Selected quad for the lemma: ground_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
ground_n	bring_v	good_a	see_v	1,546	5	3.3026	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A78137	A reply to the frivolous and impertinent ansvver of R.B. to the discourse of P.B. In which discourse is shewed, that the baptisme in the defection of Antichrist, is the ordinance of God, notwithstanding the corruptions that attend the same, and that the baptisme of infants is lawfull, both which are vindicated from the exceptions of R.B. and further cleared by the same authour. There is also a reply, in way of answer to some exceptions of E.B. against the same.	Barbon, Praisegod, 1596?-1679.	1643 (1643)	Wing B755; Thomason E96_20; ESTC R5151	48,062	73

broken downe the case it was otherwise and this R. B. in part confesseth as their scruple but he seeketh to turne another way by multip●yi●g words and in the end maketh this the sum of all that their children so begotten are Legitimate that is true borne not bastards a wonderfull case and rare exposition if one be a beleever then the children are true borne but if neither be then the children are bastards what a number of Bastards are there in the world in R. B. his sence hee addeth as a reason of his exposition that the holinesse of the childe is not concluded from the beleeving of the parents but from their lawfull use each of other which is utterly untrue and contrary to the sence of the scripture that tearmeth the seed of those of the Church holy for their relation sake but the seed of other not having relation uncleane though borne in never so true wedlock But R. B. againe saying the same without any shew of proofe that it proveth no more holinesse in the seed of the faithfull then in the seed of the heathen borne in wedlock But he doth but say it we are not bound to beleeve him unlesse we will He intendeth brevitie he saith and so referreth me further for answer of R. B. where the the matter is handled at large These he saith are the reasons I can shew for baptizing of children which because they satisfie not some but they require as well he saith they may a precept or example for warrant He saith I promise to doe that but first requires a precept or example to be shewed of an unbaptized persons baptizing either himselfe or others and also the like for rejecting children their member-ship in the Church and right in the Covenant as of old These two he hath sufficiently done Indeede if hee might bee his owne judge he hath but truely he must to work about it againe or otherwise men of judgement will count his cause lost for R. B. to proove that an unbaptized person may baptize himselfe or others before he be baptized himselfe brings Davids eating of the shew-bread and the Alsufficiencie of the scripture to instruct the man of God in every good work And for cutting of the Intayle of children from the Covenant and putting them out of the Church that one onely Allegorie mentioned in the scripture Gala. 4. and this expounded aright and not according to his erroneous sence is so far from being for him as it is cleare against him It is no marvell he should say it is sufficiently done It is well he is judge in his own cause for sure others no not those of his owne way will say any such thing for him Now he will take notice of the performance of my promise and so to the first thing by me set downe he having cavelled at it before he passeth it by Namely children their being baptized into Moses in the Cloud and Sea a verie cleare example He mindeth my next as the first and that is of the baptizing whole housholds as the Jaylers Lydiah and the houshold of Stephanus by Paul himselfe R. B. replieth to this and saith he requireth an example of Baptizing Children and not of housholds It is worth the noting what unequall dealing may be found in men and how far men are from measuring to others what they require of others to be measured to them to prove that an unbaptized person may baptize Davids eating the shew-bread is a verie cleare example and full proofe with R. B. And he may take himselfe wronged if any shall refuse it If I had said to him I require an example not of eating shew-bread but of an unbaptized person baptizing of himself what would he have said he it is likely would have minded me of the substance of the thing and the nature and agreement of the matter so parralled as he intended I minde him so to minde this Instance and proceede I reasoned thus from these examples If Children with their Parents entred not the Covenant Church estate now as of old they did The Apostles would have spoken more particularly and not so generally for sure hee minded the reproofe of our Lord to marke 10. 14. those Disciples that hindred children from comming to him for this reason amongst other because the Church consists of such It is an example for baptizing whole housholds however wherin usually are yong children It is as pertinent however as Davids eating the shew-bread before A family may be tendred a whole family may be baptized It lieth on the part of R. B. if I mistake not to declare by what right they being a part should be put by If he can shew no further discharge but that Allegorie they will doe well enough I told him if a houshold were tendered to Baptisme and I will now put the case if hee was to be the Baptizer and there should be an infant two or three in it and Pauls example should be alleadged to him by what warrant would he put them by or who should be his pattern It seemeth he would rather chuse to follow the disciples which Christ blamed for hindring Mark 10. 14. Children in their comming to him rather then the minde of our Lord or example of Paul But what I inferred about this he passed by with silence And thinketh to pay me home saying this proveth no more the baptizing of children then it proveth the baptizing of notorious drunkards theeves and swearers or whole housholds have bin baptized in som housholds there are such ergo If I should tell R. B. that Iohn Baptist did baptize such and so the cause is by him unaware granted he would Matth. 3. 7. Luke 4. 7. Luke 4. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. tell mee they confessed their sins first but the scripture telleth him and us all that they were a generation of vipers whose good fruits were not then brought forth pleasing himselfe in the paralell he saith to me who seeth not your folly I may I suppose with more ground Retort it on R. B. againe for making such a paralell and Illusion for would he have drunkards c. to be baptized whether they would or no And if these being in a family confesse their sinnes though they forsake them not sure R. B. or otherwise he differeth from those of his owne way especially if they own but totall dipping will thinke it meet to baptize them upon that their confession and profession though they were and doe after appeare to remaine such drunkards theeves and whores as hee speaketh of who may not see R. B. his shallownesse thus to please himselfe with just nothing He commeth to the next I said the whole Church of Collosse was baptized as the whole church of old were circumcised now a part of the Church which was thus buried with Christ in baptisme were children To this hee answereth our question is of Infants and not of children in the generall some of which may be

Baptisme and saith suppose the Church hath continued then Baptisme by which the matter is difference't cōtinueth also so it is probable his Baptisme is the Baptisme of Christ derived from thence R. B. hath forgot his question he asked me before and merrily said it was a bull but what thinketh hee is not the derivation good and rationall he would have it taken notice of that the best ground his opposite hath is but probability But it were well if he would once leave his fabling I said it was more than probable and I thinke that is certaine if I mistake not But further he saith seeing I hold Baptisme dependeth on the Church he addes true and so maketh a hinge for his doore to goe up on I would faine know where he learned in the Scripture this true and false with reference to the Church and Baptisme it will trouble him much to finde it the Church is either the Church of God or it is not and so Baptisme is either Christs Baptisme or it is not but of this by the way in the next hee will happily shew it then he proceedeth and taketh notice that I hold not the Church of Rome the Church of God but that State I hold to be the mother of fornicaetion Sodome and Egypt he thinketh it must needs follow that the Church of Rome hath not the Baptisme of Christ he is so frequent in the change of Termes as I might make a booke of it I write of the Church and Baptisme the Ordinances of God continuing under that Roman State in that defection hee is alwayes up with the Church of Rome and the Baptisme thereof hee cannot reach higher in his understanding but it must bee the same and from that that I hold the Church of Rome not the Church of God hee will make it follow whether it will or no that the Church of Rome hath not the Baptisme of Christ will he make it apappeare that Baptisme doth not remaine the Ordinance of Christ under that State who hath said the Church of Rome This he will make to appeare by a lame Argument thus if the Church of Rome hath not continued what meaneth the man it never was the Church of God although God had a Church in the Citie of Rome therefore Baptisme by which the matter of the Church is differenced hath not continued in the Church of Rome sure this is a bull the Church I indeed hold continued in the defection and under the Roman State though R. B. fathered a lie upon me and said I held it could not there continue and as t●e Church so Baptisme by which the matter of the Church is differenced not pure matter from corrupt but matter from that which is none at all as for true and false they are words of his own coyning as before not found in the word of God So as here hee taketh occasion to answer a passage in in my discourse wherein I desired any to shew ●he errour or absurdity hu●t or damage t●a● commeth o● holdi●g the Church and ordinances to have continued under the defection c. as in my discourse may be seene R B here saith I may easily see it from wha● I have written my self well what is it This it is that Baptisme differenceth the true matter from the false notorious fabler and falsiner againe in his inference if the Bap●isme of Rome instead of in the defection and thus he goeth over and over in his termes be the Baptisme of Christ which differenceth the true matter from the false yet more of this coyne It should be which differenceth the matter of the Church from that which is no matter and the matter bejng so laid downe Where then is R. B. his great absurdity that I may so easily see sure hee may more easily see his folly and base dealing without true and false and such words of his owne foysting in his inference and pretended absurdity vanisheth in the ayre but what Tautologie he here useth of this true and false it is much to see men love the bratts of their owne braine The summe of that great absurdity that R. B. can shew of holding as before is set forth is only this Baptisme under the defection differenceth the matter thereof the Church from that which is no matter at all such as are the Iewes Mahometans and other Heathen and doth it not and this is his great absurditie It were well for R. B. if no greater did follow of his holding the visible Church of Christ to be ceased out of the World his close this Section a is seeming contradiction he supposeth in my tenent wherein he still abuseth me and my Reader he saith I affirme Rome is the Mother of Fornication I doe so and also that Rome is the true Spouse of Christ where have I said so in all my discourse he cannot end one Section without fathering some false matter on me But with the leave of R. B. for more full satisfaction to the Read●r I shall shew that there is a different consideration to be had of the Church in defection and that it may be minded diversly either in a good sense or in an evill though he happily cannot see it so as in on considerasion according to the co●rupt defiled condition it may be called Sodome and Aegypt the Mother of Fornication and yet in some other sence and minding the Church of God R. B. will ho●d himselfe both a Saint and also a sinner but this in a diverse consideration and respect Iudah was the Church of God and yet she is called Sodome and Gomorrah and an Harlot and Laodicea the Church of Christ Esay 11. E●e 16. R●v 3. yet in an other weighing such matter as was fit to be spued out the great absurdity before lieth in R. B. his lame understanding And now he commeth after his great travell to conclude this matter thus that seeing true Baptisme differenceth the true matter from the false observe that without true and false he is aground and cannot stir but he still impudently will father this on P. B. and yet further saith I say so in my Epistle where there is no syllable to any such purpose he proceedeth in his conclusion the Baptisme of the Church of Rome is not the Baptisme o● Christ that differenceth the true matter from the false a very worthy conclusion a bratt of his owne braine pleaseth him well and so I leave him to hug his true and false I shall now desire the indifferent Reader to mind whether R. B. hath said any thing to purpose against the perpetuity of the Church yea or no or against the sence of the Scriptures by me alleadged to prove the said perpetnity And also neither I did not say right that there is no ground for their practice till they hold this that the Church is ceased and not to be found in the World which it seemeth to be very playne by R. B. that they doe hold and so lay for

the foundation of their practice and proceed a foule errour no marvell they bee no more stable and setled but still in their changes how forcible are right words but what doth wrong reasoning profit it will never satisfie any tender conscience certainly R. B. Proceedeth to Baptisme and taketh notice of Iob. 6. 25. what I said that if the Church be ceased then Baptisme is ceased here now he is something more calme he wants his true and false to help him out to that he answereth that although Baptisme were ceased so as there were no baptised person in the World yet as long as Baptisme is found in the word with a Commission to doe it he doth but beg the thing in question never answering to what I objected in this case here the 28th Matth must be alleadged but to what purpose I suppose none can tell Baptisme he saith may be obtained without any such speciall Commission as had Iohn if an unbaptised person shall doe it R. B. will excuse him of running before hee is sent though God never speake one word to any such so to doe But he saith it will follow no more to be unlawfull so to doe then it will follow that because Abraham might Ier. 23. 21. 7. 22. not circumcise himselfe and Males before circumcision was instituted and he commanded so to doe therefore the Israelites see the weakenesse of the man in his Argument he should say therefore the Philistimes or other Heathen might not circumcise themselves after Indeed so he had overthrowne himselfe for they might not though Circumcision was instituted and commanded yet they must goe to Israel as I urged the going to Sion and there lighting their candle as the Heathen of old did to Israel which he passeth by with silence here is R. B. his Argument Circumcision is instituted and commanded therefore the Philist●mes Aethiopians and other Heathen might circumcise themselves and their Males I suppose hee holdeth not so if he doth hee holdeth contrary to the truth and this is the very case which R. B. pleaseth himselfe withall but hee proceedeth further and argueth upon the point of necessity It was necessary for John to have Commission as it was necessary to have a patterne for the first building of the Temple but here hee evadeth from the Commission to the Pattern and so deceiveth the Reader I would faine know of R. B. whether they had not a speciall Commission to build the second time It is sure they were not onely stirred up but bid goe up Hag. 1. 7. 8. and build the house and God would be ●ercifull to them But now R. B. tell me because there was a Temple described in the word and that was ruined and overthrown might they build it againe before God bid them might they build it in any place and which is more and indeed to the life of the matter might any but those of Israel build it I am sure it was said to others it was not fo● them so to doe though the patterne was in the word as in like manner it belongeth not to unbaptised persons to baptise Esra 4. 3. though the patterne be in the word it is onely for such as are baptised To that objected that the Commission 28th Mat. It was onely to baptised persons and intendeth none other R. B. answereth it requireth all persons as are made Disciples or shall be to be baptised if hee had inferred that it is most likely there shall bee a continuance of baptised persons in the World that so his pleasure might bee observed he had said something but he saith Christs voyce must be obeyed therefore he concludeth a necessity to doe as they doe run before they are sent baptised they must be why have they not a little patience baptised persons there are none in the World yet another lie must be fathered on P. B. to make good the matter hee believeth none in a pure way but under the defection there might be some alwayes found R. B. might know I reasoned from their ground and practice and not from my owne judgement if he were not blind or a vaine Caviller as I told him before But it appeareth to be true that R. B. indeed holdeth so that at some time lately there were no baptised persons in the World And yet Baptisme might be raised againe well enough there being none how then why saith hee in the. Time 2. ●6 The Scripture is profitable and serveth for instruction in all righteousnesse to perfect the man of God unto all good workes as is there declared if to all saith hee then to this of Baptisme R. B. upbraided me for misapplying the Scripture but it were well if he had first seene the beame in his owne eye and cast it out truly this is a wonderfull thing that so rare a practice should have no better ground the Scripture did not furnish the Heathen to circumcise themselves to erect a Church among themselves to offer Sacrifice yet these were good workes It was a good worke to build the Temple yet the Heathen were not furnished to doe it as before God is the God of order which when it is neglected for breach of due order he is offended he is displeased as in the case of Vzzah it was not for Saul to offer sacrifice though it were a good 2. Sam. 6. 6. 1. Sam. 13. 12. worke as it is not for an unbaptised person to baptise though R. B. doe foolishly inforce it by vaine confidence the Iron was dull that he needed to put to his strength But let us see what it is he thus confidently affirmeth that as at the first Iohn Baptist at the command of God baptised others though unbaptised himselfe even so according to his example written for our learning we are taught what to doe in like case of necessitie he at length is arrived at a faire haven necessitie hath no law being in a great straite indeed brought upon themselves by their erroneous ground of holding no baptised persons in the world after the example of disobedient Saul being in great straite they are bold to baptise others being unbaptised themselves our Lord did not so though he were the King of the Church as I told them before which he tooke no notice of but yet further he saith according to Rom. 15. 4. A disciple at the command of Jesus Christ where is that command in the 28. of Matthew this serveth at every turne as true and false did before it is foure times alleadged in this short section be like to fill up that he might seeme to say some thing but it may not be counted Tautologie but doth the 28. of Matthew command unbaptised disciples to baptise others sure R. B. is mistaken and never able to make any such thing appeare If any say Johns example is extraordinary and so not exemplarie he answereth theirs is an extraordinary case truely so it is without the rule of the Scriptures but it may

Christ and by him rather in his birth and comming into the world then by his death and leaving the world Gala. 3. 17. But not to wade in new things I further say that that Covenant Gen. 17. was made with Abraham and his seed the Church The Testament by Moses was made with the same people old and young The new Testament confirmed in particular wise with the blood of Christ it was made with the same people also the house of Israel and Iuda so as the matter standing so that the Covenants and Testaments whether so distinct or not as before being to yong aswel as old what cause had R. B. to marvell unlesse at his owne shallownesse for indeede to any that hath but halfe an eye it is so far from excluding Childdren as it doth wholly include them and interest and inright them in the Covenant and Testaments both old and new and so in the seale now as of old especially the Covenant being everlasting and by neither Testaments made voide But further he saith If Infants be not in the Covenant confirmed by the blood of Christ who saith they are not Then can they he saith have no right to Baptisme which serveth to set forth our blood of washing in the blood of Christ But I answer if they have interest both in that Covenant and Testament also then they may have right to Baptisme But this is most certain as before is briefly declared so as if R. B. can shew no other eror to attēd that distinction it will also as the rest of the matter passe for good for any thing R. B. to purpose can say against it But he saith this excludeth Children not only from Baptisme but also from salvation by Christ how it doth so I suppose he cannot tell If he thinke thus because they are said to be in a Covenant not confirmed particularly by the blood of Christ Though Typically and Relatively it be so confirmed Then from such a conceit it will follow certainly that those Israelites of old Parents and Children were excluded from salvation by Christ they being in a Covenant not so confirmed Indeed his opinion seemeth to be sicke of this disease for how Children which he holdeth neither within the Church nor within the Covenant nor doe beleeve how they should have salvation by Christ sure he cannot tell This R. B. according to his judgement thinketh a sufficient answer The scriptures which I produced to prove the extent of the Covenant of God to Abraham and his seed in their generations and that the Gentiles they were a part of the seed to whom the Covenant was made Ephe. 3. 6. That children are included and not excluded so being in the Covenant and of the Church have a writ now also to the Seale to be buried with Christ by Baptisme all which I suppose R. B. granteth as true and that he could not gain-say the same And is therefore by just consequence guilty ●● offering wrong and violence to the Covenant of Almighty God and to Abraham the Father of the faithfull in excluding such as God hath not onely included but expressed in that his Heb. 8. Covenant and also in both his Testaments for these whether so distinguished or otherwise were made with one and the same people the house of Israel and Iuda so as to Gal. 1. exclude Children alway included must needes be a changing the Everlasting Covenant and a bringing in a new Gospel never learned of Jesus Christ and let R. B. or any other cleare themselves of it if they can The second positive ground I set forth it was the stablenesse and perpetuitie of the Church some change being in forme and Administration but not in matter and relation as in my discourse is before fully proved R. B. thinketh he hath disproved the same and so here passeth it by And he onely mindeth what I did infer from this ground Infants I said were lawfull members of the Church from Abraham to Moses from Moses to Christ what should let them from being a part of the Church and lawfull members yet still seeing the Church or Kingdome is the same Mat. 21. 43. I also there proved that the Gentiles they are fellow-heirs and of the same body Ephe. 3. 6. To all which and that that further followeth in my discourse R. B. answereth that though Infants were of the Church of old yet the Lord hath manifestly declared they shall not be so now It would amaze one to see the presumptuousnesse of the man hath God so manifestly declared their putting out of his Covenant and cutting off from the Church where is that manifest declaration the scripture rather declareth their continuance Ephe. 3. 6. But let us see where is that manifest declaration It is Gala. 4. There is mention in the scripture but of one Allegorie and that is all the proofe R. R. hath for the excluding of Children from the Church and cutting off their entayle from the Covenant sure he is verie neare driven that hath no other proofe but this Allegorie to prove a matter of such great consequence as the altering of the unchangable Covenant of God and cutting of a part of the Church And this Allegorie must be expounded according to his owne sence and fancie or else all is lost with him in the cause But let us see how he maketh the Allegorie speak to his purpose for the putting of Infants out of the Church Gala. 4. It is written Abraham had two sonnes one by a bond-maid an other by a free woman he that was borne of the bond-woman to wit Ishmael was borne after the flesh but he that was born of the free woman was born by promise The sum of all this is that Ishmael not being the childe of promise was put out of Abrahams family Alas what is all this to the manifest declaration O yes saith he it is an Allegory but sure R. B. had small judgement and lesse reason to say an Allegorie is a manifest declaration But happily he may make something of it I shall minde his sence The bond-woman he saith shadowed out the old Covenant and her son Ishmael which she bare to Abraham after the flesh by carnall generation see what words R. B. here useth in setting out the generation of Ishmael sure there was some Allegorie in his thoughts about them Rom. 4. 19. For I askt him was not Isaac borne after a fleshly wise and by carnall generation also sure he was begotten and brought forth even as Ishmael was R. B. is yet beside the white hee further saith that Ishmael shadowed out the carnall Israelites which should proceede from Abraham in after generations to what time he referreth Exo. 9. 6 Act 3. 25. this it doth not appeare As under Moses the Jewes are said to be a holy people and Gods peculiar treasure so after Christ the Apostle telleth us expressely they were the Children of the promise If Ishmael being cast out of Abrahams house

and as the Israelites children of the promise This understanding must he saith be cast out also and he supposeth he hath a speciall reason for it for Ioh. 8 sayth he this implyeth as if they had beene free by nature Sure the man dreamed they were free as Isaac was by promise being a part of the seed to whom the promise was made the Israelites they were so free by promise as they could tell our Lord but they were not so free but that they must become bond unlesse they were further Rom. 11. made free by the Sonne that maketh men free indeed Rejecting of him they of free became bond and are unto this day and cut off but shall be loosed againe when their hearts shall be turned to the Lord and they grafted into their Olive tree againe But this R. B. saith is a manifest contradiction of the Apostle let that bee made appeare thus hee doth it The Apostle hee sayth by the bond-woman understandeth all them that were borne as Ishmael by fleshly generation hee then as I said must meane Isaac also for he as before is shewed was so borne by fleshly generation though Abraham was old and Sara stricken in yeeres the intent and meaning of the Apostle is far otherwise as before is shewed though he see it not and so rudely to father his erroneous conceit upon the holy Apostle So hee concludeth that all that are not as Isaac by promise c. the Galathians bein Gentiles were as Isaac by promise as before the Gentiles being grafted into the stock of Abraham the Church their seed though lineally descended is owned of God as of old and after the manner of Isaac Children of the promise I suppose the indifferent reader will bee able to see how far R. B. is from making good what he so boldely affirmed And that the Children of the faithfull and such as are of the Church are yet still true and lawfull Members and such as are not to bee denied to come unto Christ of such being his Kingdome The rest of what I set forth in my discourse touching this second positive ground in as much as R. B. happily was in his deepe reducing to some of the three heads before mentioned I shall hold him excused for passing it by If any reader studious of this controversie desire to see further thereof he may please to peruse the discourse And so I proceed as doth R. B. saying my next ground is the Apostles exhorting Parents to bring up their Children in the nurture of the Lord therefore by consequence they were of the Church and so baptized I said indeed the Apostle writing to the whole Church distributeth the same into parts and maketh one part Children which he willeth to be obedient and these were young and to be brought up in the feare of God Now the Apostle writing to the Church would not meddle with them if without I alludeing to that place 1. Cor. 5. whether the allusion were so proper yea or no I leave the reader to judge But about this R. B. taketh paines and travelleth about it and inferreth this and that as absurdities to little purpose following thereof in the meane time never clearing that which followeth of the Jewes Children being left out when they shall be called and grafted into their stocke againe as no more capable to be of the Church which were greatly to lessen their comforts and to diminish of the grace of God to them But minding his promise of reducting he passeth over and commeth in his further proceed to take notice that I said it was an uncomfortable doctrine the excluding the Lineall seed of the faithfull from the Church estate and Covenant as of old for from thence I said it will follow that Parents doe beget beare and bring forth children to the devill c. To this he answereth that by nature we are all the children of wrath Ephe. 2. ● To which I say that indeed the Ephe. were the the Children of wrath before their calling and ingrafting into the Church And further it is true of the seed of the faithfull and of the faithfull themselves that nature considered according to their fallen condition and unregenerate part they may be so minded yea Isaac the particular son of promise was so also But by Covenant and promise neither Isaac nor yet the Israelites were the Children of wrath as were the Gentiles and their seede But were the people and children of God Eze. 16. Hee sayth further that our being of the Church dependeth on our regeneration which I say is a Familistcall strain But he further sayth if all that are not borne members of the Church shall be damned I ask who sayth so Doth R. B. know no difference betwixt these two that in his judgement the one must needs follow the other being out of the Church and so Relatively without God in the world then they must be damned and there is no other way If it were so children would be in a poor case according to his judgement that excludeth them all the church But his drift is to inforce some absurditie on me I shall take notice of it he saith there is in my judgement no true visible Church in the world This fable we had enough of before so he Argueth on thus no church no Children borne in the Church no Salvation He asketh mee if this doctrine of mine be not verie comfortable he may take it to himselfe for sure he is the Master of it And by this fayned retortion he thinketh to heale and comfort the sad thoughts of Parents against that dolefull consequence that their children are not now as of old the children of God but are borne the children of the Devill and so hee skippeth over what I inferred by way of question which it seemeth he had no list to answer R. B. taketh notice of another Argument which hee sayth must needes be answered for hee taketh it I place great confidence in it and indeed so I doe he setteth it downe thus Children of Beleevers are holy therefore they may be baptized 1. Cor. 7. 14. To this scripture opened and applied as in my discourse may bee seene R. B. answereth that the Apostle doth not say the children of beleevers are holy sure he hath little modestie he might as well deny the light at Noone day doth not the Aposay now are they holy v. 14. But what then doth the Apostle say that the unbeleeving wife is sanctified to the beleeving husband that is to his use so as his ox or sheep and other goods are I suppose he so meaneth Could the Corinthians question that a poor Exposition It is likely rather they questioned their lawfull continuance with them because of old the Israelites were to put away their strange wives and the children which were Esra 10. begotten of them which children God did not own for his so they might have conscience of doing so also The partition wall being now