Popes faith religion and worship there are like priests like people Now if the Bishop of that parish be Antichrist the son of perdition as th'Apostle telleth us 2 Thes. 2. 3. then his parishoners which have no other faith or religion then he are also the children of damnation 2 Thes. 2. 12. and so can not be judged to be Christs true church and in the state of grace sealed of God with his covenant unto salvation In the Lateran Church of Rome where Antichrist is parish priest the people are grosse idolaters hereticks worshipers of Divils and of him that sitteth as God in the Temple of God ascribing unto him that Holyness divine power and jurisdiction which he doeth blasphemously challenge and mine opposite could not shew one man of that parish that differeth at all from the religion of their priest how is it then possible that he should be Antichrist and they true Christians he under wrath they under the covenant of grace he the very Temple of the Divil and they the true Temple of God For shal not the same religion and faith which justifieth them justifieth him also when it is found in him as well as in them Wherfore eyther the man of syn himself must be a sainct among those saincts or they togither with him must be as the holy Ghost calleth them an habitation of Divils Revel 18. 2. To conclude then seing there is no true visible church of Gods institution but a particular congregation any other general or catholik visible church of Rome being but the Popes own wicked fiction and seing Antichrists parish church can no more be Christs then Antichrist himself it can not without injury to the Apostle and to the proportion of faith and to other scriptures and to reason it self be gathered that the church of Rome is at this day Gods true Temple or Christs true Church Albeit for that there was once a true Chrrstian church in Rome and these Antichristians now profess to be the successors of the same and pretend one faith religion worship and reteine some doctrines and ordinances of Christ still which they synfully profane they are therfore sayd to be the Temple of God as before I have shewed Moreover there can no church be called the true Temple of God but in respect of Christ the chief corner stone and foundation of the building for he is called the living Stone and his people are living stones built up a spiritual house in him and so grow up to an holy Temple in the Lord 1 Pet. 2. 4. 5 Eph. 2. 20. 21. If therfore Antichrist sitteth in the true Temple of God he sitteth first in Christ the head and secondarily in his body and people but Antichrist is no otherweise in Christ then in a feighned profession of him whom in deed he denyeth 1 Joh. 2. 22. therfore he is not in the Temple of God but in respect of his profession of Christianitie and of the Christian societie in his people both which are false and deceitfull after the working of Satan in all deceivablenes of unrighteousnes 2 Thes. 2. 9. 10. Now it followeth that I defend my former writings against which he excepteth as for the reproches which he layeth upon my self and his trifling exceptions against words and phrases I will omitt as fruitless Wheras in scanning the Apostles words I noted mine opposites omission of Antichrists sitting as God in the Temple of God which words as God doe give light to the true meaning he excepteth how he could alleage that one Greek copie wanteth those words so doth the Syriakas Mr. Beza observeth also the Latine I answer if one copie want them and many or all other have them it is no wisdom to leave the many follow one without apparant reason For the Syriak he was deceived for it hath those words plainly though the copie which Tremellius used wanted them through the copiers default as Mr. Iunius sheweth in his notes upon the Syriak version on 2. Thes. 2. 4. As for the Latine it omitteth sundry other good things in other places and is no warrant for us to follow Obj. The question was not about the manner of Antichrists sitting in the Temple of God whether he should sit as God therin or no. Therfore I needed not alleadge these words Answ. But the question was about th'Apostles meaning in that place and therfore his words which help to manifest his meaning should have been alleaged Obj. Jt is knowen to be usual in all writers sometimes not to mention somtimes not to insist at all upon such words as perteâ—ne not to the matter in hand c. Answ. Yet I though I first used the whole phrase of the Temple of God am taxed for that I doe not after alwayes repeat all the words But to let pass such things this speech sitteth as God perteyneth much to the matter in hand for if the people which he wil have to be the Temple of God doe so acknowledge and honour the Man of syn for God as he there sitteth shewing himself that he is God then may we as well doubt whether they be the people of the true God as whether the man of syn be the true God But whatsoever honour divine power the man of syn challengeth to himself the â—ame doe the people of Rome the Temple of God give unto him in word and deed So the words are needfull and perteine to the matter in hand For by the worshiping of that Beast the false church is distinguished from the true church which refuseth to worship him Rev. 13. 8. 16. 17. 14. 1. 4. 9. 10. 11. 12. 20. 4. 2 Thes. 2. 10. 11. 12. Obj. Of Antichrists sitting th' Apostle saith that he sitteth as God but of the seat where he sitteth he sayth expresly in the Temple of God and sayth not as in the Temple of God as the answer here would import which therfore is merely shifting and full of deceyt Answ. So the Prophet sayth expresly in the house of their God Amos. 2. 8. and sayth not as in the house of their God though he speaketh of an idolatrous temple which Ieroboam pretended to be Gods and the Apostle sayth expressly there be gods many and lords many 1. Cor. 8. 5. and sayth not as gods or as lords when yet he meaneth the false gods and idols of the heathen And the scripture expressly sayth the woman saw Samuel and Saul perceived that it was Samuel and then sayd Samuel because of the words of Samuel 1. Sam. 28. 12. 14. 16. 20. and sayth not one as or like to Samuel though it was but the divil in the likenes of Samuel Paul sayth expressly that Satan is transfigured into an Angel of light 2. Cor. 11. 14. and sayth not aâ— into an Angel though in the very next words he sayth that his ministers are transfigured as the ministers of righteousnes v. 15. Which terme of transfiguring is sometime used for a
But this were to build a new Babylon and to make a confused mixture of the members of Christ and of Antichrist contrary to all the scriptures 2 Cor. 6. 14. 15. 16. 17 Rev. 21. 27. The other scripture which he citeth Deut 7. 1 11. helpeth him no more then the former for there in the 11. verse the Commandements Statutes and Judgments which imply all Moses law are expressed if other nations were freed from all these then were they freed from all law and so from all syn for where there is no Law there is no transgression seing Syn is the transgression of the Law 1. Ioh. 3. 4. And where he instanceth mariage with Pagans which is there forbidden Deut. 7. 3. and applieth it to Papists now that they should syn to mary with such I grant it But his inference therupon that therfore they are the true church and in the covenant of grace I deny For the Iewes at this day which professe after their false manner the God of Israel and all things written in the Law and Prophets should syn if now they maried with such doing contrary to their express Law Mal. 2. 11 Yet are not the Iewes now in the covenant of grace or the church of God Againe in Deut. 7. 5. there is commandment to destroy images and like monuments of idolatrie if this was peculiar to Israel then other nations synned not in suffering idols among them undestroyed wheras the Apostle plainly sheweth their greivous syn in making and using such idols Rom. 1. 23. and consequently it must needs also be their syn that they did not forsake destroy and abolish them If any now aske whether the other nations were then bound to all the ordinances of Israel I answer no for some things were never before commanded nor unto other then the church of Israel as the strangers might eat some meates which the Israelites might not Deut. 14. 21. Such things having never been forbidden them of God they might eat without syn as we may at this day But this I say of the nations that all the Lawes Statutes and judgments which were once commanded them of God they were bound for ever to keep til God againe repealed them As for example all the ten commandements and such Statutes or cerimonies as were taught them of God as sacrificing Gen 4. 3. 4. 8. 20. not to eat flesh with the blood Gen. 9. 4. and all other the like And for judgments to kill murderers Gen. 9. 6. and so to punish other malefactors And no Apostasie could ever free them from syn in neglecting any of Gods lawes once given them So no Apostasie could free the Israelites from any law of Moses or the world now from the Law of Christ. The Iewes that under Antiochus turned to Paganisme 1 Maccab. 1. 43. were guiltie they and their seed for neglecting circumcision the Passover and all other ordinances of Moses and their apostasie wherby they went out from the covenant of God and his church freed them not from syn at all So the Christians in like manner that have Apostate to Mahometisme are nevertheless in their synns for neglect of Christs trueth ordinances though they be no Christian church as all of us graunt Onely there is this difference to be put that such as know the will of God as did the Iewes and many Papists now may by the scriptures and doe it not shal be beaten with many stripes wheras the ignorant peoples and Popish multitude shal be beaten with few Luke 12. 47. 48. But to excuse them from syn wholly is to plead for iniquitie And for this cause both David in Ps. 147. and Moses in Deut. 7. urgeth Israel to thankfullnes and obedience above other peoples in that the Lord had now written his lawes and ordinances unto them and made them an holy people when he left other peoples onely to that doctrine which by word of mouth was delivered them from Noe and his sonns which if they did forsake as they had in a great mesure they should perish for ever 7. His seventh last reason for the church of Rome is taken from 2. Thes. 2. 3. 4. Where it is prophesied that Antichrist should sit in the Temple of God This argument he handleth at large But first let it be observed how all his reasons hetherto are shewed to be insufficient and built upon weak grounds the first being taken from their baptisme which is adulterate as the church it self The second frō an inconvenience falsly presupposed that none in that church can else be saved The third from a question whether Christians Iewes Turks or Pagans be the church The 4. is againe from their baptisme The 5. is from the types of Iudah and Israel in apostasie The 6. is from a supposed freedome that such as are apostate from the covenant of God should have from syn if they neglect the ordinances of the gospel None of these arguments are taken from the essential things wherof the true church consisteth none from the matter to prove them saincts or forme to prove them united unto Christ and one to an other according to the order of his testament none from the faith to shew it to be true or from the worship and service of God or from the ministerie to manifest eyther of these to be according to Christ. And now the last of his reasons is from a figurative phrase the Temple of God which may be diversly understood and applied as himself cannot deny Let the prudent reader judge whether these his seven arguments be any thing like those seven pillars which Wisdome hewed out when she builded her house Prov. 9. 1. Now let us weigh his seventh reason The Apostle sayth he speaking of Antichrist in 2 Thes 2. 3. 4. describeth him thus There shall come an Apostasie defection or falling away and the man of syn shal be revealed the son of perdition who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped so that he as God suteth in the Temple of God shewing himself that he is God c. Here the Apostle describing Antichrist speaketh of the Temple of God where he suteth c. Now that by the Temple of God in Jsrael was figured the church of God among Christians appeareth by these scriptures 1 Cor. 3. 16. 17. 2 Cor. 6. 16. Ephe. ◠21. Rev. 11. 1. 2. 19. 14. 15. 17. 15. 5. 6. 8. 16. 1. 17. compared with Zach. 6. 12. 13 and is acknowledged by the best writers of all ages c. So then from this scripture J reason as followeth Jf the Pope of Rome with his hierarchie be the man of syn here spoken of and the son of perdition who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped then is the church of Rome the Temple of God here spoken of wherein he suteth as God shewing himselfe that hee is God But the Pope of Rome with his hierarchie
is by their owne grant the man of syn of whom the Apostle here speaketh c. Therfore the church of Rome is the Temple of God also that here is spoken of I answer This argument I might wholly grant and not hurt the cause I plead for For though the church of Rome be the Temple of God which Paul speaketh of yet followeth it not that it is Gods true Temple or true Church which is the point that should be concluded seing the scriptures often speak of things as once they were though so they continue not still as also they speak of things according to the outward pretense and shew that is made of them though in deed and trueth they be nothing less The first is manifest by these and other like instances Abigail is called the wife of Nabal 1 Sam. 30. 5. though Nabal was then dead and his wife maried to David Simon is still called the Leper Mat. 26. 6. though he was then clensed of his leprosie The king of Tyrus an heathen man that lived in Ezekiels dayes is sayd to have been in Eden the garden of God to have been upon the holy mountaine of God and to have walked in the middest of the stones of fyre Ezek. 28. 13. 14. meaning that he had been in Gods church on mount Sion among the people of God although not he himself but Huram his predecessor many yeres before in the dayes of David and Solomon was the man that became a proselyte in Israel and helped to build the Temple 2 Chron. 2. 3. 16. even as if a man should speak to the Bishop of Rome at this day and tell him what he was for a Bishop in th'Apostles dayes and how now he is degenerate and become the man of syn The mountaines of Horeb and Tabor where God once gave his Law and Christ was transfigured are after still called the mount of God and the Holy mount 1 King 19. â— 2 Pet. 1. 18. because they had been for the time sanctified by the presence of God And so the Temple in Ierusalem after the Iewes had crucified Christ refused the gospel were broken off because of unbeleef and the sacrificing and worshiping in that place was ended yet is it until the utter ruine of it by the Romans called the holy place Mat. 24. 15. Thus also the Citie become an harlot is called the faithfull Citie Esai 1. 21. the wicked that hath forsaken his righteousnes is named arighteous man Ezek. 18. 26. according to their former and not their present estate And when these titles are given them it is not to justifie them at all but to aggravate their syn So for the second that things are called according to the outward appearance and pretext set upon them though they be in deed false is evident by these and the like examples false Gods which are but idols are called gods usually so one Prophet calleth those the Philistians gods 1 Chron. 14. 12. which an other calleth their images 2 Sam. 5. 21. False prophets are called Prophets 1 King 22. 6. 22 and Balaam a Soothsayer among the heathens Jos. 13. 22. is called a Prophet 2 Pet. 2. 16. The evil spirit whom the witch of End or raised up for Saul is called in the scripture Samuel 1 Sam. 28. 11. 12 15. 16. 20. by reason wherof the Papists contend that it was Samuel in deed and not the Divil urging the letter as mine opposite doth urge against me this phrase of the Temple of God The idolatrous Temple which Ieroboam made in Israel in honour of the God which had brought them out of Egypt is called the house of their God Amâ—s 2. 8. yet that it was his true house or temple I never heard of any that would affirme though it was the true God whom they worshiped therin for Baal with his house was then destroyed out of Israel 2 King 1â— 27. 28. Now mine opposite hath given us a good rule in this his last book when answering the Anabaptists he sayth The word of God is not the bare letter or outward syllables but the intendement and meaning of the holy Ghost by whom it was given Which should carefully be observed by the due consideration of the scriptures with the circumstances therof and by the conference of other places of scripture and the proportion of fayth layd togither Which whiles the Anabaptists neglict they look on the scripture partially and press the letter extreamly without consideration of the true and right meaning therof These words of his are true the more it is to be lamented that he himself would so press the letter against me and not weigh the meaning of the same by it self and other scriptures and the proportion of fayth layd togither In alleaging this text he layeth downe the words thus There shal come an apostasie or falling away wheras the Apostle sayth except there come an apostasie or falling-away first which word first may intimate that the church should fall away from the love of the trueth before the man of syn should be revealed and this is apparant by the 10. verse where the people whom Antichrist seduceth are sayd to be them that perish because they received not the love of the trueth that they might be saved Or if the word first which mine opposite leaveth out be understood before Christs coming then is it meant of the apostasie or the falling away so called by an excellencie as exceeding all other And is not to be referred to Antichrist the head onely but to Antichristians the bodie also who after other synns should fall away with Antichrist and be damned with him as in the 11. verse it is sayd God shall send them strong delusion that they should beleeve a lye shat they all might be damned who beleeve not the trueth but had pleasure in unrighteousnes So that by the whole scope of this scripture it is evident the Apostle divideth not the people of the church of Rome from the Bishop and ministers of the same as if the people should be Gods true Temple Christs true Church under his covenant and so in the state of grace when the Bishops and ministers are the Divils Temple Antichrist the man of syn and so in the state of damnation but maketh both bishops and people deceivers and deceived all of them under wrath and condemnation otherweise then my opposite would perswade For he pleading thus The Apostle speaking of Antichrist describeth him thus There shal come an apostasie c would have men think that the Bishop and ministers of the church of Rome are the apostasie and the people not contrarie to all the scope of this scripture contrarie also to Paul in 1 Tim. 4 1. where he foretelleth of some that should apostate or depart from the faith giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of Divils meaning it of the people deceived by false teachers yea it is contrary also to mine opposites own graunt who
is also true but should have this addition taught of the holy Ghost To such as keep his covenant that remember his commandements to do them Psal. 103. 17. 18. For if we deny him he also wil deny us 2. Tim. 2. 12. That God hath regard to his covenant in Apostaticall churches and estate is also true but barely by him set down without shewing how That Moses teacheth us in Levit. 26. namely that the Israelites for their apostasie and forsaking of God should be chastised and if they would not amend they should at last be scattred among the heathen and perish among them and they that are left if they confesse their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers and if their uncircumcised hearts be humbled c. then God will remember his covenant with Iakob and will not cast them away nor abhorr them to destroy them utterly to breake his covenant with them but will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors 4. The fourth of Christs dying once and our being once baptised I also grant 5. The fift that the Church of Rome was espoused to Christ and had his baptisme in the Apostles dayes is true But where he addeth that she hath ever since reteined it with other grounds of Christian religion there he goeth too farr For many grounds of Christian religion she hath forsaken as all that are not Papists will acknowledge Wherefore he addeth a qualification either for faith or order or both in whole or in part This is so large as will bring in not onely the heathens of old but all the old condemned heretickes in the Apostles dayes and after yea even the very Iewes and Turkes at this day For in part they retein the grounds of Christian religion It is a ground of Christian religion to beleeve that there is one God and that the very Divils as the Apostle sayth doe beleeve Iam. 2. 19. But not to goe so farr as I grant him that the Papists in baptisme retein Christs ordinance in whole or in part so he cannot deny but also in the Lords Supper now turned to an abominable idolatrous Masse they reteyn Christs ordinance in whole or in part and so in other their abominations The Pope himselfe the great Antichrist the son of perdition reteyneth Christian religion in part The image of God wherein he made man at the first Gen. 1. 26. remaineth in all men still in part as the Scriptures testifie Gen. 9. 6. Iam. 3. 9. Wherefore if the reteyning of things in part holdeth men still in the state of grace and salvation who then shall be damned What a wide gate is here opened into the kingdom of heaven that if men reteyn Christian religion either for faith or order or both in whole or in part they remain still in the church and covenant of grace which is quite contrary to the doctrine of Christ and of his Apostles Math. 7. 13. 14. 22. 23. 1. Cor. 6. 9. 10. Gal 5. 19. 20. 21. 6. His sixt reason from the Iesuites profession made in their Rhemes Testament c I have before answered it being in his second argument made for the church of Rome And that which he addeth of their baptising with water in the name of the Father c is of no more weight to justifie their baptisme then the like elements of bread and wine and the words of Christs institution This is my body c are to justifie the Popish Masse to be the true supper of our Lord. Of which Mass to omitt that which many others have written of the abomination of it Mr. Calvin sayth thus The Mass â—n itself is a ronouncing of the death of Jesus Christ and a sacrilege forged by Satan utterly to abolish the sacrament of the Supper 7. His seventh reason that Iewes and Pagans are turned to the popish Christian â—aith was also refured in answer to his second reason brought for the church of Rome The conclusion that there needeth no repeating of baptisme as there was none of circumcision is granted and by me never denyed 8. Likeweise his eight reason that God hath his people in the Romish Babylon Rev. 18. 4. under his covenant of grace is before answered But he should have proved if he could that Babylon itself which is the church of Rome is under the covenant of grace that I deny the holy Ghost shewing in Rev. 17. 18. ch that she is under wrath and destruction He sayth the children of that church should plead with their mother as the Prophets taught and dealt with Jsrael of old Hos 2. 2. 3. 1. 4. 1. 2. 12. c that she take away her fornications out of her sight c. It is true so they should but why doth this man diminish from the word of God For the Prophets words are Plead with your mother plead for she is not my wife neyther am J her husband let her therfore â—ut away her whordomes c Hos. 2. 2. Thus doe I plead against this mother church of Rome but my opposite blameth me and pleadeth for her she is the wife of Christ and not divorced as before we have heard Baptisme sayth he is not of her adulteries but of Christs ordinances True so is the Lords supper so is excommunication not of her adulteries but of Christs ordinances and we reteyn them from Christ. But that whorish church hath corrupted and adulterated all these and other ordinances of Christ turned them to abominable idolatries and lyes for which we also plead against her and her synfull abuse of these divine ordinances shall nor justify but the more condemne her 9. To his ninth and last reason if baptisme be renounced then also the articles of â—aith the Scriptures and translations likewise mariages dissolved c. I answer Farr be it that we should renounce any good thing whith the church of Rome abuseth any more then Paul renounced the true God whom the Athenians ignorantly worshiped Aoâ— 17. 23. Whatsoever is of divine institution among Papists Iewes Turks or heathens we renounce it not but their profanation and abuse of holy things we doe renounce Neither can wee justifie their estate or any holy thing in their sinfull abuse of it â— though we put difference between the things which in their owâ—â— nature are good and the persons which are evill Thus men maâ— see how weak and without edge his reasons are to justifie the bap tisme in the church of Rome to be in their use of it the true seale of Gods covenant of grace in Christ unto them Next this he setteth himselfe to answer objections The first wherof he maketh this But the baptisme had in the Church of Rome iâ— not true baptisme but an idol and lying signe a detestable and cursed sacrament a fiction and not true Christian baptisme no better then when we wash our owne face with water dayly c. Answ. That it
a good creature of God also idolatrously abused The bread in the sacrament is in deed an idoll to Papists that worship it as their maker yet is it also in it selfe Gods ordinance idolatrously abused so is popish baptisme Hee might even as wel say that Reubens fact in lying with his fathers concubine was not in deed adultery but an abuse of Gods ordinance of mariage or a defiling of his fathers bed Gen. 35. 22. 49. 4. 5. Moreover the brazen Serpent was but a temporary ordinance c. Ans. This was the twelft of his shifts before now hee repeateth and multiplieth it among his Errours I refer the reader to my former answer 6 That the Romish baptisme is an impure idol in their abuse standing up in the place of Christ and his precious blood which it is not pretending to give grace c. which it doth not But the baptisme in the church of Rome is Gods ordinance had and planted there by the Apostles c. These are the errours and abuses of men about it not the nature of the baptisme it selfe Otherweise all that have received it ought to renounce it utterly and to get an other outward baptisme c. Answ. This also was before objected and answered and it is a world to see how he wearieth his reader with repeating worthlesse reasons Sacrificing among the heathens I have before proved was Gods ordinance So was the Lords supper in the church of Rome in the Apostles time so was excommunication so was the Ministery of Bishops c. These have been continued in Rome with their baptisme may we not say therefore the Masse is an idoll or that the Bishop the Pope of Rome now is an idol and Antichrist Of our getting an other baptisme which is the usuall foot and base of his arguments we have before spoken that which he could not take away Obj. Wil these men say that we can without sin reteine any thing and not utterly reject it that standeth up in the place of Christs precious blood c. Ans. We cannot indeed without syn reteyne it while so it standeth neither doe we so reteyn it far be it from us Neither might the Gentiles reteyn the lye which they had made of the truth of God Rom. 1. 25. But when the lye was doen away and God restored to them his former trueth that they were to reteyn The idolatrous Israelites if they had set up their own blood of circumcision in place of Christs blood might not without syn have reteyned it whiles so it stood Yet repenting of their idolatry they might keep the outward signe without repeating it even so we in this case Obj. Errors and abuses of men may hurt themselves but cannot change the nature of Gods ordinance in it selfe Answ. Not in it selfe I grant considered without their abuse but togither with their abuse Gods ordinance of sacrifice incense c. is an abomination to him Prov. 15. 8. Esa. 1. 13. So baptisme and the Supper now in Rom are abominations to the Lord. Obj. Mans unbeleefe cannot make the faith of God of none effect God is true though every man be a lyar Rom. 3. 3. 4. Ans. What may we think would he conclude from this Scripture To cite a place and leave it doubtfull what hee inferreth is to deceive the reader If he intend according to the question in hand that the sacraments are seales of grace and of salvation unto men whether they beleeve or doe not beleeve it is a notable errour overthrowing the Gospel and establishing the popish herefie of grace ex opere operato by the work doen. The Scriptures teach touching Gods vvord and promise that it profiteth not them that heare it if it be not mixed vvith faith in them Heb. 4. 2. if men beleeve not they shall not be established Esai 7. 9. but shall be damned Mark 16. 16. they shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on them Ioh. 3. 36. Neither is the faith of God by mens unbeleef made without effect For his truth and faithfulnesse is confirmed as well in damning unrepentant unbeleeving synners as in saving those that repent and beleeve When the righteous turneth from his righteousnes and committeth iniquitie he shall dye in his iniquity and yet the way of the Lord is equall as sayth the prophet Ezek. 18. 24. 25. 26. Again as all men naturally are lyars and doe faile and break covenant on their part by syn which God never doeth so if they continue in syn and turne not to the Lord by repentance and faith they all perish Luk. 13. 3. 5. Rom. 8. 6. 10. 1. Cor. 6. 9. 10. Jude v. 5. But let men repent and turn from their transgressions so iniquity shall not be their ruine Ezek. 18. 30. Otherweise it would follow that after men are entred into covenant with God are baptized though they fall frō Christ to Antichrist as the church of Rome hath doen though they fall to Mahomet as many East churches have doen though they turne to be Iewes or pagans and so dye yet they shall be saved for their unbeleef cannot make the faith of God of none effect But so to expound this Scripture Rom. 3. were to turn judgement into wormwood unto the destruction of mens soules And if mine opposite would not gather some such thing from it what will it help his plea for the baptisme of the church of Rome which is the whore of Babylon whom God hath devoted unto destruction except they repent Rev. 17. 18. chap. Obj. The Jewes in Christs time and before holding justification by circumcision workes of the Law set these up in the place of Christ his precious blood c. Should we therfore say that circumcision was then an impure idoll in their abuse c. Or should wee not rather learn to put difference between Gods ordinance in it selfe and between mans abuse thereof c. Ans. Whensoever Iew or Gentile held justification by circumcision sacrifice or works of the Law they made their sacraments sacrifices and workes idols impure idols to themselves in their abuse And it is admirable that men teaching religion should bee ignorant that whatsoever creature or work of man is put in the place of God and Christ it is therby made an idol though Gods ordinances and the workes of his Law in themselves are alwayes good but turned to idols are alwayes evill and an abomination to the Lord as is before proved What mouth can deny but the Papists are idolaters in praying to Saints and Angels If idolaters then they serve idols if they serve idols in so praying then the Saincts and Angels are idols to them in their synfull abuse Yet who knoweth not that the Saincts and Angels in heaven are blessed and holy and not Idols in themselves But this is mine opposites continual fallacie wherby he would deceive his reader that because Baptisme and the Lords supper are Gods holy ordinances in themselves therfore
he would 〈…〉 his first covenant and so receive them againe to grace in Christ. Vnto which I now add this sixt that God called himself the God of Jsrael and them his people because of many among them that were in deed his both such as yeilded not to Ieroboams idolatrie but went to Ierusalem to sacrifice 2 Chron. 11. 16. and seven thousand in Jsrael which bowed not the knee to Baal 1 King 19. 18. and such also as erring at first in simplicitie were by the Prophets brought to repentance though the general state of the land never repented but went on in their syn til the Lord cast them out of his sight as is testified in 2 King 17. His next chief ground is the comparison of Iudah who likeweise for sook the Lord and sometime became more corrupt then Israel so that if Israel were not in trueth Gods people and church then Iudah was not Answ. I have shewed how Israel might be called Gods people still and why I judge them not to be Gods true Church For Iudah they changed not the constitution wherin they were set of God made no new face of a Church no new Temples preists c as did Israel Therfore they did wickedly in the true Church as often times greater impietie is committed in the Church then among the heathens yet the state of the church of the heathens may not be compared though the punishmēt of such as transgress in the Church and repent not shal be worse then the heathens Mat. 11. 20. 24. Secondly the defection of Iudah was not generall like Israels though sometime the scriptures speak generally when many are corrupted but even then when for their synns they were caried into Babylon there was a godly company compared to a basket of good figgs Ier. 24. 2. 5. 6. 7. which had cried out for all the abominations were marked and reserved of God Ezek. 9. 4. c Thirdly the state of Iudah was often times reformed by many good Kings as Iosiah Ezekiah Iehosaphat and others the people brought to repentance and the covenant renewed but never so in Israel by any king that there reigned from their first apostasie to the captivitie 2 King 17. Fourthly for the wicked troupes in Iudah that refused admonition persecuted their brethren killed the Prophets mainteyned idolatrie for which the godly left their synfull communion I hold them not Gods true Church or in his covenant of grace Because the covenant was alwayes conditional if men repent and beleeve as I have before proved and mine opposite himself hath granted This may suffice to his often repeated reasons which are deduced and varied from the groundes aforesayd Touching 2 Chron. 15. 3. IShewed from the Prophet Azariahs speech to Asa and all Iudah that Israel was without the true God without teaching Priest and without Law 2 Chron. 15. 1. 2. 3. and therfore could not in that estate be judged to be in the covenant of grace Mine opposite laboureth to bring Iudah it self also within this estate but that hath no colour with it The distinction of names Iudah and Israel the state of Iudah under Solomon Roboam Abijah and Asa though corruptions were come in plainly sheweth it otherweise and I leave it to the readers judgment 2. he granteth it may well be understood of the 10. tribes and sheweth good reasons for it how then doth he take away the weight of the reason that Israel being without the true God without a teaching Priest Gods true ministerie and without Law could not in that estate be Gods true church in his covenant of grace or have the true seales therof unto them He fayrly denyeth the conclusion Jt wil not prove sayth he that circumcision or the other ordinances of God had in Jsrael or in Judah were false and deceytfull signes c. Jf it would then it might be urged against Iudah also and where then was circumcision c. I answer If there were no circumcision but among them that were without the true God without his ministerie and without his Law then was there no true circumcision in the world For if we consider the first institution of circumcision Gen. 17. and the Apostles doctrine of it in Rom. 2. 25. 28. 29. 4. 11. and the doctrine of Christian baptisme now answerable to circumcision of old it is impossible that that people should have the true seale of righteousnes and salvation from God in Christ that are without God and without Christ. No colourable excuses or distinctions wil here availe◠except men can prove an absolute promise of salvation whether men repent beleeve or no whether they be in God and Christ or no Which is contrary to all the scriptures Wherfore this one testimonie is ynough to overthrow all his long plea for Israel as if they in this synfull stare unrepentant continued stil actually in the covenant of grace and state of salvation And what colour maketh he against this plaine scripture He first speaketh of forsaking God what it meaneth and how it is spoken of the Iewes in the Prophets namely of forsaking his Law Temple Worship and service and not simply of so dealing with the Lord himself as the bare words and letter it self might seem to imply For even in the defection of Israel when Ieroboam set up the calves yet stil they intended to worship the Lord that brought them out of the land of Egypt c. 1 King 12. 28. Answ. First observe how here he would not have the bare words and letter of the scripture to be insisted upon yet is it his continuall practise and onely colourable reasons For the Temple of God 2. Thes. 2. and the people of God are his mayn grounds for the church of Rome and of apostate Israel 2. He omitteth the words which I cited that Israel was without the true God c and speaketh of an other phrase of their forsaking the Lord to ease his burden which he found too heavy 3. It is granted him that by forsaking the Lord is meant the forsaking of his Law Temple Worship and service and not that they did professedly renounce God but stil pretended and intended to serve the true God what would he inferr hereupon This maketh the more against his plea for them The scripture sayth they were without the true God without teaching Priest without Law this was true eyther in their own account or in Gods not in their own account for they thought they stil reteyned the true God even as the heathens of old hereticks Antichristians and Iewes at this day perswade themselves that they serve the true God therfore they were such in Gods account Now Gods judgment is alwayes according to trueth when mans judgment erreth and deceiveth himself Thus then though Israel thought themselves the true church and to have the true God as mine opposite also thinketh and pleadeth for them yet in the Lords account which is trueth they were without the true God