IT is the common understanding of the Professors of this Age, that the Quakers, (so called) do deny that Baptism with wa­ter is now a duty incumbent upon Christians; and that the Seekers so called, do deny that any persons have a right in this Age to Administer it, although they do grant it to be a duty; and also that the Socinians, so call'd, do deny that the Son of God (out blessed Saviour, called Jesus Christ) had a Being or Existency before he was conceived of the Virgin: Now, al­though [Page 2] my tenderness and respect towards them all is not small (it be­ing the natural Issue and [...]es [...]ts of my Principles, w [...]o profess my self a Latitude man, [...]o lov [...] all mankind, more especially those tha [...] [...]ppear to be (in their way) sincer [...] Professors of Religion) yet I must crave leave for Truths sake (though never so small) to shew mine opinion to this end, that we might arive at such an Oneness as at least to maintain some amicable correspondency one with a­nother, in order to a conviction by cool and sedate Debates, without Exasperation and Railery (things un­doubtedly hatcht in Hell) which ne­ver sprang from Michael) who, though Disputing with the Devil, the greatest Heretick in the Crea­tion, yet durst not bring Railing ac­cusations against him, but said, The Lord Rebuke thee: I do therefore coolly and kindly say to all the three Sects of Men before mentioned, that [Page 3] I humbly conceive in the three points stated, that they are out of the way, and besides the Truth, and that Bap­tism with Water is now a Duty in­cumbent upon Christians, that there is some, even in this Age, have a right to Administer the same; and that the Son of God, our Blessed Lord and Saviour, had a Preexistency to the Virgins conception, for the clearing up of which, we offer these following Arguments relating to each point in its Order.

Baptism with water in force to this day: proved as followeth,

Arg. 1 That Administration that was giv­en from Heaven as a Duty in com­mon to the Penitent or commers to Christ since the Ministration of Moses is in force still even to this day.Major.

But Baptism with water was an Administration given from Heaven as a duty in common to the Penitent or commers to Christ since the Mi­nistration of Moses, Ergo, Minor. It is in force still.

This Argument as a fruitful Root yields us these five proper and useful branches, (viz.) 1. That Baptism with Water was a Ministration from Heaven. 2. That it was a Duty. 3. That it was a duty in common to the Penitent, or commers to Christ. 4. That it was since the Ministration of Moses. 5. That it is in force still, the proof of which (I think) esta­blishes the Argument in all the parts of it.

And first, That it was from Hea­ven we thus prove.

Arg. 2 If Baptism with water was not from Heaven,Major. then it was of Men, or else John did administer it of his own head.

Minor.But it was not from Men, neither did John administer it of his own head, Ergo, It was from Heaven.

Arg. 3 That it was not of Men we thus prove.

Major.If the Ministration of water Bap­tism was of Men, and not from Hea­ven, [Page 5] then there was some Author of it before John Baptist from whom he received it.

But there was no Author of it be­fore John, from whom he received it,Minor. Ergo, it was not from men.

Arg. 4 The Major is good; the Minor we prove thus.

If there was some Author or be­ginner of this Ministration before John from whom he received it, then it is somewhere plainly and convin­cingly discovered. But

It is no where plainly and convin­cingly discovered, Ergo, it was not so. And that it was not of his own head, We thus prove.

Arg. 5 If it was of his own head, then it was a bare Invention and Tradition of man.Major. But

It was not a bare Invention and Tradition of man, Ergo, Minor. it was not of his own head.

Arg. 6 That it was not a bare Invention and Tradition of man, we thus prove.

MajorThat which our Saviour Christ submitted to as part of his work, was no Invention or Tradition of men.

MinorBut our blessed Savior did himself submit to Johns Baptisme, Ergo, It was no Invention of Tradition of men.

The Minor is ungainsayable, The Major we prove thus.

Arg. 7 If our Saviour had submitted to the Invention and Tradition of men,Major then he had undervalued his own Authority, and opened a door for an Innovation in Religion.

MinorBut our Saviour did do neither of these, Ergo.

And that it was neither of his own head, nor from men, but indeed from Heaven, we thus prove.

Arg. 8 That which was Righteousness to submit to:Major and Sin and Rebellion to reject, undoubtedly was from Hea­ven for nothing but the Authority of Heaven can constitute these two things (viz.) Sin and Righteousness.

MinorBut it was Righteousness to sub­mit; [Page 7] wickedness and Rebellion to reject Johns Baptisme, Ergo, it was from Heaven.

The Major none will deny: the Minor is p [...]oved from plain Scrip­ture, Mat. 3.15. Jesus said unto John, suffer it to be so now, for thus it be­cometh us to fulfill all Righteousness.

The Scribes and Pharises Rejected the Councel of God against them­selves,☜ in not being Baptized of John.

Arg. 9 If God himself sent John to Bap­tize, then John's baptisme was from Heaven.Major.

But God himself sent John to Bap­tize,Minor. Ergo, his Baptisme was from Heaven.

The Major can live without beg­ging: and the Minor bares up it self upon this immoveable Pillar,Jo. 1.6.33. John 1.6. v. 33. John saith, God sent him to Baptize with water, from whence we pass to the (Second) part of the Argument, (viz.) that it is a duty; for the proof of which, we [Page 8] need do no more but borrow some­thing from the eight Argument al­ready laid down, and that is this.

Arg. 10 That which men were charged with sin for the neglect of,Major. was doubtless a duty to perform.

Minor.But men were charged with sin for the neglect of water baptisme, Ergo, it was their duty to perform; they rejected the Councel of God, &c. In not being Baptiz [...]d of John. And that it was a duty in common to the Penitent or comers to Christ (which is the Third part of the Argument) we prove thus.

Arg. 11 That which was administred to Multitudes as their duty,Major Mark. 1.5. and the rest that refused, condemn'd for not doing of it, was a duty in Common unto men.

But Baptisme with water was Administred to Multitudes, and the rest that refused, condemned for not doing of it, Ergo, it was a duty in Common, Mat. 3.5.6. All Ju­dah [Page 9] and Jerusalem came to John to be Baptized of him, confessing their sins, and they that refused, are condemned as rejectors of Gods Councel.

Arg. 12 And that it was a duty in Common we further illustrate after this man­ner.Major.

That Ministration which Christ and his Disciples took up and follow­ed after John, was a duty in Com­mon unto men.

But Baptisme with water Jesus and his disciples took up and follow­ed after John, Ergo, Minor. it was a duty in Common.

'Tis said Jesus made and Baptized more disciples then Jo [...]n, Joh. 3.26. though not by his own hands, but his dis­ciples, John 4.2.

Arg. 13 That which was Administred in the name of Christ,Major. by an Authority Apostolical, both unto Jews and Gen­tiles, was a duty in Common unto men.

But Baptisme with water was Ad­ministredMinor. [Page 10] in the name of Christ by an Authority Apostolical, both unto the Jews and Gentills, Ergo, it was a duty in Common.

The Major we have no doubt of, the Minor is proved from these two plain texts, Acts. 2.38. Be Baptized every one of you, &c. Acts 10.48. And he Commanded them to be Bap­tized in the name of the Lord J [...]sus. Now that this was since the Ministra­tion of Moses there need be no proof, we therefore come to the last part of the Argument which is the thing most Scrupel'd, (viz.) that it is in force still, but before we enter upon the proof of it, we shall hit away one objection.

Object. All things that were given from Heaven since the Ministration of Moses do not continue in force still, for Christ taught his disciples not to take a staff nor to Sallute any by the way and the like; and none can deny but this was from Heaven; yet not [Page 11] in force still, therefore Baptisme might be of the like Temporary con­sideration, and might end as this did with a notwithstanding.

Answ. If the grand Argument be consi­dered it leaves no Roome for this Objection; because that sayes, that Ministration that was given from Heaven as a duty in Common to men; but this in the Obj [...]ction was not given as a duty in common, for though the immediate followers of our Saviour were to observe it for a specifick Reason, yet where was it Preacht to, imposed upon, or owned by men in common, as baptism was; if not, 'tis not to the purpose, but is lame, and halts, as not being able to go, and so we shall leave it to prove that Baptism is in force still.

Which is done by these following Arguments.

Arg. 14 If the Baptism and ministration of of John was a part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, then it is in force still.Major.

Minor.But the Baptism and ministration of John is a part of the Gospel of Je­sus Christ, Ergo, the Baptism and ministration of John is in force still.

The Major is unquestionable, un­less we shall suppose that a part of the Gospel, as well as the Law, is made void; which to suppose, will bring us to a Rock that we cannot dis­cover now.

The Minor is plainly proved, Mark. 1. and beginning where the ministration of John is plainly call'd the beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, &c.

Arg. 15 If the Baptism and ministration of John be not in force still,Major. then it is ended.

Minor.But it is not ended, Ergo, the Bap­tism and ministration of John is in force still.

Arg. 16 The Minor only requires help, and thus we afford it.Major.

If the Baptism and ministration of John be ended, then it ended at him­self.

But it ended not in himself, Ergo, Minor. the Baptism and ministration of John is not ended.

Arg. 17 The Major we have no doubt of, the Minor will bare up it self with a little help.

If Johns Baptism and Ministry end­ed at himself,Major. then it did so by Gods appointment, but it ended not at him­self by Gods appointment, Ergo, the Baptism and Ministry of John ended not at himself. The minor proved thus.

Arg. 18 If Jesus with his Disciples did ob­serve and practise it after they receiv­ed it from John, Major. then it did not end in him by Gods appointment.Minor.

But Jesus with his Disciples did observe and practise it after they re­ceived it from John, Ergo, it did not end in him by Gods appointment.

Arg. 19 The Major is as clear as the Sun at Noon-day, for if it had ended in John by Gods appointment, then the keeping of it up still had been cross to it, and consequently a Sin which [Page 14] our Savior would not have comitted. the minor we clear up after this manner

Major.If Jesus with his Disciples did not practise Johns baptism after they re­ceived it from him. Then they did practise another Baptism after the same manner.

Minor.But they did not practise another Baptism after the same manner, ergo, they practis'd the same that John did.

There is two Reasons to be given for this. First, because the Baptism ascribed to Jesus and his Disciples is coupled with Johns, without any signs or circumstances of a contradistinction. Secondly, because the extraordinary baptism with the Holy Ghost, by the power of Jesus, was not then come forth. And there was none other but these two owned, and administred by Jesus and his Disciples.

Arg. 20 If Jesus with his Disciples did practise another Baptism distinct from Johns, Major. after the same manner, (which is denyed in the minor of the last Ar­gument) [Page 15] then it was the duty of the Subjects of the first to be baptized o­ver again by the Second.

But it was not the duty of the Sub­jects of the first baptism, to be bapti­zed over again by the second, Ergo.

Arg. 21 If it was the duty of the Subjects of the first baptism,Major. to be baptized o­ver again w [...]h another baptism after the same manner: Then it was the duty of Christ and his Disciples to submit to it.

But it was not their duty to be baptized over again after the same manner, Ergo. Minor.

The reason of the major is, First, because it was a point of righteous­ness which it became them to fulfil, as well in the second as in the first. Secondly, because their practice in common duties and points of Righ­teousness, was to be Exemplary; the minor proposition, which saith, 'twas not their duty to do so, is Illustrated by this Argument.

Arg. 22 If it was their duty, then they did perform it.

Major.But they did not perform it, Ergo, 'twas not their duty.

Arg. 23 If they did perform any such thing, then some unquestionable evidence may be produc'd to prove it.Major.

Minor.But no unquestionable evidence can be produc'd to prove [...]hat Christ and his Disciples were twice baptised with a common and ordinary bap­tism. Ergo.

Arg. 24 If that part of the Gospel that re­lates to the ministration of John, Major. be Abrogated, then is the Doctrine of Repentance, Baptism, the confession of Sin, and owning the Messiah, ceas­ed and made Null.

Minor.But these are not ceased and made Null, Ergo, that part of the Gospel relating to the ministration of John is not Abrogated. The major pro­position is clear, for in that enume­ration did the Ministry of John chief­ly consist, and if it was made Null, [Page 17] the duties thereof must cease, and if they were afterwards set up again, there must then be a fault committed either in making Null that which was useful and good, or else in bringing in again an Abrogated and exploded thing, according to St. Pauls rule, If I build again the abrogated and ex­ploded things I once destroyed, I make my self a Transgressor.

Arg. 25 To prove the minor, that the Do­ctrine of Repentance, Baptism, Con­fession of Sin, and owning the Messiah is not ceased and made Null. Take as followeth.

If those duties contained in the mi­nistration of John were abrogated and made Null:Major. Then it was done by some publick and Ministerial Edict, proceeding from an Authority either greater or equivalent to Johns.

But it was not abrogated and made Null by any such edict and Authority,Minor. Ergo, ir was not done.

The Major I think is unquestion­able, [Page 18] for it was necessary that the Mi­nistery of one so plainly and fignally appearing to be by divine Authority, as not only proved by Scripture, but confirm'd of God by a voice from Heaven: should at least have an Au­thority Equivolent to it to make it Null.

The Minor it thus made good.

Arg. 26 If it was done by any such Edict and Authority,Major. it must then be done by Christ and his Apostles.

Minor.But it was not done by Christ or his Apostles, Ergo, it was not made Null at all, the reason of the Major is because none but these had so much as an Authority Equivolent to Johns, the reason of the Minor, that it was not done by Christ or his Apo­stles is, because it was own'd, approv­ed and Taught by them in all the parts of it afterwards as is evident from these Scriptures, Mat. 4.17. Joh. 3.26. Acts. 2.38. From whence we draw this Argument.

Arg. 27 If Christ and his Apostles own'd, approv'd & taught the same things in all the parts thereof that was contain'd in Johns Ministrey,Major. Then for certain they did not by any Publique and Ministerial edict make it void.

But they did own, approve,Minor. and teach the same in all the parts there­of, Ergo, It was not by them made Null. The Minor is proved by the foresaid texts, and further confirm'd by these following Arguments.

Arg. 28 If Christ or his disciples did by any publique and Ministerial Edict make the Ministery of John Null.Major. Then it is set forth in some part of the Divine Records. But there is no part of the Divine Records do manifest any such thing, Ergo, it was not done.

Arg. 29 The next Argument levied for confirmation of Water Baptism, is from the Reason of the thing: that there is the same Reason for the Bap­tism and Ministry of John to be in [Page 20] force now as was then (even when John himself did Preach it) Now, though this will not hold in all cases, namely, that if the reason of a thing remains, then the thing it self must, where the things were before abro­gated, yet in this case it will hold, where there hath been no such abro­gation, and therefore from these pre­mises we frame this Argument.

Arg. 30 If the Reason of an unabrogated piece of Service remains still,Major. then the Service it self remains still.

Minor.But the Reason of the Service con­tain'd in Johns Ministry remans still, Ergo, the Service doth so likewise: The Major we hope will face its Ad­versaries, and keep its ground. The Minor we expect to be assaulted, which will find help at hand from these considerations.

Cons. 1 The Precepts of Johns Ministry stands still upon Record, equally un­abrogated with the other parts of the Gospel.

Cons. 2 There is the same unbelieving world and necessity of confession of Sin, Repentance, and owning the Messiah upon his appearing in the Ministration of the Gospel, as there was when he appeared in person; this I doubt not but that it will be readily granted; why is there not then the same Reason there should be the like publick subscription to, and owning of Christ before witness now, as was then, how else should we keep the Traditions as they were delivered to us by the first Ministers of the Gospel, without detraction or disorder; and if there is not a pub­lick subscription to Christ before witness, how shall the Disciples of Christ be known; and if they are not known, how shall a witness be made for him, or his Name be born up in the World? and if a wit­ness for him to bare up his Name in the World, (as a baptizing in the Name of the Lord Jesus doth [Page 22] plainly import) why then should it not be after the same manner that the Example of Christ, and footsteps of his flock doth lead to? and if any shall say, because it is unsafe in these cold and Northern climates, the Answer is ready.

First, many thousands have done it here in these Climates, and done it in a cold Season with safety.

Secondly, If it hath been the Lords pleasure to injoyn a stooping, and a little hardship and self denyal to be past through in the very entrance up­on a profession of him, it is not safe to say there is a Lyon in the way to excuse from it; and it is far less trou­ble to the Flesh then was Circumci­sion, which was injoyn'd upon a se­vere Penalty, and that it ought to be in the same manner prescribed by the first Ministers of the Gospel.Major. Take this Argument to prove it.

Arg. 31 If men may presume to substract, alter, and vary from the rule in the [Page 23] service of Christ in one thing.

Then they may presume to do so in another, and a third, and so through the whole discipline of the Gospel, into disorder and confusion.

But men may not presume to do any such thing, Ergo, Minor. it ought to be done according to the first frame and pattern of things, as they are left us upon Divine Record.

For if this be not admitted, why may we not in celebrating the Sacra­ment of the Lords Supper, use Flesh and Sauce instead of Bread, and Beer or Water instead of Wine; and when we are minded to shew our re­joycing in, or to mourn and humble our selves before the Lord; to use a Fiddle instead of a Hymn, and the mournful sound of a Trumpet in­stead of Prayers and T [...]a [...]s; or why may not a kissing of the Cup do in­stead of drinking of th [...] Wine? and cruming the Bread into a Mess of Pottage stand for a breaking of it, and [Page 24] they that do so, say we have celebra­ted the Lords Supper, and so bring the serious and grave worship of a dear and dying Saviour into a silly Pastime in some respects, and into a Hodg-Podg, or Slibber-slobber in o­ther respects, and by this means lay a fair foundation for a total slighting and enervating of Christ's service on one hand, or for a jumble or mixture of Mahomet and the Pope on the o­ther hand, but that such things ought not to be done, we prove in pursuit of our minor proposition by these following Arguments.

32. Maj.If men ought not to presume to alter any thing of the first frame and pattern of things under the Law with­out special Tolleration, then they ought not to presume to do so under the Gospel.

But men ought not to presume to do so under the Law, Ergo, the minor Minor. is proved by the Sacred Text, See thou make all things according to the [Page 25] pattern shewed thee, Ex. 25.40. Heb. 8.5. The change or alteration of small Ceremonies was accounted a Sin and punished, as carrying the Ark in a manner differing from apoint­ment, and a variation in a point of worship reputed to be the offering up of strange fire, &c.

Cons. 1 The Major is clear by these con­siderations arising from this general head, viz. That there is the same reason for the Establishment and con­trivance of the Ways and Methods of the Gospel, as there was for that of the Law; as first, the Gospel had the same Authority of Heaven stampt upon it as the Law had; 'tis said in reference to the most despised part of it, that God sent John to Baptise, Luk. 3.2. Joh. 1.6. v. 33.

Cons. 2 That the Ministers by which it was sent forth and publisht, were as great as any Ministers of the Law, for 'tis said of John Baptist that he was great­er than a Prophet, and amongst them [Page 26] that were Born of Women, there had not arose a greater, who was the be­ginner of the Gospel, from whom it w [...]s afterwards confi [...]m'd, and carry­ed on by Christ himself, that great Minister of the Sanctuary, who in pitching of the Tabernacle, and set­ling the M [...]thods of the Gospel, acted not of himself, but from the Father, and in p [...]int of Dignity and Prehe­minency, was beyond both Moses and John.

Cons. 3 That there was but two Duties Instituted besides what was compri­zed in the great Magnacharta, the Laws of Natural Religion; we mean the Sacraments of Baptism and the Supper of the Lord, and therefore no need to lessen or diminish them.

Cons. 4 That these are neither difficult nor chargable, so as that there should on that account be a change or altera­tion of them, for Baptism is much easier than Circumcision, and the Celebration of the Supper much [Page 27] cheaper than the offering of Bulls and Goats, Oxen, Sheep, Heifers, and the like.

Cons. 5 They have as blessed a Tendency as any Precepts and Ceremonies of the Law had, to direct men to the Confession of Sin, to an owning of the blessed Jesus, before witness, to the serious thoughts of Death, and going down into the Grave, and to a Resurrection by the power of that Jesus whom they do profess, all which is contained in Baptisme, if rightly understood; as also to a Remembrance of his great Love he bare to them, evidenc'd by the shameful and miserable Death he dy­ed for them, to which useful work and necessary Duty, appertains Sal­vation, according to the saying of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 15. By which ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I Preacht unto you; which was, That Christ died for our Sins, according to the Scriptures, and which is live­ly [Page 28] set forth in the Celebration of the Supper; For as oft as you do this, you shew forth the Lords Death till he comes.

Cons. 6 There is the same danger depend­ing upon the Removing or alteration of the Ceremonies of the Gospel, as was of the Law, for there being an aptness and propensity in mens minds to busie themselves about something relating to Worship; if the right and true Methods be removed or chang'd there is then no great difficulty for to inovate and introduce wrong ones in stead of Right: The Inventions of men instead of the Institutions of God and his Son: nay, it may be the Ceremonies of Bell and the Dragon, of Baal and Belshazzer, when once the remembrance of Right things are nigh worn out in the world, and then farewel to the true Service of the Gospel.

Cons. 7 Lastly, there is the same damage doubtless depending in reference to [Page 29] those that shall change or diminish the Duties of the Gospel, as there is in reference to those that should do so by the Law; and that our Saviour tells us, (in case they be saved) They shall be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven; from all which conside­rations we frame this general Argu­ment for the confirmation of the ma­jor Proposition.

Arg. 33 That which had the Authority of Heaven stampt upon it, the greatest and highest sort of Gods Ministers to set it forth, that is easie to be per­form'd, and may be done with little trouble and charge, that hath a bles­sed tendency, and where is a double danger depending upon a total neg­lect or alteration, men ought not to remove of alter. But it tis so of the duties of the Gospel, Ergo.

More might be said upon this Ar­gument if two things did not forbid, (viz.) want of Time, and fearing to make the Book too Big, we shall [Page 30] therefore Answer two objections and pass on.

Object. 1 John said, he was to Decrease, and Christ to Increase.

Object. 2 Our Saviour gave orders for a new Baptism in his great and last Com­mission to his Disciples, Mat. 28. Mark. 16.

Answ. The first of these is scarce worthy of the name of an objection, there is so little in it, for (1) if Baptisme with water was once a duty as hath been already proved, being evidenc'd (1) by Gods sending John to Bap­tize, (2) by Christs submiting to it, (3) by mens being highly charged with sin that did reject it, (4) by Christ and his disciples after owning and practiseing of it, (5) it's being a branch or duty of the Gospel, (6) it's being joyn'd with other lasting and Perpetual dutys, as Repentance, Confession of sin, and owning the Mesiah, (7) from the reason of the thing: I say if it was [Page 31] once a duty upon these grounds, and from these concuring circumstances, then they must needs run a very great hazard that shall reject and violate it upon so slight and uncertain a ground as one particular text that doth not d [...]clare it void, but is at most but in­terpretative, and admits of another in­terpretation quite contrary to the op­posite opinion, and that with a great deal of more reason and probabillity; For by Johns decreasing cannot be meant his Ministry, unless we shall suppose that Confession of Sinne, Repentance, and owning the Mesiah, as well as Baptism, was to decrease, then which there can be nothing more absurd; (to conclude) we think and say further then, with much more probabillity, that not Johns Ministry, but the great fame and Master-ship of John was to decrease as to the hav­ing disciples call'd by his name (the disciples of John) and the like, for after Christs publique enterance up­on [Page 32] his Ministry; as John did point and direct men to Christ as their chiefe leader; so they were after­wards taught by Christ to call no man Master, but soly to own him, and be called the disciples of Jesus (not of John,) And for this there is good reason to be given, but for the other, if there was no more reason then that it is uncertain, it were sufficient; but we further say; (to conclude Johns ministry, was to decrease and be made Null upon the appearance of Christ, as there is no reason to be plainly shewed from this Text, and as it is very unsafe to violate and reject a sacred duty upon so uncertain a ground as a private interpretation of a parti­cular text) that the Interpretation is for me and a stranger, and therefore deservedly to be cast out, and have no inheritance for the dispossessing of Johns Ministry, which we dismiss with this Argument.

Arg. 34 Those Duties that have been rati­fied and confirmed by many signal and weighty circumstances, ought not to be violated or rejected upon so slender a ground as the meer In­terpretation of a particular Text. But the Baptism and Ministry of John hath been so Ratified and confirmed, Ergo, the Baptism and Ministry of John ought not after so slight and careless a manner to be rejected and made void.

And as to the Commission of Christ, Mat. 28. we Answer.

If any shall suppose that thereby the Baptism and Ministry of John was made void. (1) That it doth not plainly appear from thence, but is at most but Interpretatively so there­fore unsafe to rely upon in the ruin of a plain part or Precept of the Gospel. (2) That the Commission aforesaid did not make void the Bap­tism and Ministry of John, for these Reasons,

[Page 34]1. It's not congruous to suppose that Christ should institute, and set up one part of the Gospel to Ener­vate and make void another part of it, which Johns Baptism and Mini­stry hath been proved to be.

2. It doth not infallibly appear that the Baptism given in the Com­mission of Christ, was different from that of Johns as to matter, form, and subject, which are the main parts of Baptism; and if there was some small difference in point of circumstance, it will not be sufficient to prepondrate and out-weigh a plain and clear duty; and there can no plain difference be made to appear betwixt the Baptism of John, and that given in our Savi­ours Commission, unless it be in the use of words, viz. In the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and this amounts to these three things.

1. The setting forth the Existency of the Trinity, that Three such were.

[Page 35]2. The capacity and dignity of the Trinity, they were to Baptize in their Names, which was a Witness or Testimony on the Ministers part, and a subscription on the Submitters part, to the preheminence of this holy Trinity, in opposition to the Instruction of any other, either as a Third Person to seclude any one of these, or as a fourth to be equal with them in their United Dignity.

3. The work and opperation they joyntly intended to be concern'd in; and more than this is no subject of Baptism bound to believe and ac­knowledge in or upon their Baptism: that is to say, The Being of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost: The Dignity of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; the work and opperation of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in carrying on the great design of the Gospel; and if these words were not used by John in the Act of Baptizing, yet the thing was set forth in his Ministry, and at [Page 36] the same time, while the Minister and Submitter were together; and there­fore we do affirm that John did in his Baptism and Ministry direct into the same Faith as the Apostles by their Commission were to Teach and Bap­tise into, (viz.) the Being, Dignity, and opperation of the Trinity: And no man can be certain that our Savi­our did injoyne more in his great Commission, or that the Apostles did make use of that very form of words in the Act of Baptising: The con­clusion then is, that for any thing that yet appears, the Baptism contained in the Commission was, and was to be the same in all points with the Baptism of John; and therefore from thence appears no certain ground of an Abrogation. Indeed our Saviour did do three things in reference to Johns Baptism by his great Commis­sion; (1) he confirm'd it by com­manding his Disciples to keep it up, and carry it on; (2) he adds per­fection [Page 37] and clearness to it by his great Authority, his short and plain In­struction about the design of it, which was to bring his followers to subscribe to the Doctrine of the Tri­nity in th [...]ir submission to it. (3) he did further extend it, by ordering of it into all the world, which John did not do; our Result is, that neither the words of John, I must decrease, nor the Commission of our Saviour to his Disciples to Baptize, doth fair­ly make Null the Baptism and Mini­stry of John: from whence we offer this Argument.

Arg. 35 That which is fairly and infallibly proved once to be Gods Ordinance, and Mans duty, ought not without a fair and infallible ground to be ac­counted Null and void.

But the Baptism and Ministration of John is fairly and infallibly proved to be Gods Ordinance, and mans duty, Ergo, it ought not without the like ground to be accounted Null and [Page 38] void; and if any shall still oppose what hath been contended for, I shall only state this question to be debated with them, and end this first point by two short Arguments.

Quest. Whether the Baptism command­ed by God, Administred by John, submitted to by Jesus, and after his Death owned and practised by his extraordinary Ministers, be put an end to or made Null.

Arg. 36 If the Baptism and Ministry of John was by the Holy Ghost reputed and owned to be the way of the Lord, after the Ascention of our Sa­viour, then 'tis in force still: but it was so, Ergo, Acts 18.25, 26.

Arg. 37 If Baptism with Water be not in force still, as well as other parts of Johns ministry, then it is somewhere exempted. But Baptism with Wa­ter is no where Exempted, Ergo.

And now let us see if we can find an Administrator. In this Enquiry after a Minister, we will propose Three things.

[Page 39]1. To state what a Minister is in his make and constitution.

2. What doth warrant him to Act or Perform the Work and Office of a Minister.

3. And then put it upon this fair Issue, viz. whether there be any un­der such circumstances in this Age, that Renders the Persons fit, and the Ministry warrantable.

Of these three Propositions in their Order: To the first of these,

1. We affirm that there is but two things necessary to the make or constitution of a Minister. (1) Abi­lity or Qualification to fit for it. (2) Authority or Commission from God to impower to the performance of it: The ability or qualification con­sists in two things; 1. understanding to know. 2. utterance to divulge of report those things that may answer the ends of a Ministry, in which re­spect there is these two things requi­site, 1. To be able to understand the divine Authority and truth of the holy [Page 40] Scriptures, (2) to understand and report the sence and mind of God contained in them, in all the weighty and necessary points of Religion; the reason of this is, because it's a receiv­ed truth that the holy Scriptures are able to make wise unto salvation, and therefore must contain all things es­sential thereunto, and ability to Mi­nister two things, will answer the end of a Ministry: and the truth is, these two things are the very basis of all Christianity in the world, and the de­nying or Removing of them is no less then the shaking of the very founda­tion and ground work of Christianity all over the earth; for take away the Divine Authority, and truth of the Scriptures, or the sence and mind of God in all necessary points contained in them, and then resolve us by what means we shall become Christians; the like dismal consequence follows upon the denyal of the qualification, for if none be able to understand and [Page 41] prove the divine Authority and truth of the Scripture, then is all truth lost at once; for who can tell whether it be the Alcaron, the Bible, the Leviathan, or some thing else. And if none be able to understand the sence and mind of God, contained in the Scriptures, in all weighty and necessary points, al­though the Scriptures be the truth, yet we are never the nearer, because they are Scaled up so as none can un­derstand them and teach them; And then it Roundly follows, that none can hear them, and believe them ac­cording to St. Pauls maxim, how shall they hear and believe without a Preacher, and if none can hear and be­lieve them, where then is Christiani­ty? it is all lost; and it must needs be a folly in men to make a do about Godliness and Christianity, when there is none able to make out any such thing; now upon admiting this Hypothesis to be true, (viz.) that Ability or Qualification is every [Page 42] where wanting in this Age, let us lay the consequents that follows there­upon altogether, and see how fright­fully they look upon us.

1. The truth and Divine Autho­tity of Scripture cannot be asserted and proved.

2. The sence and mind of God contained in them cannot be known.

3. Then the world is left without a sufficiency to defend truth against errour, and Satans party is the strong­est side, for they have sufficient amu­nition to charge their minds withall against Christianity, Goodness, and Vertue, but the Children of vertue have not any thing but the bare dictats of nature to help themselves.

4. Christianity is a false and groundless denomination, for there is none able to prove the Reality and good ground of any such thing.

5. There is no firm and standing rules of Religion more than the vari­able wits and tempers of men admits of.

[Page 43]6. No light nor salt for the world, but what results from the heart and invention of man.

7. No witness for God but what man shall see good with his own eyes, without the help of an infallible per­spective Glass, and none at all for Christ, for his name must be shut out of the world, because the dictates of nature doth not Preach him.

8. No ground to suffer for the Religion of the blessed Jesus, because we are not able to know whether there was such a man, or such a thing or no.

9. No External Motives to com­fort under afflictions, because no ground of an Immortality or life to come, which was only set forth and brought to light by that Ministration called the Gospel, which no man is able to understand and believe.

10. No such thing as true Faith or Church, for these are Fictions and fanciful dreams, that there is no [Page 44] ground for their being knowable, not so much as their very names.

11. No ground to look for, or expect Salvation hereafter, because no promise of it understood by any in this Age, nor is it Infallibly de­terminable whether that poor mean people that dare not swagger in Riotousness and Sin, or those jolly and jumping Boys that can do any thing that they are prompted to, or capable of, shall partake of it.

12. No dutiful care by vertue of any visible or known Precept over one anothers Souls, and what then, and whither then? whether to die like Beasts, and be no more, or to go to Heaven or to Hell is not determina­ble, because nothing speaks to the Resolution of this Question, touching a Life to come and place of Residence after Death, but a certain Book cal­led the Bible, which the Opinion op­posed saith, cannot be understood and taught but from such Premises [Page 45] and Conclusions, Good Lord deli­ver every sincere Soul. Amen.

And the like Absurdities are ready to break in upon us like a Flood, if that Principle be admitted: That though men are able to Teach and Instruct, yet there is no ground and warrant for them so to do.

For first, then may all men lay it down, because it is a groundless and vain thing, and the Devil and his Party may say to the most Pious, Painful, and ablest Teachers of Chri­stianity and Vertue, who hath requi­red this at your hands.

2. It renders all gifts, both of un­derstanding and utterance in the mat­ters of Religion and Christianity useless, for if there be no warrant for Working, there is no Reward, and then what motive or incouragement to induce to it.

3. No ground to witness against wickedness, to reprove or convince Men and Women for Sin, to teach [Page 46] Children to be Religious, or to bear up the Name of Christ in the world.

All that suffered for a Ministry or publick Witness, did foolishly, be­cause they had not the gift of Ton­gues, cannot work Miracles, want an immediate Commission, or an Ordi­nation by a Lineal Succession, neither of which is Essential to the make or Instalment of a Minister, of which we would discourse at large if it was convenient, and undertake to make good this proposition, viz. that the command of God upon Divine Re­cord, with the approbation, consent, and regular choice of the People, (meeting upon a person of a com­petent Ability) is sufficient for an In­stallment, where the four things be­fore mentioned are wanting. Now, if these two grand qualifications be granted, 1. That Ability to prove the Divine Authority of the Scrip­tures, 2. To understand and set forth the sence and mind of God contained [Page 47] in them in all weighty and necessary points) and be sufficient for the make and constitution of a Minister, then (where these are) may the ends of the Ministry be Answered in all these following particulars.

1. They may be able to convince Enemies.

2. To lay a good foundation for the Souls of men to build upon for life.

3. To Refute grand and funda­mental Errours.

4. To save the Souls of teachable and well disposed hearers.

5. To feed Gods houshold and build up his house.

6. To diffuse light so as to leave the obstinate without excuse and abi­lity to do these things, I think all will agree to be sufficient to answer the ends of the Ministrey, upon which Supposition, that where there is such ability or Qualifications, there is a true Minister in his make and Consti­tution; [Page 48] we inlarge no further upon that, but descend to the second pro­position, (viz.)

Quest. What doth warrant such a one to Act or perform the worke and office of a Minister.

Answ. Two things is requisite to a Mini­sters warrant for Administration, first the will of God requireing to do good according to his ability. Se­condly, The necessity and Regular choice of a people calling for it, who are to Judge of his ability, and their own necessity, and where the will of God requires the necessitys and regu­lar choise of the people, do call, let a man refuse at his own perril; but though a mans ability do fit, the will of God revealed doth warrant, yet if the people do not approve, consent & make a regular choise, the person fit­ed is free, not having power to im­pose, and the sin, if any be, must lye at the peoples doors. And this is the very case now depending in some [Page 49] places, Persons of good, and in others thoughts, of very valuable a­bilitys, are blamed and charged with sin for not improving their Talents, when all this while the sault is in the people, who did never Regularly and solemnly (as the Nature of the thing required) call them forth to that Im­ployment, but because this may be thought a digression, we return to our Task, and undertake to prove a war­rantableness for an improvement of ability from these considerations.

Cons. 1 That the express word of God left us upon divine record, doth require all persons in all times even till Christ comes, and in respect to all things, to improve their Talents or abilitys: Whatsoever thou findest in thy hand to do, do it with all thy might: Oc­cupy till I come, and as every man hath received the gift, so let him ad­minister as a good Steward, and to serve God with all our might, is a branch of the Moral Law, which is [Page 50] not only strongly binding, but perpe­tual, Eccl. 9.10. Luk. 19.13. 1 Pet. 4.10, 11.

Cons. 2 That this Requirement is of equal force and validity with an immediate Commission on Earth, or a voice from Heaven, 2 Pet. 1.18.19, 20.

Cons. 3 That there is an Apostolical Tol­leration for it, 1 Cor. 14.31.

Cons. 4 That the necessities of the Church and of the world doth call aloud for it, Luk. 10.2.

Cons. 5 That there is a great usefulness and conveniency in it for light and salt to the world, and witness for God, fruit every man ought to bear that is capable, Eph. 4.29.

Cons. 6 That whosoever doth well teach the least Commandment, shall be re­warded for it, Mat. 5.19.

Cons. 7 That the succession of the Ministry revolves upon ordinary abilities by command and special direction, 2 Tim. 2.2.

Cons. 8 That all Doctrinal points are al­ready [Page 51] determined. So that there needs no new Truths nor Miracles to confirm them, 1 Cor. 3.11. Acts 20.27.

Cons. 9 That those who have imbraced this good old Doctrine of Christ and the Apostles, they ought so to dilate and extend it, as may render it most vi­sible to the world, and this is a lasting duty; Let your light so shine, &c. Mat. 5.16.

Cons. 10 That ordinary Abilities, where faithfully mannaged, may warrantably make up breaches, and restore paths to dwell in, Esa. 58.12.

Cons. 11 If gifts and abilities are not assig­ned for common benefit, they are in vain,2 Cor. 6.1. and it reflects carelesness upon the blessed God, in not assigning of them for the proper use and end when there was great need of it.

Cons. 12 That Ordination is not Essential to the make of a Minister, for they ought to be so before it, or else are unfit to receive it, and some have [Page 52] Ministred before it with good suc­cess and blessing, as John Baptist, the Apostle St. Paul, Apollo, and the scat­tered Saints upon the Persecution of Steven.

Cons. 13 There is good President to Mini­ster where there is neither Miracle nor Tongues, nor Commission exten­ding further then their own Country, even from our great Baptist himself, who wrought no miracles, spake not with Tongues, and whose Com­mission carried him not to the gentle world; and to imagine if a man can­not speak Syriack and Caldea, that therefore he may not do what good he can with his Mother-Tongue; and if he be not fit to go Embassador into Forreign parts, he may not serve his Country at home according to his ability, is not only inconvenient and dangerous, but indeed against Na­ture it self.

Cons. 14 That an ordinary ability may make a good Minister,☞ if he doth no more [Page 53] then such abilities renders him fairly able to perform. See 1 Tim. 4.6. And now we shall take leave to Ar­gue a little upon the Premises.

Arg. 1 If none be able to serve God as Ministers, then are none able to teach others to serve God as Ser­vants or Subjects (no not their own Children) but some have ability to teach others to serve God as ser­vants, Ergo.

Arg. 2 If some men are able to render the principal parts of the Gospel intel­ligible and fit for belief, such as the Being, Nature, and Attributes of God, the Person, Offices, and Ex­cellencies of Christ, the Resurrection of the Body, Eternal Judgment, and the life to come, what imaginable reason can be given why they should not have ability to render the less principal parts of it intelligible, and fit for practise, such as Baptism, the Supper of the Lord, and the like; seeing there is the same plain Rule for [Page 54] the one, as for the other; the one as easie to be understood and unsolded as the other, and no more still re­quired for the one, then for the other: The Argument from hence will be good, that the same pains taken, the same methods used that inables for the greater, will undoubtedly do so for the lesser.

Arg. 3 If some men are not able to un­derstand and unfold the Misteries and truths of the Gospel in all necessary and most weighty points,Major. then is all the Christian world deceived in mat­ters of the highest weight and consi­deration, for all the Christian world agrees, that it is de facto true: And therefore they believe and profess; but certainly all the Christian world is not deceived,Minor. and consequently like to perish; the conclusion then is that such abilitys are or have lately been, & have a good warrant for their use and exercise, which we make good as followeth.

Arg. 4 If men may not imploy their strength and abilitys in the Service of God, without the gift of Tongues, miracles and Immediate commission, or an ordination by Lineal succession, then is not only the Moral Law made void, which binds men to serve God according to strength and ability, but also the best gifts and abilitys of men are rendered useless and insignificant in matters of the highest importance, (viz.) the service of God and the Souls of men: upon which we argue, that principle which undermines and makes void the designe of the Moral Law,Major. and renders the best and great­est abilitys of men useless and insig­nificant in the matters of Religion, is absurd and dangerous not to be re­ceived.

But that principle that denys Au­thorty to men to be Ministers,Minor. doth so, Ergo.

Arg. 5 If it be lawful and warrantable for men to improve their highest strainsMajor. [Page 56] of knowledge and skill for the good of others in things civil and mechani­cal, then it is lawful and warrantable for men to do so in things Celestial and Evangelical; if I may teach a man to learn his trade, to buy his clothes, to get his living, to build and furnish a house for his convenien­cy of Temporal life, doutless I may, if able, teach men to know Christ, to serve God and to get Salvation.

Minor.But it is lawfull and warrantable for men to improve the highest strains of knowledge and skill in matters civil and mechanical, Ergo.

Arg. 6 If it be not lawful and warrant­able for men to improve their high­est strains o [...] knowledge and skill in heavenly and Spiritual things,Major. Then are th [...]y under no obligation to im­prove their Talents.

MinorBut men are under an obligation to improve their Talents, Ergo.

Arg. 7 If men are under no obligation to improve their Talents in Spiritual [Page 57] things, then they are under no obli­gation to serve God, and the Souls of their Neighbours.

But they are bound to do both, according to power and opportunity, Ergo.

Arg. 8 If they are not bound to serve God and the Souls of others according to power and opportunity.

Then it is no sin to neglect both; but it is a sin to neglect both, Ergo.

Arg. 9 If it be no sin not to serve God and men according to power and oppor­tunity, then are not men Accountable for it.

But men are accountable for it, Ergo.

Arg. 10 If men are not accountable for the none service of God, and men accord­ing as aforesaid.

Then they shall not be condemned for it; but they shall be condemned for it, Ergo, Mat. 25.41, 42, 43, 44.

Arg. 11 That which men have the express [Page 58] word of God requiring, they have good Authority to perform.

1 Pet. 4.10.But the express word of God re­quires men to minister that have abi­lity, Ergo, they have good Authority to perform it, Eccl. 9.10. Luk. 19.13.

Arg. 12 That which is good in its own na­ture,Major. men have good Authority to perform, Phil. 4.8, 9.

Minor.But to Minister in the things of God is good in it's own Nature, ergo.

Arg. 13 That which is useful, profitable, and beneficial to others,Major. men have good Authority to perform.

But to Minister in the things of God, is useful, profitable, and bene­ficial to others, Ergo, Acts 18.27.

Arg. 14 What is most effectual for the sup­pressing of Sin,Major. men have good Au­thority to perform.

Minor.But to Minister is most effectual to suppress Sin, Ergo.

Arg. 15 That which tends to advance Christ,Major. and comfort his Church, men have good Authority to perform.

But to Minister,Minor. tends most there­to, Ergo.

Arg. 16 That which the Example of the best Ages leads to,Major men have good Authority to perform, Can. 1.8. Phil. 4.9.

But to Minister the things of God,Minor. the example of the best Ages leads to, Ergo.

Arg. 17 That which tends to season, and keep the world from stinking,Major. men have good Authority to perform.

But a Ministry tends thereto, ergo, Minor. Mat. 5.13.

Arg. 18 That which is most conducable to keep up the Rules of Religion,Major. men have good Authority to perform.

But a Ministry is most conducable thereto, Ergo, Luk. 22.32.Minor.

Arg. 19 That which keeps the world from an universal detriment by a total E­clips,Major. men have good Authority to perform.

But a Ministry doth so, Ergo, Minor. Psal. 43.3. Rom. 2.19. chap. 13.12.

Arg. 20 That which most tends to make men the Servants of God,Major. men have good Authority to perform.

Minor.But a Ministry most tends thereto, Ergo, 1 Thes. 1.9.

Arg. 21 If to teach the least Command­ments of God be required and re­wardable,Major. men have good Authority to perform it.

Minor.But to teach the least Command­ments of God is so, Ergo, Mat. 5.19.

Arg. 22 Where men have ability to exhort they have good authority to perform, Heb. 3.12.

Minor.But men have ability to exhort, Ergo.

Arg. 23 Where men have ability to feed the Church,Major. they have good autho­rity to perform.

Minor.But men have so, Ergo, Mat. 24.45, 46. Acts 20.25.

Arg. 24 If men have ability to build on the most holy Faith,Major. they have a good Authority to perform, Jud. 20.

Arg. 25 If men have ability to use the [Page 61] Word of God for the best advantage against Satan, they have a good Au­thority to perform, Eph. 6.17.

Arg. 26 If men have ability to contend for the Faith, they have a good Autho­rity to perform, Jude vers. 3.

Arg. 27 If men have ability to Prophesie, they have a good Authority to per­form, 1 Cor. 14.31. All may Prophesie, if in order, and not in confusion.

Arg. 28 If men can pluck fire-brands out of the fire, there is good warrant to perform, Jude 23. vers.

Arg. 29 If men can separate the pretious from the vile, there is good warrant to perform, Jer. 15.19.

Arg. 30 If men can stand in Gods Counsel, there is good warrant to minister, Jer. 23.21.22.

Arg. 31 If men can strengthen under bur­thens by a ministry, there is good warrant to perform, Gal. 6.2.

Arg. 32 If men can watch over one another, there is good warrant to teach and In­struct, for that is the very design of watchfulness.

Arg. 33 If men can give a Reason of the hope that is in them, there is good warrant to perform, 1 Pet. 3.15.

Arg. 34 If Women have Authority to Mi­nister according to ability and occasi­on, (though not in the Church, or to Usurp) then men have upon the same ground. But Women have, Ergo, Tit. 2.3, 4. Acts 18.26.

Arg. 35 It a man shall do that which an or­dinary ability is capable of, it is a suf­ficient qualification to make him a good minister, 1 Tim. 4 6.

Arg. 36 If men have a good Authority to minister things greater than Baptism,Major. and Equivolent to Baptism, Then they have a good Authority to mini­ster that.

Minor.But they have a good Authority to minister things greater and equivo­lent, Ergo, they have a good Autho­rity to minister that.

If they have not as good Authority to Administer Baptism as things greater and Equivolent.

Then they are somewhere exem­pted from it.

But they are no where exempted from it, Ergo.

And if the Baptism, and the mini­stry of it be out of date, let it be shewed plainly, for our minor Pro­position calls for it, being an Uni­versal Negative.

The conclusion is, if men are able to teach the Nature, manner, and end of Baptism, and minister the same, they have as good Authority to do it as the other Duties already men­tioned.

Thus having made good a war­ranty grounded upon ability for men to Minister; we come next to the Third proposition, (viz.) to put it upon a fair Issue, whether there be any in this Age whose ability Ren­ders their persons fit, and their Mini­stry warrantable.

In answer to this inquiry, I shall offer but 3 things, because I would [Page 64] not have this Tract grow bigger than a Pocket companion.

1. If there be no able and true Mi­nisters in this Age, then there is no Right or true Believers, because the faith of the Age is grounded upon a Ministry delivered either written or verbal.

2. That this Age affords men as knowing and well vers'd both in Scripture and Philosophy as any by past Ages (men Marvelously inspired only excepted) which might easily be made out by Instances, if there was convenient Room to be afforded.

3. If any shall deny that any per­sons in this Age have ability so to fit them to be Ministers, as renders their ministry warrantable, let them set forth their denial, and they shall be undertaken.

And so we come to the Third ge­neral head (viz) to affirme that the Son of God, our blessed Saviour and [Page 65] Redeemer was before or had a preex­sistency to his being Conceived of the Virgin, which we shall be but very short in: for the proof of which, we levy these following Arguments.

Arg. 1 If our blessed Saviour was truly the first born of every Creature,Major. then he had a Pre-existency to his be­ing conceived of the Virgin.

But he was truly the first born of every Creature, Ergo, Minor. he had a Pre-existency, Coll. 1.15. Heb. 1.6.

Arg. 2 If the Son of God our blessed Lord and Saviour had a hand in making of the World;Major. then he had a Pre-exi­stency to the Virgins Conception.

But the Son of God our blessed Lord and Saviour had a hand in the Creation of the World, Ergo, Minor. he had a Pre-existency, John 1.10. Coll. 1.16.17. Heb. 2.10.

Arg. 3 If our Lord Christ was before John Baptist not only in preferency but exsistency.Major.

Then he had a Pre-existency to theMinor. [Page 66] Virgins conception.John. 1.30. But our Lord Christ was before John Baptist not only in preferency, but exsistency, Ergo, he had a Pre-exsistency to the Virgins Conception.

Arg. 4 If our Lord and Saviour had no begining of dayes in some true sence and considerable respect; Then he had a Pre-exsistancy to the Virgins Conception.

Heb. 1.3.But our Lord and Saviour had no beginnings of days in some true sence and considerable respect, Ergo, he had a Pre-exsistency.

Arg. 5 If Christ went and preached with­in the Compass of the Age and dayes of Noah, Major. then he had a Pre-existency to the Virgins conception.

Minor.According to that known maxim, Essence alwayes preceeds operation: But Christ went and Preached with­in the compass of the Age and days of Noah, 1 Pet. 3.18.19.20. Ergo, he had a Pre-existency to the Virgins conception.

Arg. 6 If Christ was the Root of David, Major. then he had a Pre-existency to the Virgins conception.

But Christ was the Root of Da­vid, Ergo, Revel. 22.16.Minor.

Arg. 7 If Christ was before Abraham, then he had a Pre-existency to the Virgins Conception.Major.

But Christ was before Abraham, Minor. Ergo, John 8.58.

Arg. 8 If Christ was High and Rich be­fore he became Low and Poor,Major. then he had a Pre-existency to the Virgins Conception.

But Christ was High and Rich be­fore he became low and poor, Ergo, Minor. 2 Cor. 8.9. Phil. 2.6.7.

Arg. 9 If Christ was not before conceived of the Virgin,Major. then was the glory of the Creation, (viz. Angels and men) left a headless Creation, and in com­pleat till after the Virgin Mary, 1 Cor. 11.3. 2 Col. 10.

But the Creation was not left headless and incompleat, Ergo, Minor. [Page 68] Christ the Head of it was before.

Arg. 10 If Christ was not till conceived of the Virgin,Major. then the world was with­out a Mediator for the space of Four Thousand Years, or 42 Generations (the consequence of this Hypothesis, we want both time and room to dis­course, but at the first look of it, it bespeaks great caution and pause.)

But methinks a poor sinful world should not be without a Mediator so long a time,Minor. Ergo, the great Media­tor of the New Covenant did Exist before.

Arg. 11 If there was a Promise made in him,Major. by him, or to him, before the world began, Then he had a Pre­existency to the Virgins Conception.

But there was a Promise made in him,Minor. by him, or to him, before the World began, Ergo, 1 Tit. 2. 2 Cor. 1.20.

Arg. 12 If the Son of God be the Person meant by Solomon, Maj. Prov. 8.22.23. That was set up from everlasting, be­fore [Page 69] the world was; then he had a Pre-existency to the Virgins Con­ception.

But the Son of God is the Person there meant by Solomon, Ergo. Minor.

Arg. 13 If the Angel of Gods Presence, and great Michael, Major. (so frequently spoken of in the holy Scriptures (that is set forth to be the Prince of the Jews, and head of Angels) Dan. 10.21. Prov. 12.7. Be meant of Christ the Son of God, then he had a Pre-existency to the Virgins Conception.

But by the great Michael aforesaid is meant Christ the Son of God, ergo, Minor. he had a Pre-existency to the Virgins Conception.

Arg. 14 If the Children of Israel in their Journy through the Wilderness,Major. in the days of Moses, did both partake of him, and provoke him, then he had a Pre-existency to his Being con­ceived of the Virgin.

But the Children of Israel did then both partake of him,Minor. and provoke [Page 70] him, Ergo, 1 Cor. 10.4.10.

Arg. 15 If Christ had a Glory with the Fa­ther before the World began, then he had a Pre-existency to the Virgins Conception.

Joh. 17.5.But he had a Glory with the Fa­ther before the world began, Ergo, he had a Pre-existency. More might be said, but this shall serve.