Slike stranica

contrary, p. 144. Levit. xiv. 6. considered, ibid. That the word

does not always necessarily signify to dip all over, is the most

that can be inferred from it, p. 145. Besides, here it means to

dip all over, p. 146. Isai. xxi. 4, Ezek. xxiii. 15, Dan. iv. 33, and

v. 21, considered, p. 148, &c. Hot climates very dewy, p. 150.

The Syriac version confirms our sense, p. 151. Ecclus. xxxi.

26; 2 Macc. i. 21; Ecclus. xxiv. 26. considered, p. 152, &c.

The purification enjoined for touching that which is dead, to be

performed by sprinkling, p. 153. Together with dipping, ibid.

The Mahometans purify in such cases by washing all over,

p. 156. Washing was the main part of the purification among the

Jews, p. 157. For which reason the Son of Sirach uses this

word to intend the whole ceremony, p. 158. Luke xi. 38. con-

sidered, p. 160. Mr. Wall pretends the Jews always washed

their hands, by having water poured on them, p. 161. Which

is false, p. 163. The priests washed their hands and feet by

dipping them, p. 164. Our Lord washed his disciples' feet so

likewise, ibid. The authority of the rabbins not to be de-

pended on, p. 166. Dr. Pococke allows, the Jews were obliged

sometimes to wash by dipping, p. 167. And from thence ac-

counts for the use of the word Banтíčeσbai, Mark vii. 4. p. 168.

Mr. Wall's next instance, which is Mark vii. 4. considered, p.

169. They that came from the market did wash by dipping,

p. 172. Sects among the Jews who washed themselves fre-

quently, p. 173. The words may refer to the things brought

from the market, p. 177. Heb. ix. 10. and Matt. xxvi. 83. con-

sidered, p. 179, &c. The sacramental washing being expressed

by words which signify any kind of washing, does not prove it

therefore be administered by any kind of washing,

p. 182, 183. Words, like our ideas, have their genera and spe-

Words of a more particular sense should explain

the more general, and not the contrary, p. 185.

have lost the true reading in the last, ibid. Metaphorical pas-

sages make for, not against my opinion, p. 193. Languages

do not exactly answer to one another, p. 195. If the word

Barrio were otherwise ever so ambiguous, yet as it relates to

baptism, it is sufficiently determined only and necessarily to

mean to dip, p. 197. By the doctrine and practice of St. John,

p. 198. Of the holy apostles, ibid. Of the succeeding church

for many centuries, which urged a trine immersion, p. 201.

Learned men in general allow this mode of baptism, p. 203.

Mr. Wall pretends, though the ancients did generally baptize

by immersion, they likewise used affusion, or the like, p. 206.

But this was not allowed in common cases, ibid. Aspersion, how

at first admitted, p. 207. It is unreasonable to argue, that the

general sense of a law is the same with the exceptions that are

made to it, p. 209. The ancient church of the first centuries

did not practise affusion, &c. p. 212. St. Cyprian's plea for

aspersion very trifling, p. 213. All who were baptized in the

apostles' times were baptized by immersion, p. 216. The clini-

cal affusions do not appear to have been introduced till about

two hundred and fifty years after Christ, p. 218. At which time,

they very much doubted of their validity, p. 220. By the first

patrons granted to be presumptive, p. 222. All allow immersion

was insisted on anciently as the only regular way, in all common

cases at least, p. 226. A humble remark on the bishop of Sa-

lisbury's plea for changing the manner of administering the sa-

crament here in England, p. 228. The clergy pretend they

would gladly revive the ancient practice, but do not take the

proper methods; and in reality obstruct its being revived,

p. 229. βάπτω and βαπτίζω synonymous, p.230.

present may go far to open people's eyes yet much more in

their favour, ibid. It is pity some friendly measures are not

taken to compose the difference, which is not so impracticable

as some fancy, ibid. Mr. Wall's attempt, though the best in its

kind, falls very short of answering the design of it, p. 235.

His scheme, ibid. He first allows it cannot be made appear

from Scripture, that infants are to be baptized, ibid. And there-

fore recurs to these as the only expedients: 1. To the practice

of the Jewish church: 2. To the practice of the ancient Chris-

tians, p. 236. Some reflections which overturn all he says as

to his main conclusion, though he should prove these two points

ever so solidly, p. 237. From his concession, that it cannot be

proved from Scripture, it unavoidably follows, that it is no in-

stitution of Christ, ibid. And to suppose it may be included

in some of the more general expressions is only to beg the thing

in dispute, p. 240. Unless he can shew us infant-baptism is so

much as mentioned in Scripture, we shall not believe it is in-

stituted there, ibid. Our author makes the Scriptures the rule

of language; which he therefore ought with much more reason

to make the only rule of his faith and practice, p. 241, 242.

The baptism of infants is unlawful if Christ has not instituted

it, ibid. True protestants should adhere to the Scripture, as

the only infallible guide in all religious controversies, p. 243.

They who do otherwise, seem to be too near the church of

Rome, as to the article of tradition at least, which is an inlet to

all the rest, p. 244. Our adversaries act very inconsistently in

rejecting tradition, in their disputes with the Romanists, while

they recur to it as their main refuge in the present dispute with

us, ibid. That infant-baptism ought not to be practised, is

proved from our author's principles, compared with the articles

of the church, ibid. It gives the Romanists a handle to weaken

the reformation with too much advantage, p. 246. The articles

of the church directly against traditions, ibid. The Scrip-

tures' silence as good an argument against pædobaptism as can

be desired, p. 248. We find a strong tendency in our minds to

depend upon the Scriptures only, ibid. We are obliged by any

sort of law, &c. only to the particulars the said law expresses,

p. 249. This illustrated by instances, and by an undoubted

maxim from Tertullian, p. 250. Applied also to the present

dispute, and illustrated by more instances, p. 251. Some build

the ecclesiastical hierarchy mainly on that very foundation on

That the Scripture does not leave infant-baptism so undeter-

mined as some would pretend, is largely shewn from Matt

xxviii. 19, p. 261. All laws equally oblige in all particulars

mentioned in them, p. 262. This applied to our present dis-

pute, p. 263. The commission necessarily obliges to teach all

it intends should be baptized, ibid. Therefore infants cannot

be included in that commission, ibid. The commission also

requires, that all of whom it speaks should be first taught, and

afterwards baptized, p. 266. The ridiculous objection of such

as say, infants also are to be taught, answered, p. 269, 270.

Some would evade its force, by confessing, this commission

relates particularly to the adult, which is directly giving up the

argument, p. 270. What the pædobaptists urge from the words

all nations, answered, p. 271. It is not said all of all nations,

ibid. Illustrated by a parallel instance from Matt. iii. 5, 6.

p. 272. Mr. Dorrington censured, p. 273. It is proved, the com-

mission most directly excludes infants, p. 274.

dobaptists urge concerning the Greek word

swered, ibid. Dr. Hammond censured for so

dicting himself in this point, p. 275. Men of the greatest

learning disown the criticism of the pædobaptists, p. 276. A pas-

sage from the bishop of Sarum, ibid. Another from Dr. Whitby,

p. 277. Maonτevew is constantly used to signify nothing less

than to teach, &c. p. 278. The sense of the word proved from

its etymology, p. 279. The primitive, and all its derivatives,

include teaching, &c. ibid. No room for an antiphrasis, which

is now exploded by the best grammarians, p. 280. The pretence

from the termination, that words in -eú∞ are to be interpreted by

sum in Latin, is groundless, p. 281. Plutarch uses the word to

signify to teach, p. 283. Another instance from St. Ignatius, ibid.


Mr. Wall's attempt founded on mistake, p. 343-

tences from the Jews examined; which he has collected from

the learned men who best understood their writings, ibid. Their

authority of no weight; the reasons they go upon being too

weak, p. 344.
It is without sufficient ground that our author

asserts, the Jews make it plain they baptized their proselytes

before Christ's time, ibid. His authorities too late, p. 345. Great

alterations introduced in a short time, p. 346. The passages

produced by Mr. Wall do not so much as intimate that the Jews

baptized proselytes in our Saviour's time, p. 347. There is no

necessity to understand the words in Mr. Wall's sense, ibid.

The Jews used to baptize for the pollution contracted in cir-

cumcision; which may be the baptism spoken of in the Talmud,

p. 347, 348. Some of the rabbins plainly shew us they neither

knew nor allowed of any initiatory baptism, ibid. They ridicule

our baptism as a fanciful ceremony, as appears from the ancient

Nizzachon, which fixes the rise of the practice in Christ, and

mentions it as an initiation peculiar to Christians;
and opposes

to it the Jewish circumcision only, p. 349. It appears farther

from Rab. Isaac, p. 351. So that the Jewish writings, if any

thing, prove contrary to our author's opinion, p. 352.

thority of the rabbins very insignificant, and never to be de-

pended on, p. 353. Their writings in general stuffed with very

foolish, romantic tales, p. 354. Their fabulous and ridiculous

way of accounting for Christ's power of miracles, from Toldoth

Jeschu, ibid. More instances of their ridiculous whimsies from

the Talmud, p. 358. Their foolish misapplication of Scripture,

P. 359. Their impious representations of God, p. 361. A fa-

bulous account of the origin of Rome, p. 362 Another concern-

ing R. Eliezer, in confirmation of their traditions, p. 363. The

Pirké of Eliezer, p. 364. Another reason why the rabbins are

not to be relied on is, that they profess to follow their doctors

in all they assert, though ever so absurd, ibid. They prefer

their Talmud and traditions before the Scriptures themselves,

p. 365. The character of the rabbins, ibid. Their excessive

pride, p. 366. Their way of interpreting the Scriptures, ibid.

The Sanhedrim, though made up of their best men, consisted only

« PrethodnaNastavi »