Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

first that formed the derivative μare from it in any active transitive signification) does use the word; and he uses it not only for present learners, but for some that were appointed to learn. The word has indeed always a reference to learning; but does not always suppose that learning to be at that present time, when any one is made or styled a Disciple.

Another thing that causes in vulgar people a prejudice in understanding those words of our Saviour, is this: A man that cannot read books, is apt to form all his notions of things by what he sees in his own time and country; so an illiterate man (in England for example) hearing of the apostles being sent into the nations to disciple and baptize them, he imagines it like some preacher's coming into England, as it is now, to preach and -baptize the people. Now, this notion naturally creates in his mind a supposal that Christians did not baptize their children in infancy, because .they are now to be baptized after they are taught. He does not animadvert to that difference which appears by conceiving all those nations to which the apostles were sent, as Heathens who must be baptized after they were taught, having had no fathers to baptize them before. This indeed looks gross; but one may perceive plain footsteps and traces of such conceptions among - ignorant people in the tenor and chain of their dis

[ocr errors]

course.

5. There has been an argument raised against infant baptism, even from that text by which (among others) the fathers did never fail to prove it. I mean from C those words of our Saviour (John. iii. 5) which are in the English, Except a man be born again of water, &c. They catch hold of the word man there, and say, It is 46 declared necessary for every one, after he is a man grown. I would not have any Antipædobaptist that keeps a more refined conversation, think that I feign or impose this on then; it is certainly true, that some ignorant: people, in country places, do not only urge this, but do say that it is inculcated to them by their teachers.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

I shall not stand to shew the mistake of this, having said more than so palpable a misunderstanding of the words, as they are in the original, can deserve (part 1, chap. 6; and part 2, chap. 6):

6. To enervate an argument taken out of Scripture for infant baptism, is equivalent to the forming of one against it; and does as much tend to the excusing of any illiterate man, if the proofs which should have convinced him that children are to be baptized, be eluded either by translations that give an imperfect sense, or by false interpretations, the falsehood whereof he cannot perceive. I shall give three instances:

1. In that text (1 Cor. vii. 14) which is rendered in English, Now are your children holy. The word here translated holy, is far more often, in St. Paul's Epistles, 'translated saints; and so almost all (not quite all) the antients do understand St. Paul here, as if he had said "in English, Now are your children saints. They observe, moreover, that with St. Paul, this term Saints, is generally used as another word for Christians; as To the saints at Ephesus, at Rome, &c. is as much as to say, To the Christians there; therefore, they take St. Paul to mean, Now are your children Christians; that is to say, baptized. He persuades the believing wife not to go away, but to stay, in hopes that she may convert, or save, as he words it, her unbelieving husband; and that the rather, because it appeared that the grace of God did generally so far prevail against the infidelity of the other, that the children of such matches 'were baptized for the most part. This interpretation, or such as amounts to the like effect, I have shewn to be the most current among the primitive Christians, in those places of the Collection which are referred to before, at Note 9, of the Evidences for Infant Baptism; "and if it be allowed, there needs no more evidence for it from Scripture

But what shall an unlearned man do that meets with this text expounded by new interpretations, that do totally set aside that meaning? as holy; that is, not bastards, &c.

[blocks in formation]

Methinks this should be plain, that since the word αγιοι is sometimes translated saints, and sometimes holy, there should even at those places where it is translated holy, be understood such a holiness as is something agreeable to the signification of the word saints, and not a new-made signification; in which neither St. Paul, nor any other apostle, did ever use the word.

[ocr errors]

2. The words of that other text (John iii. 5) were always taken in one fixed and undoubted sense and meaning, viz. to signify baptism; and that so known and supposed, that not only the words at length, born again of water, &c. but the word born again, or regenerate alone, was used as another word for baptized, and regeneration for baptism, not only by all the fathers of the first 400 years, but I think for above 1000 years following; so here was a plain place of Scripture for baptizing of all persons that should enter the kingdom of God.

[ocr errors]

But even this has been, in great measure, defeated by a new interpretation, much of the nature of that by which the Quakers do elude all those places that speak of the other sacrament; for, as they, by the words bread, wine, eating, drinking, &c. do force themselves to mean some mystical or metaphorical thing, as for bread, something else (internal bread, I think) and so of the rest; so the new interpreters of this place by the word water here. In short, they have brought it to this, that the text does not signify baptism at all, nor any thing about it; and the notion and signification of the words regenerate and regeneration, js by degrees so altered in common speech, that he that reads them in any modern book, does not know nor understand them again when he meets with them in any ancient one. From whence proceeds the wondering that some have made at St. Austin, when reading occasionally some chapter of him, they have found that he takes all that are baptized to be regenerate, thinking he means, by regenerate the same that they do, yiz, concerted in heart, &c.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

But at this rate of altering the sense of words, any text of Scripture whatever may be eluded: the most fundamental article of the New Testament, I believe in Jesus Christ. It is but to take the words Jesus Christ in a new sense for the light within a man's self, and then, if he believe in himself, he holds the article; therefore the words of Scripture, or of any old book, must be taken in that sense in which they were current at that time; which, because it is a thing that vulgar people, of whom I speak, cannot enquire into, therefore I put this way of evading the force of this text among the answers to it that may pass with them; but it appears vain to those that are acquainted with the old use of the word.

3. There is another interpretation yet, by which the force of that text is evaded; and that is by such as do grant indeed that the words born again of water, &c. are to be understood of baptism; but they say, that by the kingdom of God there, is to be understood, not the kingdom of glory hereafter in Heaven, but the church here, or the dispensation of the Messiah; so that it is as much as to say, Except any one be baptized, he cannot enter into, or be a member of the church. I shew (part 2, ch. 6) that this interpretation is plainly inconsistent with the context, and also that it avails not this cause if it were allowed,

These last-mentioned reasons, evidences, and argu, ments, tho' I think them not justly pleadable against infant baptism, yet I thought it fair to set them down; let every one pass his judgment; and if they have not any real weight in true arguing, yet the appearance of it which they carry, does serve to make people pass the more favourable censure on those of the Antipædobaptists, who have no means of understanding the history of the ancient times, and can read only the vulgar translations of Scripture, and do light only on such expositors as I have mentioned.

But this I must say, that any Antipædobaptist who, having better means of knowledge, is convinced that any of these arguments have really no force, and yeş

does urge them upon the more ignorant people, acts very disingenuously towards them, and is a prevaricator in the things of God; for to use any argument with an intent to deceive, bath in it (though there be no proposition uttered that is false in terminis) the nature of a lie; which, as it is base and unmanly in human affairs, so it is impious when it is pretended to be for God, as Job says, chap. xiii. 7.

CHAPTER XI.

DISSUASIVE FROM SEPARATION, ON ACCOUNT OF THE DIFFERENCE OF OPINION ABOUT THE AGE OF REACEIVING BAPTISM.

WHAT I have to say in this last chapter, I have kept as a reserve, that in case people cannot be brought to be of one opinion in this question, yet they may avoid that which is now-a-days made a common consequence of the difference in sentiments about it, and is far more dangerous to their souls' health than the mistake itself is; I mean the renouncing of one another's communion in all other parts of the Christian worship. Whosoever could prevail on them to relinquish this humour of dividing, would do a most acceptable picce of service to the Christian religion and the salvation of their souls..

Our blessed Saviour, who does easily pardon involuntary errors and mistakes, and forbids his members to despise or reject one another for them, does impute a heavy guilt to those that go about to break or divide the unity of his body.

I had thought once to insert here a discourse of the great sin and mischief of schism; but having been too long already, and that being a subject that requires, and has had, just tracts written on it, I shall content myself with reciting briefly a few plain proofs of the stress which God, in Scripture, lays upon our endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit (i. e, a spirit

« AnteriorContinua »