. Chap. 16. p. 143 144, 146. Chap. 18.30, 31.57.  but bids them expect the just vengeance of eternal fire, that the thundering of damnation to such is the only way to bring them to salvation, gives them no encouragement to enter the straight gate, that God hates and abhors all men whatsoever, while they continue without a change of their nature, and all the good things he gives them, are but as we throw cut scraps to dogs, and till they be new born none of them may expect the least expression of love from him, etc. Surely God so loved men, while yet ungodly and unchanged, that he gave his Son for them, and gives his Gospel to men while unregenerate to better purpose than we give scraps to dogs, even to regenerate them; And the Apostle Peter here uses other arguments besides Damnation to move men to repentance, and regeneration, even the promises: As also God himself uses other not unlike this, in Isai. 55.7. Ezek. 33.11. Matth. 22.4. But I pass it, only could not but note it for the monstrous unreasonableness of those say.  
2. For the promise here what it is; we may say either, that it is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The promise of the Spirit, mentioned ver. 33. And here again, ver. 38. Prophesied of, and promised by Joel, Joel 2.28, 29. which the Apostle Peter had been speaking of in this Chapter, ver. 17, 18, 19, 20. Or else we may take it more largely for the whole Contents of the Gospel preached to Abraham, concerning the sending forth of Jesus Christ, and blessing all the kindreds of the earth in him. Sometimes called the promises, Gal. 3.15, 16. Sometimes the Covenants of the promise, Ephes. 2.12. Sometime the promise, as Acts 13.32. We declare unto you glad tidings, that the promise made to the Fathers, God hath fulfilled the same to us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus. And that this may be the meaning of the Apostle here too may be gathered from Acts 3.25, 26. where urging the Jews again to repent, and be converted, ver. 19 he uses the same way or persuading them, telling them there, They were the children of the Prophets, and of the Covenant that God made with Abraham, (called sometime the promise, Heb. 6.13.) saying, In thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed, unto you first God having raised up Jesus hath sent him to bless you, etc. Where by the way let me propound my apprehension, that by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, raised up, there used, And again Acts 13.33. is not meant, having raised him from the dead, as the Translatours in that place, Acts 13. rendering it, raised up Jesus again, seem to have understood, and as very usually it is understood, but simply, and in a more large and comprehensive sense, that God hath raised him up, sent him forth, appointed, furnished him to save and bless us, etc. So the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is used, Acts. 3.22. A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up to you, (he says not, out of the grave, as speaking of the Resurrection, but) from among your Brethren: and so it's used in divers other places, as these in the Margin 
* Sam. 2.25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I will raise up to me a faithful Priest, 1 King. 14.14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Lord will raise up a King that will cut off the house of Jerohoam. So also, 1 Chron. 17.11 je. 2● 5. and. 30.9. etc. ; to say nothing, that so it will better suit that quotation of the Apostle Acts 13.32. out of the second Psalm, as taking the word begotten thee, in a more comprehensive and first sense, and that there speaking of his Resurrection, ver. 34. he adds for distinction sake the Particle (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) and the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but (or And) that he raised him up from the dead: as if he spoke of raising him up in another sense before: But to return again to our business.  
The word promise here may the rather be understood in this second and more comprehensive sense, because so it also includes as a particular therein the promise of the Spirit, that being a choice branch of the Blessing promised to them, and their Offspring, as in Isai. 44 3. where Spirit and Blessing are used, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, words of the same import, and explicatory the one of the other. I will pour out my Spirit upon thy seed, and my Blessing upon thy offspring. Only let this be further minded, that the word promise, (be the matter of it what it will) is of a double signification in Scripture-use. Sometime signifying the promise making, or the form or manner of speech in which something is promised. So Heb. 6.13. When God made promise to Abraham. So also Heb. 11.17. 2 Cor. 7.1. Rom. 9.4. Whose are the Service of God, and the promises. Sometime the thing promised, as Heb. 11.13. All these died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, etc. So Heb. 9 15. 1 John 2.25.  
3 By you and your children, are meant here the Jews, and particularly those he exhorted to repent, and that were pricked in heart, though not so bounding up his speech to them in particular, as to take in the body of the people in general, as will be more evident by and by. And by their children, such as were their natural children, begotten and descended naturally of them, of what Age or Sex soever; for though all such were not the children of God in its prime notion, yet they were all their children, either older, or younger, that were begotten by, and descended of them. Difference in age or sex, made no difference as to that matter; therefore no matter though grown men also are called the children of their Fathers, for their growth gave them not that Denomination, but their descent of them; they were as really their children in infancy, as when so grown. So that here is no ground for excluding Infants in their infancy from being comprehended in this expression: The Holy Ghost using no Note of distinction between some and other of their children, nor any word that might limit to men grown; he says not, to you and your grown children: but indefinitely, to you and your children: Yea, we find expressly that in Deut. 29.10, 11. (To which the Apostle seems to me here plainly to allude) the Covenant, and so the promise of being to them a God, and taking them for his people, (which includes also the sending Christ to bless them, and give his Spirit to them, for that is part of the work of God, as manifesting himself a God to a people, and making them his people) is to the little ones of that people, as well as the rest. You stand here this day all of you before the Lord your God, your Captains of your Tribes, your Elders, and your Officers, with all the men of Israel, your little ones, your wives, and thy stranger that is in thy Camp, etc. That thou shouldest enter into Covenant with the Lord thy God, and into his Oath which the Lord thy God maketh this day with thee, that he may establish thee to day for a people unto himself, and that he may be unto thee a God, as he hath said unto thee, and as he hath sworn to thy Fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and to Jacob. Neither with you only, etc. but with him that standeth here with us this day before the Lord our God, and with him that is not here with us this day. To which clause the Apostle Peter seems to allude in saying, And to all afar off, etc. Yea, and one clause of that Covenant made with them, and their children, even their little ones there, is expressly in their returning to the Lord, and obeying his voice, (namely in listening to the great Prophet, and to the word of faith, as compare Chap. 30.11, 12. with Rom. 10.8, 9) To circumcise their hearts, 
Deut. 30 6.  and the hearts of their seed to love the Lord, etc. Which how is it done but by the giving forth his Spirit in his Church, and Ordinances to them? And what is it in substance, but that in Acts 3.26. Unto you first God having raised up Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities? Which though now at this time they almost generally rejected, yet in their turning in again, shall be performed to them, and their children, 
Mark 10.16.  as he did actually give his blessing to those little children that came (that is, were brought) to him.  
4. To that, how this promise was to them, and their children? Let me say,  
1. Negatively: Not so as it was to Christ, who had actually and immeasurably received upon his Ascension the Promise of the Spirit in the man, or nature of men, to communicate to them in listening to, and obeying him, and who is the Storehouse, and way of making out all the promises of God, 2 Cor. 1.20. So they neither had, nor could have the promise to them, or their children. Nor if, were the things promised absolutely theirs, nor the promise as made in an absolute form so, or upon such terms, as that they must certainly, and without fail receive the Holy Ghost, and the Blessing of Christ, whether they repent of their unbelief and obstinacy, yea, or no, or were discipled to him, and baptised into his Name, or not; for that would rather have undermined the Apostles counsel to them, then have added strength to it, making their Repentance and Baptism needless to them, or their children. Now many of them, though called, Chap. 3.15. children of the Covenant, and though Christ was sent to them to bless them, not harkening to the great Prophet, received not his blessing, but were broken off, and wrath came heavily upon them. But,  
2. Positively, and Affirmatively. The promise was to them, and their children, because they were made by way of proposition to them, and the proposal of them, and so the promise, or promises, as so made, were given to them, and their children, as their standing privilege in which they were preferred before all people, who in that respect were strangers to the Covenants of promise, 
Ephes. 2.12.  and knew them not, nor were born or educated up under the hope, and in the way of enjoyment of them. Thus theirs was the adoption, they were chosen to be a people nearer to God, 
Exod. 4.21, 22.  and had his Name put upon them, (as the father's name is on his child) and God more especially owned, and cared for them, and they were born and educated in the Kingdom of God, where his Blessing and Spirit was conversant for teaching and bringing them to be the children of God by faith and regeneration. And so theirs was the glory, they had the manifestations of God's glory amongst them, and were honoured above all other people; theirs were the Covenants, to them made, with them left, that they might be trained up in the knowledge of them: So theirs was the giving of the Law, and the Service, or way of God's worship, and the promises; they were promulgated to them, and they were brought up under the hope of them, being children of the Kingdom, Rom. 9.4, 5.  
2. They were made as the choice things promised conditionally with them, so as that they submitting themselves, and training up theirs to, and for God, according to his will manifested to them by Moses, and all the Prophets, and now by the Great Prophet Jesus, he would be a God to them and theirs, Jer. 11.7. do all to and for them that was needful to be done of God for making them his people, a people every way happy, and so now sent his Son to them, (having died for them) to bless them, in turning away every one of them from their sins, which blessing, even the forgiveness of their former sins against him, and wickedness against Christ in crucifying him, and the Holy Ghost to be present with, and bless them and theirs, according to their several capacities; if they would repent of their wickedness, and every one of them be subject to his Government, being baptised into his Name, they should receive: otherwise they to be cut off from the Congregation of God, and from the Blessings promised them.  
5. By what hath been said, It appears how or upon account the promise was to them, and their children: not in respect of any particular birth, repentance, or faith, or the like, in the senses even now cleared: for this is asserted concerning them, not by way of promise, as something that should accrue to them by their repenting, and being every one of them baptised, (only the things promised they should actually receive in so doing) but as a motive and ground to move them to repent, and be baptised. Was it to them, as they were pricked in their hearts; for the same is affirmed of them in Chap. 3.25. that were not as then so pricked, that we have any mention in the least of, yea, of those for whom the Apostle had great sorrow, and heaviness of heart, as actually rejecting their own mercies, and not attaining the blessings promised, yet theirs, also says he, are the promises, Rom. 9.4. But as they were the seed or family of Abraham, either lineally descended from Jacob, as the natural Jews, or adopted, or proselyted thereunto, as the Proselytes of the Gentiles, (and such as were here amongst the people that Peter preached to, Acts 2.10.) by virtue of Gods having called and chosen them, the Family of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to be to himself an holy people, Deut. 7.7, 8, 9 And so as they sprung from, or grew upon that holy root, that was holy by virtue of Gods call and account, as Rom. 11.16. So they are called natural branches, though by their actual unbelief after broken off: So even their children were born to God, and owned as his. Ezek. 16.20, 21. Children of the Kingdom, and members of God's Congregation, or Church: as appears by this, 
Gen. 17.14.  That they not being circumcised at eight days old in the times of the Law, they are said to be cut off from the Congregation: that is, they were exempted from being Federates, or having the Privileges and Commonwealth of Israel, as pertaining to them, so as to be enjoyed by them. In other respects, they could not be called natural branches, or children of the Kingdom, as we have seen, being by nature, as in themselves, children of wrath, as well as, and no better than others, Ezek. 2.23. Rom. 3.9. Their Infants then, as their Infants born in, and to the Church of God, were members of the Church, and partakers according to their capacities with them in their privileges, The Covenants, Promises, Adoption, Glory, pertained to them, and they were concerned in them, and had their share of blessing in them, and in Christ also who was of them, sent to them, and refused not to bless them, as we have seen, they being brought to him, and brought up in his way, Ordinances, and Appointments in his Kingdom; of which blessing they only were deprived by their parent's unbelief, as not bringing them to Christ, or discipling them to him, 
Gen. 17.14.  and so bringing them into his Church, and Kingdom, or (and that more especially) by their own voluntary refusing to listen to that Great Prophet, when they grew up to be capable of understanding, and following after him, Acts 3.22, 23. which may yet be further seen in what follows, viz.  
6. Who be meant in that phrase, and All that are afar off. And that is clearly the unproselyted Gentiles, included in those phrases of Joel 2.28.32. All flesh, and whosoever shall call upon the Name of the Lord. This is clear, I say, in Ephes. 2.11.13.17. where Those that were in times past Gentiles in the flesh, called the uncircumcision by that that is called the circumcision in the flesh made with hands: are said expressly to have been afar off. But now ye that were sometimes afar off, (namely, before their being called) are made nigh. And he came and preached peace both to you that were afar off, and to them that were nigh. Afar off they were not only in opposition to what they were now after their call, but also to the Jews that are said to have been nigh, even before Christ actually, or by his Ambassadors after his ascent preached peace to them. Afar off, because they had not the Adoption, nor the Glory, nor the Covenants, nor the Giving of the Law, nor the Service, nor the Promises, nor the Prophets, nor the Revelation of Christ, as the Jews had, in which respect the Jews were as a people dwelling in the City, when they were as people lying by the highway sides, and hedges, Mat. 22.7, 8, 9 etc. yea, that in what they were afar off, is expressed, Ephes. 2.12. They were without Christ, not only in respect of what interest they had in him upon believing now, but also in respect of what the Jews had, as Jews called of God, and they had in and by their being called to the Church of God, in which the Jews till they broke off, were, that is, they had not Christ revealed to them, and sent to them to bless them as the Jews had: And they were aliens from the Commonwealth of Israel, even from those privileges, and more special means of Grace and Ordinances, with the presence and blessing of God, and Spirit accompanying, that the Jews had afforded to them, and to all proselyted to them in common: And so they were strangers from the Covenant of promises; than it follows, the Jews and their children were not so, for otherwise they should be afar off too, and the distinction between their children and them afar off should be groundless, and come to nothing: No, they were to them and their children, the other, were neither born under, nor brought up to the knowledge and hope of them; fathers and children were without them, and so by consequent without hope, the fathers had not that hope for their children, nor for themselves, that the promise held forth for and to men, and as the Jews had, or might have had in minding and believing them: they being without God, that is, the knowledge of God, and the Covenant of God, and so God had not engaged himself to them, to be with them, and their children, to bless and keep, and protect and own them, as he was the God of the Jews, whence also their hope for themselves and theirs sprung. So that by this also, it yet further appears, that the children of the Jews as such by virtue of his foresaid choice and calling them, and so (the partition wall being broken down) the children of the Proselytes and Disciples of the Gentiles were such, as to whom the promise was, into which Baptism as an Ordinance of Christ, further admitted, and was one way or step toward the meeting with the performance of, and therefore they to be baptised, and nurtured to the expectation of it. And lastly,  
7. By this it also appears, why and whereto that is added, So many as the Lord our God shall call to. Namely, that it speaks to the Gentiles, because they being far off could not have the promise, either propounded to them, or set before them to follow after it; nor conditionally made with them and theirs, much less could they enjoy that blessing in Christ promised, neither call upon God, nor be saved, unless called by God to Christ in his Church. Rom. 10.14. The Call of God by sending the Gospel to them, preaching peace to them, and inviting them to come in, was needful and sufficient for their having the promise to them, in the former sense, and so much only the word call often signifies, as in Prov. 1.24. Matth. 22.2, 3, 4. Though the being called of God, so as to be prevailed with to believe and obey, where capacity is given, is needful for the enjoyment of the blessings promised: These Jews with their children had the promise to them already, and before this, as we have fully showed, and were not now to call, to have them made in that sense to them, in which it is affirmed, It was then (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) to them, they were called hereto in Gods calling Abraham, and calling his seed in Isaac, and in his calling them out of Egypt to himself, and making his Covenant and promises further with them, and in all the Prophets, and Christ, and his Apostles calling them, and their children were called in their father's being called with them, as when they were called out of Egypt. As generally, when God calls parents to his Church, he calls theirs under their tuition with them; Thence the Salvation of God, (the means of salvation, that is at least) is said, to come to the house, or household, not to them of understanding, or that actually believe only; and they are to bring up theirs in the way of the Lord, and disciple them to him, or worship him with them, as Joshuah says, Josh. 24.15. But the unproselyted Gentiles were not as yet (the body of them) called to the Church, the Commission only was given forth, (the partition wall being broken down) for calling and discipling, baptising them, and not circumcising them, as before, Matth. 28.19, 20.  
Sum up all this together then, and we see its clear, That the promise was to their children, one and other, till they wilfully put it away, and they, even the least of them, were therein near to God, capable of Christ's blessing them, and so had that that is here laid down as the ground and motive for being baptised into Christ's Name, for the forgiveness of the sin of their Nature, so as to own them, and care for them, that notwithstanding, as his upon whom he had put his Name, and so of having the Holy Ghost to be with them, and circumcise their hearts, and sanctify them, as they grew more and more capable thereof. That they were of the Lords Congregation, and it was the Jews sin, both against themselves and their children, to oppose and put from them Jesus Christ, which they ought to have repent of, that every one of them being baptised into his Name, and so submitting to him, they might receive the promise now brought nigh, and tendered to them by Christ in his coming. To which adding that (which the Scriptures, and we from them, have before shown) That the partition wall is broken down, and we Gentiles that were afar off, are now made nigh by the blood of Christ, called to be partakers of his promise by the Gospel, as Ephes. 3.4.6. Then it will roundly follow, That our children now are as near as theirs were then, and so are of God's Congregation, are children of the Covenant and Kingdom by insition, (though not by natural descent from Abraham) and so have the true ground of Baptism, the Seal of that promise, way of admission into the outward Court of God's Kingdom, into his Church, and under his promise and blessing now to us, as Circumcision was before Christ's Ascension, and the badge of difference between the Church, and Congregation of God, and them that are strangers to his Church and Covenant, and to deny or defer it to them, is to bewray our ignorance of God's grace and gracious mind toward them, and to cut them off, or keep them out of God's Congregation, and so from the blessing of Christ, there to be dispensed to them. And I pray God help the Antipedobaptists to see and consider the injury they do to themselves and their children, so would they repent of their mistaken zeal, and be as zealous against their abuse of this, and other Scriptures, as now they are against Infant-baptism.  
Whereas they object, That only they that heard the word gladly were baptised, ver. 41.  
I answer, That they were baptised that heard the word gladly, is certainly affirmed, but he that shall turn it, and say, That all that were there baptised, did gladly receive the word, shall speak as much beyond what he can prove, as he that supposes it might be otherwise. Children are often included tacitly in their parents, at least in passive matters spoken of through the descriptions of those concerned in those passive matters, may be by such acts as only suit to the parents, or those of years only. As it's said, That the Lord removed Israel out of his sight, and the King of Assyria carried Israel captive: and the reason is rendered, That Israel had sinned against their God, and walked in the statutes of the Heathen, and built them high places, and set up Images: which things Infants were not capable of acting in, and yet they are without all doubt included in what is passively affirmed of them for Gods removing them, and their being led captive, 2 King. 17. So in Gen. 34. Simeon and Levi, making (though feignedly) a Covenant with Hamor and Sechem, requires that every male of them be circumcised, (which certainly included not them they spoke with only, but their children, and Infants too, as every one of you in Acts 3.37. may do.) And in ver. 24. it's said, All that went out of the gate of their City, harkened unto Hamor and Sechem, and every male was circumcised, all that went out of the gate of the City. Shall we say, that because it's said, All that went out of the gate of the City harkened unto Hamor, and they were all circumcised that went out of the gate of the City, therefore all that were circumcised did actually hearken to, or consent to Hamor and Sechem, and that no child or infant, but such as were able to go out of the gate of the City, and to give actual consent to Hamor, were circumcised; surely it will not follow. So Psalm. 10.6. it's said, Our Fathers provoked God at the red Sea, yet God saved them, and led them through the red Sea, (in which the Apostle tells us. They were baptised into Moses, 1 Cor. 10.1, 2.) And it follows, That they than believed his word, and sang his praises, even Moses, and the children of Israel, Exod. 15.1. And yet I think no man will thence gather, that only those that provoked God at the Sea, or that after believed, and sang praises, were saved, and led through the Sea. Many other instances might be given to the same purpose, so that nothing can be thence concluded from what is said of those that are mentioned to have been baptised, that will enforce a straitening of the right to Baptism to such qualified persons; which is also rather to be sought and minded what it is from the grounds of it as laid down in Scripture, then from what is expressed as to the practice of it.  
That Scripture oft mentioned by us, in what we have said to this of Acts 2. viz. Acts 3.25. compared with Gen. 12.3. That in the seed of Abraham all the Families of the Earth shall be blessed, may come in for another Evidence to the point in hand by itself, for what doth it signify less than that, In Jesus Christ (he through his death as a Ransom for all, 2 Cor. 5.14, 15. 1 Tim. 2.6. And Resurrection from the dead, having answered the Law, abolished death for all, and so become Lord of all, and the propitiation for the sins of the whole world, Gal. 3.13. 2 Tim. 1.10. Acts 10.36. 1 John 2.1, 2.) hath in himself blessing for all Nations, and for all the families of the Earth: and not only for some persons in those Nations or Families. God was in him reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their trespasses to them: And hath since his Ascension committed the Ministry of that Reconciliation, by preaching and baptising, etc. to his Apostles, and such as succeed them in the Gospel, 2 Cor. 5.19, 20. In which Righteousness is unto all, extendible to all, and in the Gospel terms held forth to all, so as that it comes upon all that believe, close with, and receive it, Rom. 3.22. According to that in Rom. 5.18. The free-gift is to all men to justification of life, through the righteousness of one, Jesus Christ: Even as by the disobedience of Adam the evil came to all men to condemnation, Though its the receiver of the abundance or overflow of grace that shall reign in life by him, ver, 17. And this indeed is the bottom ground of preaching the Gospel, and therein tendering the blessing in Christ to all Nations, the whole world, and to all the families of the earth, as also of discipling them, baptising them into his Name, that they are all given over to him as their lawful Lord, and in him through his death is Redemption and blessing for them all: From which they only are excluded who when it's tendered to them, put him and it from them, and so exclude themselves by cursing, vilifying, 
The word in Gen 12.3. is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, vilem l●vem habere, vibe pendere. To slight, or set light by.  or setting slight by him the Seed of Abraham, in his Person, Doctrine, Government, or Blessing, Gen. 12. Luke 10.10, 11. Acts 13.46. Now doth not the word Families clearly comprehend little ones? Are all the families of the earth without Infants? or be they no considerable part of the families in which they are? Surely they are so considerable, that God would have them included in the Covenant of his favour, Deut. 29.10, 11. and Christ would not have them excluded his Kingdom and Blessing. Why then do any question the giving them the seal of his blessing? and so putting his blessing upon whole families, that the whole household may upon the parent's receipt of the Gospel be under God's salvation. As Acts 16.31. Except such as being capable of understanding, do wilfully refuse, and thrust it from them. Surely they that deny Baptism to little ones, then do discover much ignorance, and unbelief of the grace of God; and tenor of the Gospel of Christ, how much soever they seem to know it, and their zeal is as ignorant and reprovable, as that of Christ's Disciples, Matth. 19.13, 14. what ever they think of it as commendable. Which will yet further appear; if we,  
Lastly, Consider that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, much mentioned, saying, by the ancient Doctors of the Church, that we have John 3.5. Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. Which they generally applied as to the water there mentioned to Baptism by water. And if their interpretation of it be currant, it will conclude more than lawfulness, some necessity at least of baptising Infants. And sure their Authority and Antiquity, though it may not cogere in Sententiam, enforce our consent to them, yet may deservedly challenge a sober consideration of it, that we be not guilty through rashness of that fault we are oft admonished of, Prov. 22.28. and 23.10. Let us then examine what may be said for, and what against it.  
The Scope of the place favours it, thus: Nicodemus coming to Christ by night, and confessing him a Teacher sent of God: our Saviour instructs him what was needful for seeing, understanding, and enjoying, and entering into the Kingdom of God that he preached; Namely, That he must not rest in what he had already in Moses Ministration, but submit to him whom God had more actually sent forth to be the Saviour of the world, to receive a New-birth from him in his Ministration, without which no entrance for any one (as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies) into that Kingdom. Now that which he did in his Ministration for admitting and leading men into that Kingdom, we know was together with his Doctrine, baptising with water by his Disciples, John 3.21.22. and 4.1, 2. And with the Holy Ghost more immediately by himself, John 7.37, 38. Acts 1.5. And unless a man submitted to him in both these Administrations, he could not enter into the Kingdom of God, as set up of God in his Regiment and ordering.  
The Order of the words in setting water before spirit, suits with the Order of those Administrations of his twofold Baptism. Baptism with water usually (yea always that we read of, except in that extraordinary case of Cornelius, of which we have given an account elsewhere) going before the pouring out of his Spirit, As Matth. 3.11, 12. Acts 2.38, 39 & 8.16, 17. & 19.4, 5. Where also that Ordinance of laying on of hands, in which the more visible and evident givings of the Spirit was vouchsafed after Baptism, Acts 8.16, 17. Heb. 6.2.  
3. This Interpretation agreeth with that in Tit. 3.5. whereby by most Interpreters Baptism is called the Laver of Regeneration, and I conceive it is not to be excluded in that expression.  
4. The Text will run as well or better this way, then in and according to other Interpretations: For to view them.  
1. Some by water think the Spirit to be signified by an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, like that in Matth. 3.12. The Holy Ghost, and fire; but this looks too like a Tautalogy, it amounting but to Spirit and Spirit; that of Matth. 3.12. may admit of a better Exposition: viz. by fire, to signify fiery trials, as in 1 Cor. 3.13, 14. 1 Pet. 4.12, 13. 2 Tim. 3.12. I know it is said, that by water is signified, the cleansing operation of the Spirit, and so it amounts to, Except a man be born of the Spirit, and his cleansing operation. But then water should be rather set after spirit, then before it. To say nothing that all that yet amounts but to spirit for her being holy, the birth of him must needs produce holiness or cleanness too.  
2. Others (as I myself have) understand by water the grace of God, as held forth in the Gospel, and received by faith, the word, grace, and knowledge of God being in Scriptures often so called, as Deut. 32.1, 2, 3. Isai. 11.9. with Joel 3.18. And this indeed would well agree to men of years, but how will it reach the extent of the word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) any one, which reaches to every Sex and Age? Little Infants by this must be excluded God's Kingdom then, they being not capable of hearing and understanding the word in Infancy, contrary to our Saviour's express saying that tells us, that Of such is the Kingdom of God, and their receipt thereof is propounded as a good pattern for those of elder years, as we have seen before.  
But (to view what may be said against this Interpretation) our Saviour says, ver. 3. That this birth is a birth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Object. 1 (which signifies, and is translated, ver. 31.) from above, but this water in Baptism is Elementary, and from below.  
Answ. 1. Our Saviour tells Nicodemus, ver. 12. Answ. 1 that he spoke to him of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, things earthly, or done on earth, though from Heaven, and such is this Baptism: For,  
2. Though the water in it be elementary and earthy, yet the Ordinance of Baptism is from Heaven, Matth. 21.25, 26. Even from God, and his heavenly Son, Luke 3.3.  
3. Nor is this birth of water only, but of spirit also, and he is from Heaven.  
Object. 2 But to be born, signifies to have a being given, and produced, that we had not before: new principles, etc. How can a man be said then to be born of water in Baptism?  
Answ. Before we come to the Answer itself, let these premises be considered.  
1. That this speech is figurative, not proper, and so to be understood in a similitude to natural birth only, it being a Metaphor.  
The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, comprehends and takes in into its signification, the acts of generation, conception, and birth, or bringing forth, and so is diversely in divers places translated, as in Matth. 1.20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is, that which is mentioned in her. In 1 John 5.1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is born of God, and in the same place, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is begotten of of him. So that if there be but a tendency to birth by Baptism, it's enough to entitle it to his word.  
3. The whole Birth is not ascribed to Water alone, but to Water and Spirit. Now then to answer the foresaid Objection. I say,  
Answ. 1 There is a symbolical or similitudinary, yea, and something more than similitudinary birth in Baptism, for as in every birth (taking the word in that large sense before declared) there is a Corruptio unius formae, & productio alterius; a passing from one to another form, or manner of being. So in this Ordinance of Baptism there is,  
1. A Significant, letting go, dying to, or renouncing all other rights, titles, or claims to God's Kingdom, as set up in the Ministration of Christ, whether from natural-birth from Adam, or Abraham, or spiritual or symbolical birth by Circumcision, and the Ordinances of Moses. Though the Kingdom of God be for, and is tendered to men as born of Adam, or Abraham, and the circumcised were the children of it, as to right of its tender to them, and their duty to receive it, yet the Kingdom and the blessings of it by way of receipt and enjoyment, they could not, nor might have abiding but in that condition, or under that Ministration, to receive the Kingdom; they must pass further, be born from above, that is, of water, etc. be baptised, in which was,  
1. A putting on, and being brought into a new kind of being, title, and claim to the Kingdom of God, a putting on Christ as come in the flesh, and bringing by his death for all men life, righteousness and blessing through the free grace of God unto them. For in being baptised into the Name of Christ is a putting on of Jesus Christ, Gal. 3.26, 27. symbolically, professedly, and as to obligation to him, and to worship God by him. Something of the some nature was in Circumcision, whence I conceive our Saviour reprehends Nicodemus, his gross ignorance and mistake of his meaning, saying, Art thou a Master in Israel, and knowest not these things? John 3.10. For in Circumcision there was intimately a renouncing of all claim to the blessing of God by any natural birth of Adam, or Abraham, or any thing of themselves, whence the foreskin of their generation was cut off, and an owning or coming in unto a new birth or being, namely, to have a being in Christ of the seed of Abraham, as promised to him, and so in the Covenant with Abraham, promising blessing to all the families of the earth through him. Only that that gave title to the blessing as promised, would not suffice to give title to the exhibition of it, the being brought into the Covenant, and so into Christ as promised, served to bring into the Church, as under that Ministration of Moses, and the blessings suitable thereto, but to the Kingdom of God preached and administered by Christ come in the flesh. It was needful to be born of water, that is, to be baptised into him, as so come in the flesh, etc.  
2. There also there is some Analogy in Baptism to the customs used upon newborn persons in nature, as in Ezek. 16.3, 4, 5, 6. There is a washing of the Infant newborn before it be fit to be educated, or nourished amongst persons that are clean. So here the party to be baptised by his submission to Christ, is made partaker of a new birth, or title to the Kingdom, and is washed; to signify that Christ forgives sins to the submitter to, and believe on him: Like as amongst the Jews, If any Heathen family submitted to the Jewish Religion formerly, they were all beside Circumcision of the males, baptised or washed. See Ainsw. on Gen. 17.12. For being by the submission of the parents to the Law, as it were newborn to that Religion, they were dealt with as newborn Infants, washed, etc. Yea, such a right we find to have been practised amongst the Grecians, (the Devil imitating sometimes God's Ordinances) that if one had been given out to have been dead, and his Funeral solemnised, if it was found afterward that he was alive, and appeared amongst them again, they looked upon him as unclean and abominable, not fit to join with them civil, much less their religious fellowships, till (according to the Oracle, Given at Delphos to one Aristinus, whom such a Disaster befell, 

Plut. Quest. Rom. 5.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,)  They were washed and dealt with again as new born babes, whence they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Posti minio nati, born again after death, but (not to turn aside to fables— Nec sacris miscere profana, ne mulier formosa superne. Desinat in pisciem,) I shall pass that.  
3. Whereas this birth is not only of water, but of water and spirit, there is this tendency therein further to the birth of spirit, That,  
1. It brings into the Church and Kingdom of Christ, where he as King and Lord dispenseth his Blessing and Spirit. And sealeth the dispensation thereof to the baptised in his there according to capacity attending, and submitting to him.  
2. We may presume that there is a concurence of the Spirit with his own Ordinance in part, to bless the receiver according to his capacity, he not dealing guilfully in the Ordinance of God. He having promised where ever he record his Name, to meet with us, and bless us, of what ever age the comer to him be therein, Exod. 20.24. with Psal. 115.13. In respect of these considerations it may well be called a Washing or Laver of Regeneration, as Titus 3.5. And men be said, to be born therein.  
Object. 3 3. But than Lastly its objected, That this will make Baptism as the Ancients said, Necessary to salvation. So as in Infants, or others dying without Baptism must be damned, but we know the penitent th●ef on the Cross was saved, and Cornelius received the Holy Ghost before Baptism.  
I conceive it follows not: because, Answ. 1  
1. Christ speaks here of things, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ver. 10. If I have spoken to thee of things on earth. So then by the Kingdom of God here is signified, the Kingdom preached and administered by Christ on the earth, or in his life. In which as we have showed before is a twofold state, External, and into that no man can enter so as to be reputed, and taken as a member of it, as now ordered by Christ come in the flesh, but by being baptised with water, into that Cornelius entered not otherwise, nor the thief entered at all, if not formerly baptised of John, as none can tell but he might be.  
Internal, and into that none can enter, but by being born of the Holy Ghost, that is, by being brought into, and united unto Christ by him, so as to have him the only hope of glory, the only righteousness, redemption, life, and so to have our dependence on, and rejoicing in him, and God through him. This twofold principle of birth than may have more direct reference to the twofold state of it, as here administered. And yet as Cornelius entered in some measure into the second, before he had the admission into the first; so may a man possibly be admitted into that estate, that is not here on earth to be enjoyed without it; but to enter it in both its estates here, both are required to be born of water, and the spirit. Besides,  
2. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, cannot, does not always signify an absolute impossibility, but only an unusualness, or an inconsistency with such ordinary ways, or principles. As when it's said, The children of the Bride-chamber cannot fast, so long as the Bridegroom it with them, Matth. 2.19. So it cannot be, that a Prophet perish out of Jerusalem, Luke 13.23. He could there do no mighty works because of their unbelief, Mark 6.5. The world cannot hate you, John 7.7. with divers others. Which are to be interpreted some of them, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, some of them, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it's not usual, or insistent with such principles, or ways appointed. So here a man cannot in an ordinary way enter into the Kingdom of God, the Regiment of God by Christ here, and so meet with the blessings and privileges dispensed by him, unless baptised with water, and with the Holy Ghost: Nor yet may it be said, That Baptism giving an admission, what need then of the Holy Ghost too.  
For, 1. The outward Baptism, as outward, gives but admission into its outward state, though therein it brings into the way for meeting with Spirit, and so the inward state of it.  
2. The outward Baptism, as was outed above, is not without the presence and blessing of the Spirit in some measure, where not guilfully or deceitfully received.  
3. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, doth not only signify, the first stepping into, but also the passing on into the thing entered, and so a continued act of entering, as Heb. 4.3. We that have believed, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, do enter into rest; we are yet but entering, And so in Matth. 18.3.8, 9 Such are in part entered, as the Disciples were, Matth. 11.11. Yet unless they do put away, and turn from such evils as they occasionally are corrupted with, and are offended by, they cannot 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, enter, or pass on, but will stop in the passage, and at length be cast out again. As it was needful then for Cornelius, entered into the internal state in part to be baptised with water, for entering the outward state of the Kingdom of Christ. So its needful for those that have been baptised, and entered the outward; yea, and begun to enter the inward too, to yield up to Christ his Doctrine, Reproofs, Counsels, that they may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, pass into the inward farther, and so be prepared for the eternal state of it in its glory.  
3. Though we cannot conclude then, That no outward Baptism, no salvation, yet the ordinary passage into the inward state of Christ's Kingdom here, being by the outward, and so through both into the state of eternal Glory, I think we may safely conclude it to be desperate folly and madness, for men to neglect the entering into this Kingdom in its outward state, either in themselves, or theirs, presuming to enter the inner and future state without that. If this be the way of entrance without which no ordinary entrance, Who will be so mad to put himself or his, upon an extraordinary, when the ordinary is before him, and may be had? It being not God's way to work extraordinarily, where his ordinary ways or Ordinances may be enjoyed, and are slighted. Indeed, where God denies the ordinary means, we may hope his mercy and goodness dispenses with the wants in men, they seeking and hoping in him according to what they have, but no ground for thinking so, where the ordinary means are slighted, appointed for us by him; in such a case a man neglecting God's way of entering into the Church or Kingdom of God, or bringing his thereinto, cuts himself or his off, as we have cited before from God's Congregation, as Gen. 17.14. And though there be blessing for all men, Nations and Families in Christ, yet where he hath promised that it shall come upon men to eternal life, and enjoyment of his Kingdom in its glorious state, where through unbelief, or slighting it, men do not enter it in what estates of it are here to be entered; I know not, nor believe I, that any man can demonstrate to me. Indeed, the poor Infants of such persons cannot help it in themselves in Infancy, nor could they under the state of the Jews before Christ, and though I know no promise of salvation to them in such a case, we may hope that the mercy of God would not impute it to them to an eternal rejection of them, but in such a case the parents engage God's displeasure against themselves, and so do all such as be accessary to such their actions; 
Exod. 4.24, 25, 26. Mark 10.14.  and I see not but God also punishes them in their children in threatening to cut them off from the enjoyment of such blessing, as here they might in his Kingdom meet with on the earth; That soul that is not entered into the Covenant of God's blessing in Christ, being cut off from, and so not reputed or dealt with by God as one of the Congregation, Gen. 17.14. So that there is now as the blessings of God's Kingdom here on earth both to the parents and children of their being baptised, and so born of water, though there be not absolute necessity as to eternal salvation.  
And now let us sum up that which hath been hitherto said for it, and we may put it into these following Arguments.  
1. All the Nations, or Gentiles, are within the Commission, for discipling, by baptising them, etc. Or thus, Christ hath commanded to disciple all the Gentiles, baptising them, etc. But our little Infants are also Gentiles, therefore to be discipled, baptising them.  
2. What the Apostles practised in baptising, we may lawfully; But they baptised believers with their households without exception of any, because children, that we read of; therefore so may we.  
3. If the Kingdom of Heaven signifying, or including the Church-state, is not to be denied to little children, than neither is Baptism. But the Kingdom of Heaven including the Church-state, is not to be denied them, because of such it is, therefore not Baptism.  
4. If the Infants of parents that are the branches of the stock of Abraham, be not broken off from that stock, until, or unless they come to renounce that faith and profession of his, or in his family, than they are till then to be acknowledged as holy, and as branches, and not deprived of the badge of that acknowledgement, that is Baptism: But the Infants of such Parents, are not broken off, till, or unless they come to renounce that faith and profession: Ergo,  
5. If the promise of God appertains to children with their parents, and the blessing of Christ belong to whole families, except in case of wilful rejection, and such right of it to them be ground of their coming to, and receiving Baptism, then are the children to be baptised with their parents. But so it is as we have seen. Ergo,  
6. If children have need of entering into the Kingdom of God for his blessing, and the way of entering be by Baptism, then need and ought they to be baptised; but the promises are true, as we have seen, Ergo, etc.  
So then, he that will implead, and cry out against Infant-Baptism, must prove,  
1. That children are not included in all the Nations, or Gentiles, to be discipled by baptising them; or that they cannot so be discipled.  
And 2. That the Apostles baptised not such households as in which were Infants, or in case they did, they yet left out the Infants in them.  
And 3. That when our Saviour saith, Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven, the word such signifies not such in kind, or the Kingdom of Heaven, as there mentioned, includeth not its outward Regiment, or that that may be theirs, and they admitted to it, and come to Christ in it, and yet not be baptised.  
And 4. That the Infants of believers, or of persons not broken from the stock of Abraham are unbranched, till actual believers, or may not have the outward Baptism, and be acknowledged members of the Church, though not unbranched. I say, these and the like things are needful to be proved, which I conceive a very hard task for him that shall reject Infants from Baptism.  
There are I confess, yet some other Objections against it, as that,  
1. It occasions great disorder, and confusion in the Church of God, filling it with dead unprofitable members, and profane persons, That,  
2. There is no great Antiquity for it, or not such as is pretended.  
3. That however the form that is now used, viz. of not plunging into, but only washing, or sprinkling with water, cannot be allowed to have the essential form of right Baptism in it. To all which, I shall say a word or two particularly, and so conclude.  
1. It's said, Infant-Baptism brings in a swarm of ignorant and profane persons, that have nothing but the name of Christians.  
To which I answer, 1. That it cannot be denied indeed, that many evil men are in the Church of God, as Matth. 13. Tares as well as wheat, many that do iniquity, good and bad are in the net. Yea, and this is to me an Argument of the vanity of those that go up and down to rebaptize, and gather into themselves thereby, as if they were not in the Church, or Kingdom of Christ, till discipled by their Baptism, when as they may be in the Kingdom and Church of Christ, though workers of iniquity in it: The Gentiles are within the outward Court, and it's given to them; and it's a vain thing for men to say, it's not the outward Court of God's Temple, because they be Gentile-multitudes that be in it: Nor may any say, the Kingdom spoken of in Matth. 13.41. is the Kingdom of Providence, because the field is said to be in the world: For than should they be gathered out of his providential Government, which they cannot be; for even hell itself is under the Kingdom of Power and Providence, which ruleth over all. The world indeed is the field, but the field is not the Kingdom; the Kingdom is in the field, or world, but it's not the world. It's the Church-state in which they are, and in which they offend, and do iniquity, and from thence they shall be gathered, they need not then another Baptism of water to bring them into the Kingdom, or Church-state, in its outward Court, or external form; for they are in it already: But,  
2. The reason of men's being such bad members in it, is not Infants-baptism, the Infants I am sure are least in the fault, or their being baptised. If it were, yet we see there began to be such in the Apostles time, and therefore if Infant baptism be the cause, that was then too, there were then divers that had not the knowledge of God, 
1 Cor. 3.1.2. and 15.34. James 2.17. 2 Tim. 3.5. 1 Tim. 6.4, 5, 6  and that judged and walked carnally, dead Christians, that had a form, but not the power of godliness, men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith, contentious, envious, brangling persons, some that would be drunk in their very solemn meetings. And the further the stream runs from the fountain, the more mud and corruption it contracts: but the truth is, 
1 Cor. 11.21.  the cause of this dissoluteness in the Church, is rather men's sleeping, that is, their carelessness in attending to Doctrine and Discipline; Parents have been neglective of training up their children in the Nurture of the Lord, and Church-censure, Admonition, and Excommunication have been laid aside, or abused, otherwise, the Church had not come to this corruption. Not the admission of children then by Baptism, but want of carefulness in members of elder years for disciplinating their children, and of the Church for warning, watching over, and casting out, have been the true causes of so much rubbish coming in.  
3. This might be retorted upon the Antipedobaptists, the evil consequences and fruits that frequently follow upon it. Not to mention the business of Munster, too much talked of, our own Country affords too much of the sad consequences that have followed in many upon their rejecting their former, and betaking themselves to another Baptism; as their growing to slight their brethren, though gracious, and formerly so approved; their falling off from Ordinances, yea, from Christ himself, and turning some of them to be little less than Atheists: but for the fuller opening and speaking to these sad things, I refer the Reader to a Book upon this subject, lately set out by my godly Brother, T. M. Surely John intimates that into the floor of Christ, by outward Baptism, there would enter chaff as well as wheat, and therefore if the Commission take in all the Gentiles of what Ages, or Sex, or Country soever, we may not exclude infants, because through some neglects, and want of vigilancy, many of them prove ignorant and vicious.  
2. For ancient Writers upon this point, Master Marshal hath to my hand produced divers, as Ireneus, Origen, Nazianzen, Cyprian, Augustine, Ambrose, etc. The first indeed hath not the word Baptism, but renewing rather, his Latin phrase is thus, Omnes qui per cum renascuntur in Deum, infants, & parvulos, & pueros, & juvenes. Which some object against, 
Mr Tombs.  as if he spoke of Sanctification, not Baptism: When as yet Sanctification signifies a devoting to God, and we read not that the Ancients esteemed any so, not of the Church, or not admittable to Baptism: yea, it's a confessed thing that they used the word Renasci, to signify to be baptised, and accounted such to be Renatos. It's said again, That possibly Ireneus being a Greek writer, had some other word or phrase then what suits with his Latin Translations. But that's a mere vanity as to matter of disproof of what we have in the Translations, if any Copies of him could be showed that speak otherwise, it were something to the purpose.  
For Origen, its true, he had his Errors as all the Fathers had, but sure he was without error able to say what was the practice of the Church in his time, and that's all that we seek for from the Fathers to this business: He must be a notorious falsifier, if he should wilfully misreport the Churches known practices, and we should have found some so honest, as to have cried shame upon him for it. Indeed, some suspect those passages not to be his, but Ruffinus his; which yet at the most is but suspicion. The most ancient Writers that we have, have delivered nothing to the contrary: as if Infant-baptism was not in their times practised, or as if it were unlawful (however in cases of sickness and death approaching) to practise it.  
The rest are more plainly and undeniably for it, especially Cyprian, who lived about 240 years after Christ, and with a consent of 66 Bishops determined that Infants were to be baptised, and surely we can scarce imagine, that so many Bishops should all be ignorant of what was the practice of the Church for divers years before that their determination; yea, had it been some innovation, it's not probable, but in those more fervent times for Christ, in which so many suffered gloriously for him, some would have detected and cried out upon them. As we see they did oppose Cyprian in point of rebaptising Heretics. But then against them there are two things objected.  
1. That their grounds were rotten upon which they maintained that Doctrine and practice, as if no children could be saved without Baptism.  
To which I answer, 1. That the Ancients have mistaken the grounds of the most undeniable practices: As of Baptism itself in general, though to men of years, and upon profession of faith, as if it was of the same absolute 
* Praescribitur nemini sine Baptismo competere salutem, ex il●a maximi pronuntiatione Domini, nisi quis ●atus suerit ex aqua, non habet vitam obscrinxit fidem ad Baptismi necessitudinem. Tertul. de Baptismo.  necessity to salvation, and as if it blotted out, or took away, in whom ever original sin, yea, in men of years, all other sins too. Shall we therefore say, They were wrong in holding forth any such thing as Baptism, because they mistook its grounds; the like we might say of the Supper, etc. The practice of the Church they might better understand then the grounds of those practices. It cannot be proved, that any of them were the bringers in of those practices, but the propugnators of them already, and before times in use; only they grew superstitious in their conceits of those practices, as may be seen in others of undeniable Apostolical institution, as the Supper of the Lord, etc.  
2. The ground that Cyprian gives, viz. Nemini Dei gratia deneganda est, etc. is indeed the bottom right ground of baptising them. For Christ's descending into the waters of affliction, yea into death itself in behalf of all, his rising again is that which is both the ground of Gospel-preaching to all, and affirming the good will of God to all men, That he would have them saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth, 2 Cor. 5.13, 14, 15. Mark 16.15. 1 Tim. 2.4 6. And the ground of all men's being obliged to him, to live to him that died for them, he being by that means the Lord of all, Rom. 14.9. And the door of hope set open to all, the passage through which God tendereth his grace in the Gospel, and extendeth his mercy and goodness to all one and other, and also the very ground of opening his Kingdom before-seated amongst the Jews unto all the Nations, and Gentiles, and commanding all to be baptised into his Name, by baptising them thereinto, and setting his Commands before them, and so of bringing them into his house, or gracious Government in his Kingdom. Through that there is forgiveness of sins with him, and that held forth to, and for all, that in looking to him they might receive it; through that these waters of affliction, and wrath, that would have drowned all, are made as waters of Baptism to those that receive, or put not from them his salvation. Upon that ground we call persons to, and are to receive, and bring them under his wing in the outward dispensation. And though its true, he may otherwise show mercy to those whom we with the Disciples would forbid to come to him for outward testimonies of it, yet our forbidding such is an implicit (at least) denial of his grace to them, denial of his Kingdom in the outward Regiment thereof, in which is a dispensation of his grace and favour more then to others without; though not so much as to those more within, and under the Regiment of spiritual Renovation, and Communion with him. Yea indeed, if the matter be well looked into, we shall find that the greatest cause of most men's denying Infant-baptism, springs from their unbelief of the Gospel in its extent, because they know not whether Christ hath died for them, and hath opened his Kingdom, thereby to entertain them, whether he any way looks upon them as under the Covenant of Abraham, and branches of the Church-state set up in his family, in this alteration of its form of Government, and so whether any of the sap and juice thence flowing, may he shared in by them. Sure, when we deny them Baptism, we deny them place in Christ's House, and the blessing accompanying it; we deny them that wing of God stretched out over all upon whom his Name is put for their protection and leading, till they wilfully break Covenant with him, and run from him; we deny them that place in the prayers and blessings of the Church of God put up for all of it, which otherwise they should share in; we deny them much, so far as lies in our power to deny, or grant to them. But it's said again,  
2. That Tertulliaen an Ancienter Writer, who was in Cyprians account his Master, argues rather for delaying Baptism, except in case of necessity, till they come to riper years. To that I answer.  
1. That Tertullian, and after him Nazianzen, doth so indeed, but then it's to be minded, that they neither deny Infant-baptism to have been practised in the Church in and before their times, or in the Apostles times. Nor 2. That its lawful to be practised, for in case of necessity they both allow it. Yea, it's to be noteds  
2. That it was practised in those more ancient times, even within 140 years after Christ without any known beginning; for Tertullia's arguing for their delaying their Baptism, implies as plainly that there was then an use to baptise them, as in far latter times Barnard's noting some to have denied Infant-baptism, proves, That there were Antipedobaptists in those latter Ages, in, or before Bernard's time: yea, it's to be noted also,  

Non minori de causa innupti quoque procrastinandi in quibus tentatio per parata est, tam virginibus per maturitatem, quam viduis pervagationem, donec aut nubant aut continentia corroborentur. Tex. de Bapt.  3. That by the same reason we may as well deny Baptism to young men unmarried, and widows, though they profess faith in Christ, for even their delaying Baptism too, till either they be married, or are confirmed in chastity, that is, in a resolution of a single life, the same Tertullian endeavours to persuade in the same place. And indeed, there is as little positive mention of young unmarried persons being baptised, though of twenty years of age, or upward, (that were not single all their lives after it at least) as there is of Infans being baptised, and yet I think no Antipedobaptists in the world will deny, that such unmarried persons, though not resolved against marriage, may lawfully be baptised. It's no rare thing to find the ancient Writers regarding some reasonings of their own to grow superstitious in delaying, or denying Gods Ordinances, as is evident again in Tertullian denying the lawfulness of second marriages; and what other but superstition was Constantine's, and others, putting off Baptism, till towards their end? Sure we can find no one Scripture instance for putting off persons that come to be baptised, till a greater knowledge attained, or more exact walking testified, or the like. That practice rather sprung from a conceit that Baptism cleared them of all their sins, and so they thought it good wisdom to act out what sins they had a mind to act, or thought they should act before Baptism, rather than after, and so they deferred Baptism the longer. Besides, we may note,  
4. That Tertullian is as weak to the full in his arguing against Infant-baptism, as any in arguing for it.  
For, 1. He takes for granted, That that Speech of Christ to his Disciples, Suffer little children to come to me, speaks of coming to Baptism: But answers it thus, Viniat dum adolescant, etc. Let them come when they are grown up, let them be made Christians when they can know Christ? Were not these, or some such like, the thoughts of the Disciples with whom Christ was offended? And can that be the meaning of Christ, when he rebuked them for not letting them come at the present when as yet they were not grown up? and when he in their very Infancy blessed them, and said, Of such is the Kingdom? But would Tertullian indeed have them come then when they are grown up? No, they must stay a little longer too, till they be married, or settled in their resolution of chastity. And whereas he says further, Why should innocent Age hasten to the remission of their sins? It appears, he thought that Baptism gave remission, as well as they that reasoned for it: And indeed, that being granted, his reasoning must needs be the worse of the two, for he speaks, as if they were so innocent, as that they needed no remission, whereas the truth is, They also are by nature so polluted with sin, and under the guilt of it, as that they also need washing and remission, or else they cannot be partakers of eternal salvation. This seems to savour rather of the  ground for their delaying Baptism, till they have committed many sins, that so therein they might receive the forgiveness of them all together, and not with the Scripture-grounds of Baptism. Though that God doth hold forth to men the forgiveness of their sins in Christ, and seals or testifies it in Baptism, I believe, viz. That they submitting to his Government by Christ, for the future shall have remission of what is past: yea, by believing in him shall meet with eternal salvation. And the Church so receiving, remits all that was past, reckoning them no longer, as in the unbaptized state in the world, but as Subjects unto Christ, till after-follies appearing, bring them under new censures.  
The practice we find then without any known beginning in Ecclesiastical Record, but the warrantableness of that practice we must have in the Scriptures. Now what warrant there is for it in the Scriptures, I have before shown: To which I know not what more can be added, except we should take in that Prophecy too, that speaks of the Gentiles bringing in children to the Church of God on their shoulders, and in their arms, Isai. 49.22. Which why it may not be as literally to be verified as the 23d. That Kings shall be their nursing Fathers, and Queens their nursing Mothers, I think is hard to show: Except we will jurare in verba, take this or that man's bare saying, it's otherwise for sufficient proof of it. Christ being a child born to the Jews, and born in Bethlehem-Judah, and his coming meekly riding on an Ass, his being pierced in his hands and feet, their giving him vinegar to drink, and parting his garments, and for his vestment casting lots; all these, with many other passages, had their literal fulfilling, and why this may not be so understood too, is not sufficiently proved by those that deny it. But as of itself, it hath not cleanness enough in it to satisfy an inquisitive heart in the point in hand: so is the very Commission for discipling and baptising, so full and general in its expression, and other considerations before laid down seem to be so convincing, as that there may be no further need of it; and therefore I shall pass it, and come to the last point objected, or to be considered, viz.  
3. The Form of baptising in water, what it is, whether dipping, plunging, or washing with water: Concerning which, I consider,  
1. That there is no express command tying us to any of them, or expressing, whether the whole body, or some part, or what part is to be dipped, or washed, etc. as was noted before, pag. 4 & 5.  
2. That the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is capable of any of those actions, The Pharisees washing themselves before they eat, though it were but their hands, is called, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Except they be baptised, they eat not. So it is, verbatim, Mark 7.4. compared with 3.6. Luke 11.38. The Israelites being weted with the Cloud and Sea, though into them they were not plunged, (the Cloud they could not, it was above them, the Sea they passed through on dry ground, and the water stood up as walls on either hand) is called, their being baptised, 1 Cor. 10.1, 2. So Heb. 9.10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is with divers kinds of washings, in which I conceive their sprinkling with clean water, and the ashes of an heifer alluded to perhaps in Ezek. 36.25. may be included. And whereas some say, it's to dip, Luke 16.24. it's observable,  
1. That the word there, is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of the same root it is, but not of the same word.  
2. That's applied to a small part of the body, and not to the whole body, the tip, or top of the finger.  
3. That the construction gives it rather to be thus, that he may wet his finger with water; for it's not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, into water; but only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that he may wet in, or with water.  
3. That though it's said, Some went down into the water, yet it's not said, whether the Baptist washed their body there, or plunged them over head and ears, the word will bear either, as was noted before; And they went, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Acts 8.38. may as well be translated unto, as into the water; the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 frequently so signifying.  
The Holy Ghost then being no more circumstantial in his expressions, as whether thrice, or but once dipped or plunged, and neither at all plunged, but only washed, and whether all over, or but some part; not any where tying us to any form, I think it somewhat too superstitious to bind to any of those forms, and put religion to this or that, and say thus, and in this form it must be, or else it is not Baptism. I think dipping or plunging, is a very good way, and very warrantable 
* Veteris non aliter, quam mersione vel unica, vel trina baptizabant. Graeca Ecclesia hodie baptizand●s me●git; at climici quod deoumberent baptizati sunt, non lavacro integro, sed toto corpore aqua perfuso: ita baptizabatur novatus ager. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Casnub. , and its probable they were so baptised: But I cannot say absolutely it was so, and make it a point of faith, and of necessity to be practised. I conceive the washing with water in whole, or in part, so it be into the Name of Christ, and to disciple them into his faith and doctrine, is essentially Baptism, for aught that I can see, substantially produced against it, the rather because such washing hath that name put upon it, when not used in that way, and to that end, as was showed before: therefore such a washing to this end, viz. into the Name of Christ, etc. is very capable of the Name of his Baptism, or Baptism unto him: for its the use or end of the application of water, that is rather to be respected in this Ordinance, than the outward form of applying it, there being nothing in all the Scripture by way of prescription, or tie in it.  
4. But what if the Holy Ghost himself do give us an interpretation of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and declare unto us by what manner of action on the party baptised, the thing therein signified is performed, shall not that weigh more with us then all the authority of the Masters of the Greek tongues, and all the variety of significations that they put upon the word, amongst whom we find difference enough? Me thinks, I hear all parties agreeing to it, that if we can find an interpretation of that word of his giving, they will listen to it, because he is an Author beyond all exception, and knew his meaning in his own words, better than Scapula, Budaeus, Hesichius, Stephanus, Casaubon, Zepperus, Beza, or any other whatsoever.  
But may some say, Where shall we find him giving its interpretation?  
I answer, If we diligently compare the Scriptures, we shall easily find it.  
To this purpose then let us compare the promises made by our Lord Jesus Christ, or predictions concerning his baptising, and the performance thereof by him, and sure that Act that he used in performing, is a good Interpretation of his meaning in predicting and promising it. Well then, let us look into Matth. 3.11. and see there what John the Baptist says, I indeed (says he) baptise you with water to repentance, but there comes one after me mightier than I, he shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost, and fire. See also, Acts 1.5. John indeed baptised with water, but ye shall be baptised with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. Now the question is about the manner of act signified in this word Baptise, whether it be accomplished by dipping, plunging the party baptised into the matter of Baptism, or that wherewith he is baptised, or whether it be performed by sprinkling that upon him, or by what other action. Now compare with these  Scriptures those passages in which this baptising promised was accomplished, and they will clearly unfold unto us by what kind of action the signification of that word Baptise, is answered. And first, let that be minded, that this promise of Christ to baptise his Apostles and Disciples with the Holy Ghost, was performed on the Day of Pentecost, that soon after followed, as all Interpreters grant, and is sufficiently clear, by comparing this first of the Acts, with the next following Chapter. Where we have the accomplishment of this promise spoken to by the Apostle Peter first; in the Prophet Joel's words, and afterwards in his own, in the Prophet Joels, Chap. 2. ver. 16, 17. This (saith he there) is that that was spoken of by the Prophet Joel, And it shall be in the last days, saith God, that I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, etc. In his own, ver. 33. This Jesus being at the right hand of God exalted, and having received the promise of the Holy Ghost, hath shed, or poured forth this that ye now see, and hear. What more evident, then that the Holy Ghost himself here gives this action of pouring forth the thing wherewith the party is baptised upon the said person, as the signification and interpretation of the word Baptise. That which is called baptising in the promise, being in the performance both in the Prophet, and by the Apostle called a pouring forth, or out upon. See it further cleared, by comparing Acts 10.45. with Acts 11.16. In the former place it's said, That upon the Gentiles was poured forth the gift of the Holy Ghost: And in the latter place, Peter tells his Brethren, That therein he called to mind the word of the Lord, who said, John indeed baptised with water, but ye shall be baptised with the Holy Ghost: Plainly implying, that in pouring out the Holy Ghost upon them, he performed his word of baptising them with the Holy Ghost.  
Now if Jesus Christ himself baptised with this manner of action, pouring the matter wherewith he baptised upon the parties he baptised, and the Holy Ghost tells us the act signified in the word Baptise, be in that manner acted, who can deny that that manner of acting upon the party baptised, is a right way of baptising them? Can we have a better pattern in Baptising to imitate, than the Lord himself? Or can we baptise in a better form of acting than he? Or can we doubt that this form of pouring out water upon the party baptised, is Baptism wi●h water, when the same form of pouring out Spirit, is plainly the baptising with Spirit? The difference in the matter of Baptism changes not the signification of the act employed in the word Baptise: especially that phrase of baptising with Spirit, and pouring out of Spirit: having evident allusion to, and being borrowed from the pouring out of water, and baptising with water, if baptising with water be not to be performed by pouring out water upon the person we baptise; neither then is it proper to call the pouring out of Spirit upon one the baptising him with Spirit, in Metaphorical Speeches words being borrowed from the things to which the resemblance is made, and applied to the things resembled. Now in that way used in the Congregations in England, that are Pedobaptists, it cannot be denied that the Act of Baptism is performed by pouring water upon the child, or person baptised, less or more, and less and more herein makes no essential difference, so there be water poured out upon them, with intent to, or for discipling to that Name of Jesus, by the Holy Ghosts own interpretation of the word, it may truly be called Baptism, sprinkling with water, being not different from pouring out much water upon them, except in the quantity of the water: And both Metaphors are used in the Scripture, to signify the same spiritual thing signified in Baptism. As in Isai. 52.15. He that is Christ shall sprinkle many Nations. And truly, I am not satisfied that the Holy Ghost there uses that expression only to signify his sprinkling his grace or doctrine upon them, but also to signify and foretell the sprinkling them by way of Baptism into his Name by his Servants, and that with reference to that fore-seen, he uses this phrase, to signify his sprinkling them with his grace or doctrine also. Why we may not interpret the Holy Ghost as literally here, as in the expressions next following, and all along the next Chapter, I see no convincing reason as yet that can be produced. So in Ezek. 36.25. I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean, differs not in substance from that in Isai. 44.3, 4. I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, etc. Though I confess there is another Metaphor in it, and another operation of the grace of God there hinted: So that I hope by the light of this consideration, the Antipedobaptists will see that there is no such necessity of plunging or dipping for the baptising a person, as men are ready to be persuaded by they noise the make about it.  
Object. I know some object those phrases of being buried with Christ in Baptism, Rom. 6.3, 4. Collos. 2.12. As if the Apostle there in spoke of the external rite of Baptism, burying the body of the party baptised under the water for some short space of time, as is used in plunging men.  
Answ. 1 To which I answer, That perhaps they might have such a rite, and such a rite is very consistent with Baptism, and might laudably be practised, but that it is essential to Baptism, or that indeed they so did in baptising, is more than any Scripture will enforce; much less these instanced in the Objection: And I am sure we have no express command tying us, (as is once, and again said) to the so doing: It's true, we read of some, that they went down 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, into, or unto the water, 
See Act: 8.39. Matth. 3.16.  and that they did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, come up again, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from, or out of the water: but then these phrases are evidently distinct from the act of baptising, the one prceeding it, and the other after it, and not either of them of the essence of the baptising, which whether it were by washing them, or plunging them over head and ears, or pouring water on them, is not mentioned: Nor are these phrases always used about baptising, as in the Baptism of Cornelius, and his friends, and household; there it is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Can any forbid water that these should not be baptised? The phrase of prohibiting water may seem rather to signify that water be brought to them for that purpose to baptise them, however we read not that either they, or the Jailor's house, or Lydia's went into the water.  
2. But those phrases of Burying with Christ in Baptism, seem not to determine, or tell us the outward rite of baptising with water, for then the rising with Christ too should point to something in the same, for they both are said to be in Baptism, Col. 2.12. Now that the latter doth not, me thinks, this will evince, That that rising with him said to be in Baptism, is a rising by the faith of the operation of God that raised Christ from the dead; which faith sure gave not the power of their bodily rising up from under the waters in Baptism, but they risen from under them by the power naturally in their own persons, or in them that baptised them: for neither had all that were baptised that faith of the operation of God raising Christ from the dead, as is evident in many of the multitudes baptised by John, Who though they rejoiced in his light for a season, yet abide not to the faith or understanding of Christ raised from the dead. 
Acts 8.20, 21, 22, Ti●. 1.16.  And as its evident in Simon Magus, and many in the Churches charged to have a dead faith, a profession of knowing God, but indeed were in works deniers of him, etc. Who either risen not from under the waters by the faith of God's operation, or else had afterward lost it again: but I conceive it cannot be any where probably proved, that they then had any such divine believing.  
3. I conceive then that those phrases speak either of the internal baptising by Spirit, which the Saints and faithful had proved, in which their hearts were broken off from self, and world, dead and buried to all confidences in the flesh, and buried into fellowship with Christ in his death, to yield up to conformity to him therein, in which also they experimented a quickening and raising up of their hearts to confidence in God, and readiness to walk in newness of life. Upon which grounds the Apostle after infers, If then ye be risen with Christ, seek those things that are above, Col. 3.1. In which surely he must need speak of their internal rising by the answer of a good conscience in the inward washing them with the grace of God; for as to the rising up out of the water of Baptism in the external Ordinance, there could be no ground for an if, as if any of them, in case they ever were plunged or buried under it, never came out, or risen up again there: Yea, why might he not upon that ground put in that partitive clause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, so many of us as were baptised into Christ, Rom. 6.3. Gal. 3.26, 27. As if perhaps not all outwardly baptised, and of the Church in its external form, had experience of this Baptism here spoken of. Beside, Circumcision is sometime so spoken of, not for the outward Ordinance, but the inward frame of the heart, or circumcision in the spirit, as in Rom. 2.28, 29. Phil. 3.3. Jer. 4.4. And why the Apostle might not speak of Baptism in such a way too, as to speak of the inward real Baptism of the heart, and not of the flesh, I see no reason can be given of any force at all. Nay it's sure the Apostle Peter doth speak of Baptism in that sense, 1 Pet. 3 21. Baptism now saves us not the putting away the filth of the flesh, which is done in the outward act of the external Ordinance, but the stipulation or answer of a good conscience through the resurrection of Christ: which place seems well to open and answer to that in Col. 2.12. Or,  
4. If we take them to speak also of outward baptising, than it shows not so much the external form and ceremony of it, as the inward end, intention, and scope of it. It's a coming into Christ at least, so far as to the outward Institution and Government, and so a professed Obligation to him, and to his death, to look for all salvation therethrough, and have fellowship with him therein. In which the person baptised was deadened to the world in its former, or all other Institutions, Religions, Hopes, Fellowships, Privileges, and as it were buried thereto, (especially as things stood in those times, in which he that came under the acknowledgement and profession of Christ, became therein as a man dead, and buried to all esteem, and repute or love of the world,) that so they should, or might walk in newness of life, after the new Institution and Doctrine of Christ, unto which we are in Baptism delivered, and not according to the old and wild inclinations of our nature or customs, and institutions of the world. And this holds true be the external form of baptising what it will, and let Baptism be understood to reach as far as it will; for whether the body be dipped or washed in whole or in part into the Name and profession of Christ: A man is thereby buried with him, and made as a dead man out of sight to the love and esteem of the enemies of Christ; and is obliged and bound to be so, as to the hopes, confidences, delights, customs, and vanities of the world, to be to all them as dead and buried, that so he may walk in the Doctrine and Instruction of Christ, which also will render a man as a dead, crucified, or buried thing to the world. And here is a putting on Christ, as to external profession and obligation, so much the outward Baptism brings under the bond of, and delivers up unto: And where ever the soul is inwardly baptised into the death of Christ, there in that death of his its buried with him to all its former hopes, confidences, and principles, really and actually, (though spiritually, and not carnally) and therein it's quickened up to live to God in newness of life, having really put on Christ, as to interest in his privileges, and conformity to him, crucified as to the old man, but quickened in the new. Which word (crucified) is there used of that said to be done in Baptism, as also the word planting together with him, ver. 5, 6. Though I think they should grossly mistake the Apostle, that should thence argue, that they had some such outward rites of resembling a crucifying, and an implanting in their external baptising.  
In what is said, I suppose their mistake also may appear, who from these and the like places argue, and conclude, 
Mr Law●.  That the External Baptising is a Seal of union with Christ, and forgiveness of sins, etc. which cannot be true: Except by union with Christ they mean by way of profession, or engaged subjection to his doctrine, as all baptised into Moses, became in that sense one with him; or as they that subscribe and come under the Parliamentary Authority, are in that sense one with them. And so indeed its true. That in Baptism we are buried with Christ, to external Circumcision, and so to the Observations of Moses Law, and become of his party, or under his way of institution, and nurture, obliged to his doctrine and commands, in whom we receive the end of all Moses his institution; and except by forgiveness of sins, is meant the not imputing former trespasses, or the guilt of them, to the prohibiting or keeping out from his Church and Kingdom, but that they may be admitted thereinto to wait upon him, and attend to him therein for spiritual union with, renovation by, and conformity to Christ; for so we grant, God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and hath so blotted out the hand-writing of Ordinances against all Nations, 
Col. 2.15.  that he welcometh them in their coming in to him, and reckoneth them no more unclean, nor will charge their follies upon them, so as to debar their coming in amongst his people, to be a people to him, as we noted before. Only such Jews, as (like the elder son in the parable, Luke 15.) stumble, and will not come in, and such Gentiles as count it a foolish offer that is made them, and join in unbelief with the Jews, or make fond excuses, and refuse, deprive themselves of the benefit of that non-imputation of their trespasses, which the Gospel proclaims to all, and Baptism seals to all that come in by virtue of that general Proclamation, 2 Cor. 5.19. Rom. 11.11, 12, 15. But if by union with Christ, is meant, as I conceive it is, union in spirit, and spiritual privileges to eternal life, and by remission of sins, such a forgiveness, as to take them into Covenant, as proper heirs of its peculiar privileges and blessings, and right to the eternal inheritance, then though Baptism witnessing to Christ, and pointing us to him, witness to the enjoyment of that union and forgiveness through the hearty belief on Christ, yet it sealeth them not to the several parties baptised outwardly, as their undoubted portion and privilege in and by coming to this Baptism, and so to be professed Subjects in the Kingdom, or Church-state of Christ, to be enjoyed by them. The sealing of that is the proper work of the Spirit of Christ, as hath been noted before. And thus have we also viewed these Objections. But,  
4. In perusing Master Kendal's Answer to Master Goodwin, I have lately met with one other Argument, which though propounded only Ad hominem, and by way of Objection by him to Master Goodwin, as endeavouring to show an inconsistency in his principles, and doctrines, yet as I apprehend may seem to carry some show of weight in it amongst some of the Antipedobaptists, that believe the Extent of Christ's Death and Ransom; yea, it makes me call to mind, that it is a prime Argument with many of them, and therefore I conceive it very needful to say something to it, and show its invalidity. It is to this purpose.  
Christ by his death and sufferings hath wholly dissolved, Object. 4 and taken off from all men the guilt and condemnation that was brought on all men by Adam's sin, and so from all Infants, so as that none shall perish now, but for his own personal sinning against the Government and goodness of God by Christ; therefore as Tertullian says, Quid festinet innocens aetas ad remissionem? Seeing Infants are not in danger of perishing while such, nor have any sin to be washed from, no need is there of their being baptised. To this purpose is Master Kendal's reasoning once and again, and particularly in Chapt. 17. Pag. 203. twice, and again, Pag. 207. To which I answer. Answ. 1  
1. By denying the Consequence, because though Christ indeed hath died for all, and through his death the benefit is to all men to justification of life, Rom. 5.18. So as that there is salvation extendible to them in the public person, and tenderable to them in the Gospel. So as that They are so far redeemed from under the Law, or first Covenant made with Adam, as that though they have broken it in him, yet they are not under a necessity of destruction, but Christ hath power to forgive their sins, and bring them unto God, that sin and law notwithstanding: And no Scripture speaks of any perishing finally, for that Adam sinned but generally for their own personal rejections of the light, imprisonings of the truth, abuses of goodness, and patience, and rebellions against Spirit, by and through Jesus Christ extended and afforded, as witness, Prov. 1.22, 23, 24. etc. Ezek. 24.13. Josh. 3.19. and 12.48. Rom. 1.18, 19, 20, 21-28. 2 Thes. 1.7. & 2.10. Rom, 2.4, 5. with divers others, which also seem to me, 
Part. 2. p. 83.  may be enforced from Master Kendal's own concessions; As when he grants, That all the goodness, patience, mercy, men enjoy, they have it as the purchase, and procurement of Christ; no such good thing being extendible according to the Covenant with Adam, broken by us, for from thence will it not plainly follow, That he stood in the breach, stopped the course of the Law, cursing us only, and debarring us of all good, and gave it its satisfaction for all for their breach of it, and sin against it; that being in itself inflexible, and not otherwise diverted from accursing us, and depriving us of all good but by satisfaction given to it in some other bearing its sentence for us; for if the Law could upon other terms have dispensed with our enjoyment of good, and suspended its sentence; yea, have permitted mercy to us instead of curse; we do in vain put the enjoyment of of those good things upon Christ's Mediation. If then he hath suffered the curse of it for all, and so given it its demands, as that he hath power to give contrary to its sentence, then are all men no longer under it, as the Covenant of life, and favour in the sight of God, or in regard of his binding them to live by their personal obedience of it in Adam, and themselves, or else for ever to be accursed, and perish; Though in men's consciences it have this dominion, unless and till their ignorant hearts be better informed, 
Isai. 42.6. and 49.6, 7. Matth. 25.31. to the end.  and believe the truth, and as a means of convincement of sin, and so tending to salvation, it is yet in its force, as in the hand of Christ, who is become the Covenant to the people, according to men's subjection, to whom in the light he affords, or sinning against him, they are now to be judged. Though all this, I say, be so, yet it follows not from thence, either,  
1. That Infants are guilty of, or have no sin in them: For the death of Christ neither maketh them less guilty of having sin in Adam, or of being guilty of that sin as in him, nor doth it take corruption or uncleanness out of them by its self; men may be guilty in themselves of that that is not imputed to them, and for which being forgiven, they shall not suffer. Paul nevertheless charges himself with being the chief of sinners, because his sin was forgiven him through the blood of Christ, 1 Tim. 1.15. And it is not Christ's dying for men simply renews then, but the discovery of the grace and truth of God to them, and the belief of it with the operations of the Spirit of God therein, that cleanses both the conscience and spirit of men. Children are conceived in iniquity, and born in sin, spring out of an unclean root, and therefore are unclean in themselves, Job 14.4. Psal. 51.4, 5. or,  
2. That Baptism (were it so) is needless for,  
1. The Death of Christ for a man is so far from rendering Baptism needless to that man, that indeed there is no ground for baptising any man but by virtue of, and upon the account of his death for him. Christ as dead, and risen for us, is the ground and foundation of all mercies, and of all ordinances, and the promise of him was the foundation of all the ordinances before his coming, 1 Cor. 3.11. Ephes. 2.20. as might easily be evidenced. Had it not been for his stepping in, we had forthwith upon breach of God's Covenant lain for ever in death and misery without any mercy, or favour to us, or hope of delivery: but for that Christ had not had authority and power over any man to dispense favour to him, or deal otherwise with him, then according to the desert of his sin, and sentence of the Law, nor had there been any remission of sins either to be sealed to, or sought for by any person, nor no way for adoring or worshipping God, nor could ten thousand baptisms do, or have done any man the least benefit, had not Christ died for him; therefore, me thinks, its strange, that the granting of this should make Baptism needless, but for which Baptism is wholly groundless. This might easily be retorted against himself, that there is no ground for baptising children, or very uncertain if Christ died not for all; it would then be rather needful of the two, to say till they grow up, and give some testimony of their faith, and so hopes that they are of the Election, especially Baptism being into the death of Christ, Rom. 4.2, 3. that we may have good ground to baptise them into that that's for them.  
2. Baptism doth neither take sin out of the nature, nor off of the conscience: I say this Baptism by water, 1 Pet. 3.21. much less doth it take sin from before the presence of God, so as that he imputes it not to men, that the having these things undone, should be the ground of its Administration, as the Objection supposes, while the supposing those things to be already done by the death of Christ, is brought to argue it needless. As its the sufferings of Christ that hath satisfied for sin, and redeemed men from under the first Covenant, to be now dealt with in, and through Christ the Mediator, and hath opened the way for men to God again, so it's the belief and receipt of the truth, and grace of God, in, and upon which, God forgives and acquits actual sinners of foregoing sins, and justifies them, and that both washes sins off from the conscience, and purifies the heart, and conversation. This outward Baptism than doth neither after believing, nor before, take away sin. That phrase, Arise, and be baptised, and wash away thy sins, calling upon the Name of the Lord, Acts. 22.13. signifies but either, that in calling upon the Name of the Lord, and yielding himself to his Baptism, he should,  
1. Declare and manifest his hearty closing with the Lord Jesus, and that he did repent him really of his former practices against him, and so should manifest, That he received forgiveness of his sins, or,  
2. That so he should receive the external soul, or ratification of forgiveness of sins to the believer.  
And so, 3. Receive a Ministerial forgiveness, or washing them away, so as to be no longer reckoned by the Church a persecuter of it, and stranger from it, but to be owned by them, as cleansed from his former sins: and that phrase, Baptised for the forgiveness of sins, Acts 2.38. That that hath sealed forgiveness of sins in Christ to them, to be dispensed in believing, and that in yielding to the Name, and entering into the Profession, and Church of Christ, they were in the way to receive it from him, or have it sealed to them: But those phrases prove not, That the outward Baptism either satisfied for, or procured cleansing in conscience or heart from sin.  
3. The having sin taken away off from men in point of obnoxiousness to punishment, or off of their consciences; yea, the putting a man into such a condition, as in which he is actually capable of salvation, and so the rendering Baptism not necessary to salvation, doth not take away the need of Baptism, or make that the Administration of it should be groundless, for,  
1. Then none should be baptised at all; for we do not find Baptism asserted as necessary to salvation to any in the Scripture, (I mean the outward Baptism,) so as that without it no salvation. We find. He that believes and it baptised▪ shall be saved, Mark 16.16. but never he that believes must be baptised, that or else he must be damned; Certainly the thief on the cross, unless baptised before, was not at all baptised, yet was saved; and surely Cornelius being justified of God, and the Holy Ghost being poured upon him, might have gone to Heaven had he died then before he was baptised, and many went to Heaven before it was instituted.  
2. Then both the Antipedobaptists, and Master Kendal baptise needlessly, for,  
1. The Antipedobaptists say, 
All its necessity, is but a Necessitas precepti, as the precept for it makes it necessary▪  They believe before they are baptised, surely if they believe they are actually under the promise of forgiveness; yea by faith are justified from their sins, and the death of Christ without doubt hath discharged them before God, and brings remission to their consciences, and gins to purify their hearts, and so they are translated from death to life, before Baptism; therefore by their rule Baptism is needless for them.  
2. Master Kendal's principles make it needless too, for did not Christ die for the elect Infants; and if so, ought they to die again, or perish in the sins Christ died for? Or ought they not rather, as Master Owen says, to be discharged of all actions and suits that may be made against them? Say they not all, its unjust that Christ should bear their sins, and themselves too? So that they are safe enough from condemnation, nor possibly could perish, though not baptised with outward Baptism. And as for all other Infants, they can have no good by it, but must perish, it notwithstanding being reprobate; Ergo, no need for Baptism by that reasoning.  
But 3, There are other uses and ends of Baptism, and reasons of its appointment, in order to which there is need of it: As,  
1. The obeying and fulfilling Christ's Commission for discipling all the Gentiles, baptising them, Matth. 28.19.  
2. The bringing or admitting them to Christ in his Church or Kingdom for his more special protection and blessing, Matth. 19.13, 14.  
3. The discipling them to, 
1 Cor 10.2. Matth. 28.19.  or obliging them to be brought up to the acknowledgement of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and not in the ways of profaneness, and Gentilism.  
4. The sealing the righteousness of the faith of the Gospel preached to, and believed by Abraham, but more fully performed and declared now; as that though by nature we, and all ours, are unclean, unfit for fellowship with God, and admission into Kingdom, yet through the death of Jesus Christ for us there is forgiveness for us in him, and for ours, an entrance into his Kingdom where blessing is to be met with, for making us meet for fellowship with himself.  
5. The solemn profession of the Parents, or Nurturers faith in the Gospel of Christ, 
Ephes. 6.4, 5.  in bringing them to have his Name put upon them, with a knd of public engagement upon themselves, to bring them up for Christ.  
6. The putting away the filth of the flesh, 1 Pet. 3.20. the stain of Gentilism, and so the putting a Note of distinction between themselves with theirs, and the Heathens that have not the Name of Christ upon them. So that no ground for, nor substance in that Objection fling so often in Master goodwin's dish, by Master Kendal.  
Indeed I rather wonder upon what what account he can baptise Infants, that makes the Scripture-language so uncertain, as that all Nations or Gentiles by his Line of interpretation may possibly reach but a few unknown persons of some Nations, and that expresses such rash conceptions of the Reprobation of many Infants; 
Pag. 72. Chap. 8.  As when he says, Pag. 72. Chap. 8. Though they die in Infancy before they be capable of doing any work in one kind or other on earth, yet they shall acknowledge Christ in hell, and bow their little guilty knees, etc. I am sure, no Scripture tells him so, Methinks, his doctrine is far more obnoxious to doubts and scruples about Infant-baptism, than the other. Concerning which Doctrine, (seeing I have had occasion to mention him) I must needs say, Master Kendal is more beholding to his Metaphysics, then to the Scriptures, for his belief and maintenance of it. As not only his Book throughout, but his own positive confession therein, Chap. 16. Pag. 159. declare: Where he says, It was his laying a good foundation in Logic and Metaphysics, that kept him upright in these controversies of Divinity. See I pray then upon what a good foundation that Doctrine is built and upheld; not upon the only good and sure foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, 
Pag. 123. Chap. 4.  Ephes. 2.19, 20. (whom he plainly confesses that Christ never sent to read us any Metaphysical Lectures, about those points of the simplicity of God, and so by consequence not about Necessity, Contingency, Liberty▪) but upon Philosophy, which the Apostle bids us beware of lest it spoil us in the matters of our faith, telling us it is but the vain deceit of man; and however solid and substantial it seems to be, it will but deceive us, Col. 2.8. A goodly foundation that both he and his doctrine stands on. Gramercy then, (to use his own phrase) to Logic, and Metaphysics, for his being right in the faith, more than to the Grace or  power of God, at least more than to the Gospel, and holy Scriptures, and Grace, as therein declared; for however the unlearned Apostle tells us, That they, the Scriptures are able to make us wise to salvation, (to preserve himself and others from seducements.) Through faith in Jesus Christ, yea able to furnish the man of God perfectly to every good work, (whether to teach doctrine, rebuke evil practices, reprove and stop the mouths of gainsayers, save himself and hearers.) Yet Master Kendal had not gone wrong, and had not been able to have made so solid an Answer, as he supposes his to be to Master Goodwin, had not his Logic and Metaphysics stood him in more stead than all the Scriptures. In answering or speaking to which he usually bungles. No marvel that he so seriously and highly commends these Studies, (of which the Apostle bids us beware we put not too much in them) to the Fellows and Students of Exeter College in Oxford, in his Epistle to them, telling them, It is impossible to be profitable without those Studies. Oh what's become Paul of thy assertion of the Scriptures sufficiency to make us perfect and profitable to every purpose! Nay he tells them, They will find that a bare pair of shears and a met-yard, he means (he says) a little Logic and Philosophy will stand them in I know not how much stead. Yes, they serve notably▪ as he uses them, to measure the Essence and Nature of God, the manner of his willing, knowing, acting, and the dependencies of all things and actions thereupon by his rule of effects and defects, and applications of them to the truths of the Gospel, to limit and shorten them most gallantly, and to leave us but a little of that truth and goodness they seem to have in them.  
As to instance, 1. To Ezek. 33.11. As I live, saith the Lord, 
Chap. 16. Pag. 152.  I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, etc. He applies his Metaphysical yard-wand, and measuring it by that, he finds, that what ever God hath no pleasure in shall not take place, and so measuring it further by the appearance in the event he finds it will agree only to the Elect; nay, and by another false application of to it, to his Met-yard, makes it to run but even with the persons spoken to, the House of Israel, forgetting the Mood Darii, That particular Applications may be well made from general Propositions; And then comes his Philosophical-shears, and at one cut snips off all them wicked, that in conclusion do die, and so the truth of that saying, Ezek. 18. ult. yea, and yet further by virtue of his former application of his Met-yard snip away all the reality of that dying there spoken of, and makes but the force of him that dyeth, to be him that by his sins did deserve to die, but indeed dies not: yea, snips away all our Interest in that notable testimony of good will to sinners, and encouragement given to wicked men of the Gentiles to repent. Again,  
2. Applying the said Met-yard to 2 Chron. 36.15. where it's said of Jerusalem, 
Chap. 16. Pag. 160.  and the Jews, That God sent his Prophets to them, and Messengers rising up betimes, and sending them; Because he had compassion on his people, and on his dwelling place; and by that he measures his compassion to be but a respiting their overthrow for a time, till he had sent his words, Prophets, and Messengers: and then by his Phylosophical-shears off goes all his love of pity and benevolousness of affection to them: in which he desired not their destruction, but their repentance, and living rather; yea, and all the dependence of the sending of the Prophets, and Messengers upon any compassion in him as the cause of it; yea indeed the sending of his Prophets was rather by this Met-yard, the cause of the compassion toward them; for he did but respite their destruction till he should send them his Word and Prophets, and therefore sure had it not been for that he would not have respited them: Nay indeed, this compassion was such a respiting of their destruction, as argues an absolute purpose to destroy them only; yea, by his effects and defects, purposed according to the rule laid down by him, Pag. 85. Chap. 2. it contained further in it a purpose to bring them to a greater ruin. And this in his Metaphysical Divinity, is God's compassion.  
3. Applying the same Met-yard to John 3.16, 17. or rather that to it he finds that the love of God cannot reach so far as to the world of mankind in general, so as to have prepared such an Object of faith of his Son, and such plenteousness of salvation in him, That whosoever of it believes, shall be saved; therefore with his shears, he snips off all but the Elect, that is, such as are eternally saved. And further to make sense of the phrase, (that whosoever believes) he snips it so, as to make it, That whosoever of the Elect of this, or that Nation, condition, or at this, or that time believes, shall be saved, as still implying possibly not all of them, of all Nations, and in all Ages, shall so believe; and here he snips so desperately, that he cuts so much off, (as in all the rest almost) that of what he cuts off, it may as truly, or rather be said, God so hated the world, that he gave not Christ for them to believe on, or as such a Medium of salvation, as affords any good ground for their believing, or possibility of their salvation; but absolutely destined them through sin into destruction: yea, and he snips off the truth of that in John 12.47. where Christ is affirmed so to come not to judge the world, but to save the world: as to include the unbeliever on him too therein.  
4. Applying the same to 1 Tim. 4.4. he cuts out off all the greatest part of all; as if we might not pray for all, 
Chapt. 6. Pag. 26, 27.  because not for some in all cases, as in case of the sin to death; and because Christ praying for things whereof only men as actual believers are capable excludes the world, (that is, men as, and while yet uncalled) from being the objects of those requests, when as yet his end in praying for those things for believers was the good of the world amongst whom he sent them, 
Ver. 18.21, 23. of Joh. 17.  and that they might believe that God sent him, even as the then believers already had done. As if because when we pray for Magistrates, for things properly suitable to them, as Spirit of Government, and excluding the common people as the objects of those petitions, though their good be the end of them. We should be by this snipping faculty, denied to pray at other times, and in other requests, (as it's evident our Saviour did, Luke 13.6, 7, 8. and 23.34.) for other men. Thence also he once, twice, thrice, snipt out the word all, from 1 Tim. 2.2. For Kings, & all in authority, because he (its likely) see that stood in his way to hinder his scant measure of but some of all sorts, and renders it for Others in authority, and ver. 4. changes the phrase, will have all saved into, will save all. As if between these two there were no difference: As by the same rule he snips with his Philosophical-shears the greatest part of the signification of All and Every, in all other Texts alleged with those words in them in this controversy.  
5. By the same Rule and Shears applied to 1 John 2.2. he snips and scants the whole world, so that it will lie in a narrow compass, and snips the words to you that believe, 1 John 5.13. which shows to whom his Epistle is directed, all away to the believing Jews, because ver. 7. of Chap. 2. he tells them of the word they heard in the beginning, though that be no more than Paul's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1 Cor. 15.2, 3. to intimate, that he preached no new doctrine now, from what he and his Brethren had always from their first preaching doctrinated them in; but by that sense of the whole world, All the Gentile Churches lie in wickedness, 1 John 5.19.  
6. By the like Application of Rom. 14.14. and 1 Cor. 8.11. to his Metyard, he by his shears snips off all the Apostles Argument drawn from the mischief that might accrue to the weak Brother that Christ died for, and makes little better than a mere scarecrow of it, like the bidding of an Archer, take heed, if shooting with his arrow the roof of Paul's down, which would fall alone, if not so mightily supported with strong marble Pillars, that ten thousand Arrows cannot bring it down, though they may do some little damage by sticking in the wood-work, or rasing the Leads. Yet he gives such large measure to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, him for whom Christ died, by making him to signify men of that species, that he quite snips out the weak man Christ died for.  

Chap. 18. Pag. 157.  7. Applying to the same Rule or Met-yard the Type of the Brazen Serpent, (to pass over many particulars) he snips out all the blind men that were stung before he proves there were any such, though were there such no more was required of them then what God requires of blind men, and they are supposed possibly they may do, Isai. 42.18. To look towards the object with their blind eyes, that they might see.  
8. And to say no more, Applying to it that in Matth. 23.37. How often would I have gathered thy children. He measures it so scantly, as that he cuts off the Godhead of Christ from that, 
See the like Expression spoken of God, Ezek. 24.13.  Would have gathered, and by that means not only eclipse off the authority of those places, in 2 Esdr. 2.20, 30.32, 33. where those words are applied to the Lord Almighty, but also eclipse his wings so short, under which they should be gathered, making them but the wings of a man, as that I fear they could not give sufficient protection to them; To say nothing, That in the Manhood he came not often to them, but by his Prophets in his Spirit he came often, (which concurrence also of the Spirit with the outward means afforded, as the patience of God to such as perished in impenitency he eclipse off, contrary to Gen. 6.3. and 1 Pet. 3.19, 20. And so from other means more plentifully afforded to those Jews, contrary to Neh. 9.20.30. Isai. 5.3, 4. Isai. 63.10, 11, 12. Zach. 7.11, 12. Acts 7.51.) Yea, 
Contrary to john 14.9, 10, 11.  he snips off all the real similitudes of God from Christ, and faithfulness in not doing his own, but his Father's will, by himself asserted, John 6.37, 38. While he makes Christ indeed as man to will their gathering, and endeavours it, when as God had no love or compassion towards them, nor willed their gathering. As for Christ's purchasing faith and repentance for the Elect, (by purchasing, understanding the obliging God to make them actually believe,) I think its a shred of humane Tradition, that he brings not any Scripture to prove, nor is it sown with the thread of any firm connexion with his own principles; for if God without respect to Christ's death decreed absolutely to bring these and those persons to glory, surely there needed no obligation to be put upon him by the death of Christ, to give them that that is necessarily requisite thereto. Christ needed not except to remove the Sentence of the Law, and so sin as obstructing the dispensation of those good things conducing to glory, and to keep them from stopping up the passages of his love, and then his own purposes and good will, will (yea, saves engaged for the execution of themselves too) give to every one according thereunto. Christ hath procured that without violation of truth or justice, he may give grace and glory to men, and so much he may as he pleases give to any man without any such violation. As for his snipping the 2 Pet. 2.1. and cutting off the real aggravation of the false Teachers, sin by making the Text of no brother a meaning then only that Peter spoke charitably, or according to such a judgement as there could be no ground for (his speech being not about any Church-members as such, but dogmatically, and by way of Prophecy, both of the way and end of some persons in the future, who being described to be such, and to have such an end, could not together therewith be charitably supposed, according to those principles to have been bought or redeemed; nor being false Teachers were so much as in a seeming way to be bought, but rather in an appearing way not to have been bought by his principles; false teaching being no probable sign of Election, though to establish his seeming good gloss on this place, he impertinently quotes as a place without exception to prove that the Scripture speaks in that Dialect, 2 Chron. 28.23. Ahaz worshipped the Gods of Damascus, which slew him; Sure he forgot that the Gentiles worshipped Devils, 1 Cor. 10.20. and they by the Syrians might smite him, as well as rob Job by the Sabaeans. As also that Names of places are put for the Inhabitants, as O Jerusalem, thou that killest the Prophets, Matth. 23.37. And so are of a plural signification, and so the sense is as Tremelius also renders it, Sacrificavit Diis Damascenor percutientium ipsum, The Gods of Damascus, which Damascus smote him. This I say, I shall pass over, he that will see more thereabout, may see it in my Answer to Master Owen, which if he please, he may have at Master Cripse, or Master Moules, or Master Calverts Shops in London.  
Indeed he deals with few Scriptures in this Controversy, but he miserably scants and eclipse them. If my Tailor kept such a false Met-yard, and could keep his shears no better from snipping away all my cloth, he should have little of my custom; but I think, though he be no man of his word, he can keep his met-yard and his shears honest enough. Master Kendal might have afforded the Students too a Philosophical needle of a piercing tongue, and Goose of a pressing wit, and then they might have been fit to do less harm on a Shop-bord, then in a Pulpit with their worldly rudiments, and humane Divinity. I hope the Reader will pardon this digression, and Master Goodwin, that I have here put in this bit to stay stomaches, till he have prepared a fuller meal of Reply to him. Indeed the unsavouriness and ungodliness of such passages, as while men pretend to such special grace, and to such jealousy for God's glory, in the mean while to give the honour of his truth and grace to humane Sciences, and heathenish Philosophy, and cast such disparagements upon the Scriptures, and Divine Revelations, which are the weapons of our spiritual warfare, mighty through God to pull down those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, strong holds, and reasonings, which Philosophy, and vain deceits of men build up against it, provoked me hereunto. 
The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there may have some reference to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as well as to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; to the word Mystery, as well as to Christ.  The Students should do far better to study the Scriptures well, and especially that second to the Colossians, and held for true and certain, That in the Mystery of God, Father, and Christ, as preached in the Gospel, are hid up all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, and that in Christ we are completely furnished as well for wisdom, and for profiting one another, as for righteousness, 1 Cor. 1.30. So as that as we need not to turn aside to the Law of Moses to make us righteous, so neither need we to turn aside to Philosophy, and vain deceits of men, after the rudiments of the world, and traditions of men, and not after Christ, (however by men highly commended as necessary for us, to be profitable, and to be made and kept upright in the faith of Christ) to make us wise unto salvation. Nay, they had need to take these counsels, to take heed of being spoilt with Philosophy, for there is more danger of being spoilt by it from Christ, then being built up in him; while men are led away rashly to pry into things they have not seen, being vainly puffed up with a fleshly mind, not holding the head, 
Ver. 17.18.  etc. as follows in that Chapter. And indeed, who sees not that Philosophy leads men so to do, as to pry into the Essence of God, 
john 1.18. Prov. 30.3, 4.  his nature and manner of willing, knowing, acting, and yet no man hath seen him at any time, or climb up into Heaven to him by his Metaphysical Scales to bring us down an infallible discovery of him; nay, rather soaring aloft into those speculations, they have but burned their wings, and in the issue have had Icanus his fortune, fallen into a Sea of errors; as indeed most of the Heretics of old, Menander, Manes, Ebion, Cerinchus, Arius, (and who not) have been led into their errors by occasion of their curiosity, and Philosophical speculations. They being good for nothing when unsoberly used to measure out God, and his truth by, but to corrupt men's minds from the simplicity of Christ, and from giving the obedience of faith to the Heavenly Doctrine, and fill the world with jangling disputes, in stead of hearty, sober believing. For what truth or certainty we have of them, but the certainty of our purblind reason; which is not able to give us good satisfaction about the consistency of their principles with themselves; as that Deus est actus purus simplicissimus: 
Chap. 4. Pag. 168.  and there is not aliud & aliud, Diversity in God, and yet that he erected his will from, or in Eternity, as Master Kendal tells us, but his power not but in time, as if his power lay still while his will acted itself, and yet both power and will in him are himself, and so but one thing. That both his power and will are simply one thing in himself, yet he erects his will but once, there can be but one immanent act of God, but his power he may erect very often; but if both be himself, why may he not erect one as often or seldom as the other? To say nothing, 
Chap. 4. Pag. 154. Et saepe alibi.  how evidently false it is, That the act or action is all one with the thing acted, as Gods creating Heaven and Earth, all one with the Heaven and Earth, and so as the Heavens and Earth are yet, so God is still creating them, and hath not ceased, 
Gen. 2.1.  as his word tells us, from making them. Just as if I should say, my action of writing is all one with these lines and letters, and so long as these remain my action of writing remains also, though evident it is that they remain long after I have done writing. Sure he that makes Philosophy his foundation, as Master Kendal says, shall never stand sure from erring and perishing, shall never believe or know God's word aright, yea, shall incur God's displeasure against himself for throwing by God's foundation, 
1 Cor. 3.11. with Ephes. 2 19, 20.  (which is not Election, as he vainly interprets, 2 Tim. 2.19. by a private interpretation that is not attested by any other Scripture, but the Apostles Doctrine, and Jesus Christ himself, as laid therein) and cornerstone, for Christ only in the bosom of the Father knows, and hath revealed him, but no man receives his testimony, but gives more heed by much to his vain reasonings, and to Philosophy the Deceits of man; And surely for this, viz. the throwing by the word of God, and subordinating it to Philosophical Dictates, more than for any thing, will the Wrath of God come upon the Universities, and Students therein, if they persist in so doing.  
Might I advise them, I would wish them to study the Word of God more, and learn to give the obedience of faith to it, and subject all their studies and conversations thereto, and captivate all their Philosophy and Metaphysical Notions to the obedience thereof, and not measure and snip it by them, so shall they find the sufficiency of the Scriptures, and the blessing of God, and bring more souls to Heaven then now they are like to do; yea, such as now they hinder from entering by rejecting the word of the Lord, and exalting their Philosophical Actions above his Revelations; so should they also avoid those heavy judgements threatened, Isai. 29 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. Jer. 8.5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 13. etc. 1 Cor. 1.18, 19.20. and 3.17, 19, 20.  
And were I â Secretis with Master Goodwin, I would desire him to let go his Metaphysical weapons, and keep him closer to the smooth stones of the Brooks, the sure testimonies of God's word, so would these Goliah's fall before him, and he should have less trouble from them. They might happily do with him, as Master Owen with me, who (and I am well pleased with it) either like that great Goliath looks upon me, and my small furniture, as (an Impar congressus) too little and despicable for his greatness, or else hath got some stone in his forehead, some conviction from some of the Scripture Arguments and Answers produced, and is willing to say nothing. But I have done, desiring pardon for this too long Digression, I shall here put a period to this Disquisition about Infant's Baptism. And I hearty desire that God will please to cause his truth in this point to shine out more clearly to the dispelling of all mists and clouds, that darken any of our understandings thereabout, and subdue our hearts to the through cleaving thereto; And that such pious and judicious Readers, as this my Disquisition shall come unto, would seriously weigh it: And if God have given more full light, (as I question not but he may) to any of them in these matters, I desire that they would neither put it under a Bed of sloth, nor under a Bushel, to scant its appearance to those only of their own Family, Society, or Congregation, but set it on a Candlestick, (whither it justify or reprove any thing there written) that it may give light to all that come into the House, even to God's whole Church, and Congregation.  

Ten Arguments modestly propounded, tending to prove, That the study of Philosophy (though lawful to be known, and in some points useful for, yet) is not necessary to the Preachers and preaching of the Gospel; not the key of Knowledge, without which men cannot understand or profitably hold forth the Truths of Christ to others.  
Arg. 1 IF Philosophy, Physics, Metaphysics, etc. had been needful for furnishing men to the Gospel, than Christ our Saviour, who came to teach us the mind of God, and to set on foot the preaching of the Gospel, would have delivered those Sciences to us, at least a more perfect form of them then the Philosophers did or could: But he did not so: As Mr Kendal says neither he nor his Apostles ever preached us any Metaphysical Lectures about the simplicity of God, etc. Ergo.  
Arg. 2. If they had been necessary as above, then would Christ have chosen the wise and prudent, Scribes and Pharisees, Philosophers and Princes of the world for knowledge in such Sciences to have been the Gospel-Preachers, or else have furnished those he did choose with such knowledge in them; but he did neither: Not the first, Mat. 11.25, 26. 1 Cor. 1.26. Nor the second, for he only gave them his Spirit to open to them the mysteries of Salvation contained in the Scriptures. Ergo.  
Arg. 3. They are of divers nature from the Gospel; that being a Revelation of a Redemption, and way to Salvation for fallen man, Philosophy but a purblind speculation about the nature of creatures, their qualities and conditions as creatures, and of God as he stands in relation of a Creator or Governor to them: and therefore can be no more necessary to the understanding or preaching of the Gospel in its simplicity, than a candlelight to show the Sun.  
Arg. 4. The Law or Doctrine of the Lord is perfect both for converting Souls to God, and building up the converted to the inheritance, Psal. 19.7. Acts 29.32. which is the whole business of the Gospel Ministry: Therefore there is not need of Philosophical Sciences, which are but the Observations of a purblind mind, and the Inferences and Deductions of a corrupted perverted Reason.  
Arg. 5. If the said Heathenish or Humane Sciences be necessary as before, then are we not complete in Christ, nor are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, necessary for our Salvation, and the carrying on of his Work, hid or couched in him and his mystery: but the contrary is affirmed, Col. 2, 2, 3, 10. Christ must be beholden to humane Philosophy to complete him, and the mystery of him, if they be necessary; but that's false, and derogatory to the glory of Christ, the one thing needful, and leads to distraction about many things.  
Arg. 6. If we are to beware of Philosophy, lest we be spoilt by it, then is it not necessary to teach and preserve us: But the former is true, for the Apostle bids us beware lest any spoil us with Philosophy, calling it the vain deceit of man, though man usually counts and calls it wisdom, Col. 2.8. Nor may we think that the Apostle calls such Sophistry only by that name as the wisest Philosophers called Sophistry and not Philosophy, but that which those wisest Philosophers called and accounted Philosophy; it being the Apostles drift to assert the fullness of Christ and the mystery of the Gospel, and to debase all other things that were of highest esteem with men.  
Arg. 7. The Apostle implies that the setting up such wisdom in the Church of God, is to defile the Temple of God, 1 Cor. 3.16, 17, 18. diligently compared, which is all one as to say, To exalt it as needful and necessary to the work of Christ, is to make it an Idol, it being but part of the name of a man, which is upon the Beast. Ergo.  
Arg 8. If the coming with the Gospel in such a Philosophical way, that is, a holding it forth with and in the exercise of wisdom of words and Arguments after the manner of the wise Philosophers of the world, be your way to obscure the power of the Cross of Christ, which is the main thing of the Gospel, and to make men's faith of the Gospel but to stand on a humane bottom, then is it not necessary to be furnished therewith for preaching the Gospel: but the premises are held forth by Paul, 1 Cor. 1.17. & 2.4, 5. and therefore Christ gave him no commission, but a prohibition rather of so coming to preach the Truth, and he forbore both excellency of speech, such as that that Lactantius calls Rational or wordy Philosophy, that part that consists in teaching men to speak eloquently, and excellency of wisdom, such as the higher kinds of Philosophy, as their Metaphysics teaches, Cor. 2.1.  
Arg. 9 Paul writing two Epistles to Timothy and one to Titus about their profitable carriage in the Church of God, and giving Instructions about the choice and qualities of Bishops, never mentions that for one, that they should be well learned in Philosophical Sciences, but rather warns them of them as unnecessary, and too often, as they are apt to be, used dangerous, 1 Tim. 6.20, 21.  
Arg. 10. Nay the same Apostle in those directions asserts the sufficiency of the Scriptures, being studied, believed and minded, not only to Salvation, but to all the works of a Minister or man of God in his Ministry, 2 Tim. 3.14, 15, 16, 17. nor intimates he that other Sciences were needful to give them understanding into them, but if they be sufficient to perfect a man of God, than other writings not necessary; the best way to understand the Scripture is by the Scripture.  
Some lesser usefulness and curiosities some Sciences may afford, as the Mathematics to find out the bigness of the Ark, the measures of the Temple, etc. Astronomy to tell us what Arcturus, and Orion, and Pleyades are; History and Chronology may seem to help to understand the passages of the Monarchies and Visions of Daniel, etc. and yet there is so great incertainty in them too as to what is Heathen, that they rather trouble then help; therefore Mr Cushion was fain to throw those Calculations by in his late Clavis Rediviva. The Tongues have their more usefulness, because the Scripture was writ in other Languages, but they are distinct things from Philosophy.   
FINIS.