mitchell-P044_A-12_1

VERSO

14

had been so largely recited above, ver. 17 xc. where God promises the effusion of the Spirit on their sons & and their Daughters. Fam. Expos. Note on the place. ----------- ---------- ----------- 3. Dr. Hammond. "If any have made use of that very inconcludent argument, Acts 2:39, in support of infant baptism, I have nothing to say in defence of them. The word children there, is really the posterity of the Jews, and not peculiarly their infant children, Works. Vol.1. p.490. --------- ------------- ------------------ A A 4. Limborch, (a learned Divine of Amsterdam) By tekna the Apostle understands not infants, but posterity; in which signification, the word occurs in many places in the New-Testament,

RECTO

15

see among others John 8:39. "If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. Whence it appears, that the argument, which is very commonly taken from this passage, for the baptism of infants, is of no force, and good for Nothing Comment. in loc. A A --------- --------------------- --------------- So you see the Baptist in their exposition of this text are supported by emminent peopbaptists. --------------- Once more, those who were baptized, were those who had actually received the word. v.41. ------------------------- Acts 8:5-12. 35-37. ---------------------- ― 9:18. ― ----------------------------------------- ― 10:44 - 47. ― 18:4 - 8. 19:1 - 7 ―

VERSO

16

Rom. 6:3. Know ye not, that so many of us xc------------- ------------ The baptized here are such as were dead to sin. Certainly then believers. ---------------------- Col. 2:12. Buried xc ― risen through the faith -------------- Every passage, that we have as yet examined, gives not the the least intimation, that any other were baptized then, Professed disciples, or believers. ― ----------------------- But Some I have omitted the Households so as to take them up together ― They are Lidia's Acts 16:14-15. ----------------- Jailer's. Acts 16:25-34. --------------- Stephanas. 1 Cor. 1:16.

RECTO

17

1. If the word children occured in these accounts, it would not then follow that they were infants. ― But there is not intimation, either, of children, or of infants ― ------------------ 2. As to the case of Lidia - I ask, Had she a husband? Ans } Household, call hers. ― No mention of him ― Was he baptised on her faith ― Had she any children, and were they under the years of understanding? ------------ Her household are called brethren, in the 40 vrs. No evidence from this chapt. that there were any other disciples in the place at this time, then those in her household. ― and The Jailers'

VERSO

18

3. As to the Jailers's household; it is put beyond dispute, by the inspired writer, that they were believers. v. 34. Believing in God with all his house. As if the Holy Spirit had cause this to be recorded, not oly to described the character of this household, but also, that of the others. ---------------------- Stephanas. . We know no thing about his household, then what is said by the Apostle 1 Cor. 1:16 & 16:15. Ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the first-fruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints ― ------------------------ This seems to convey the idea that they were believers.

RECTO

19

If any person knows any more about them, I should like to have information on the following points ― 1. Was he a married man, or a batttchelor? ― ---------------------- 2. Had he a wife living, or was he a widower? ― ----------------- 3. Had he children? ----------------- 4. Were any of them infants? ---------------------- 5. Did his household consist of himself & wife alone, ― or of wife, & children, ― or Himself, w. C. & domestics? ― ------------------------ 6. Were they all baptized upon his faith? --------------------- Objections. It is not likely, that these households, should be without infants. --------------- Answer. What is the unlikelihood of it? Is it contratry the experience & observ-

VERSO

20.

of mankind? From the place, where I now am, (Eaton Corner, L.C.) I can count, with in a circle, of which a mile shall be the radii, I six families in which there is not a person, but what ^might believe and be baptized. -------------- Objection 2. Who ever heard of a whole house believing? ------------ Answer. Any person, that ever read the New-Testament. ― John 4:46-53. A certain noble-man. ― Himself believed & his whole house. ― ---------------- Acts 10:2. Corneleus, ― feared God with all his house. ― ----------------------------------------- Acts. 18:8. Crispus believed with all his house.

RECTO

21

Thus it appears, then, that the apostles understood their commission, to preach the gospel, and to baptized, those, who believed; And we find no evidence, that they knowingly, baptized any that did not believe, thirefore, they did not baptized infants, nor unbelieving children. ----------------- This is virtualy conceded by Poedo-Baptist writers. Dr. Goodwin. "Baptism supposes regeneration sure in itself first. Sacraments are never administered to begin, or to work grace. Read all the Acts, still it is said, they believed, and were baptized." Works. Vol. 1:pt.1. pg. 200. ------------------ Mr. Th. Boston. "There is no example of baptism recorded in the scriptures

VERSO

22

where any were baptized, but such as appeared to have a saving faith in Christ. Works p. 384. ----- --------------- ------------------------- Limborch. There is no instance can be produced from, which it can be indisputably inferred that any child was baptized by the Apostles". Complete Sys. Div. B.V. ------------------------- Mr. Baxter expressed munch the same. ----- Dr. Wood, of Andover, Ms. acknowledges, that there is no precept, nor example in our sacred writings for the baptism of infants, but that it must be made out some other way. ------------------- Accordingly he proceeded. --------------- What is the other way which our peodo-bap-

RECTO

23

tist friends have for f or making out infant baptism, when they fail from the New-Testament accounts of baptisms? -------------------------- Baptism came in the room of circumcission. That it occupies the same place in the gospel Church, that circumcission did in the Jewish Church. ---------------------------- To this we reply, I cannot assent ― 1.^th That this assertion is unsupported by the New-Testament.

---------------- 2.^nd There are circumstances recorded in the NewTestament, that, if the declar^ation was correct, the Apostles could not help to have mentioned. See Acts 15:1,2,23-29.