Christianismus redivivus Christndom both un-christ'ned and new-christ'ned, or, that good old way of dipping and in-churching of men and women after faith and repentance professed, commonly (but not properly) called Anabaptism, vindicated ... : in five or six several systems containing a general answer ... : not onely a publick disputation for infant baptism managed by many ministers before thousands of people against this author ... : but also Mr. Baxters Scripture proofs are proved Scriptureless ... / by Samuel Fisher ...

Disproof.

Sirs, let me ask you two questions, first are you sure these are infants indeed? Secondly, are you sure they were infants of believers of whom Christ saies, who∣ever offends one of these little ones that believe in me? for my part if there were any probability that he spake of little ones literally taken at all, as I know none there is, yet I am sure there is none that they were the little ones of believers he then spake of, in contradistinction to the infants of unbelievers; for tis not specified either one way or other, and is most probable that the child he occasionally called to him might be some unbelievers child, or other, the number of believers, where e're he came, being few, and not comparable to them that believed not, but what e're that child was yet this is much more then probable, that by the term these lit••le ones in v. 6. he means not infants but his Disciples, whom, having first perswaded them to become such as that little one, or as little children in such things as are gener∣ally found in them, viz. plainness of spirit, humbleness, innocency, freedome from malice, in which respects David saies Psal. 131.2. my soul is as a weaned child, from that Analogy that was and ought to be between little ones and them, he here bespeaks (as it was very ordinary for him to do) under the title of [these lit∣tle ones] besides the plurall number he speaks in implies he spake of such of whom there was a plurallity then present, for saith he these little ones, pointing as it were to more then one, but there was but one little one then in the midst of them of whom when Christ speaks, he speaks, in the singular, saying this little child: as to the term 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which is used in the third verse, whence you argue that they were children in age spoken of by our Savior, by which you seem much to strengh∣then your selves in your Dabling of Infants foreheads, I must tell you that of the two you more marre than make your matter, by so much as mentioning of it in this case, for first 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 though by some philosophicall or poeticall license it may possibly be used to signify [Infantem] some youngling of three or four years old, as (though beginning to prattle) can scarcely speak plain, yet cannot so much as poetically, much less properly signifie Infantissimum, such a one day old infant as you talk of, nor such a six dayes old suckling as you sprinkle, but properly it ex∣presses at least one capable of erudition, and how beit it hath not its derivation from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as setting the cart before the horse, I say not ungraciously, for many a gracious man is no good Grecian, but ungraecianly you greek it out, yet 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hath its derivation from it, for to say the truth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is the primitive of the two, and though 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be the diminutive of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, puer, which is the primitive to them both, yet this is enough to shew that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may be used, and yet not infancy meant by it neither, but childhood, which is a distinct age from the other, for there's difference between Infantiam and pueritiam, as inter ado∣lescentiam & inventutem, all which have their severall and proper periods, yea in truth it signifies child-ship, at least capable to be taught, not such meer babe∣ship as you baptize.

Secondly if it did, yet whats that to your present purpose, which is to prove by the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the third, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the fourth verse, that Christ means the ve∣ry same viz. little ones literally taken in the sixth? as much as if you had said nothing at all, for verily as it follows not that he doth, so its evident enough that he doth not mean the very same in this phrase, verse six, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 whom he means in the third by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: for who doubts on't but that by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the third verse, natural little children are to be understood, the intent of Christ there, being to shew how his disciples must be like them, if ever they enter into heaven? but in verse six owning his disciples, to whom he tells that they must be such, as already such in some measure as they should be, he speaks of them under that very same name and notion; and this was no unusual term for Christ to denominate disciples, nor yet for them to denominate one another by; for be∣sides that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 it self is the title by which, though not here, yet elsewhere all believers and new converts to the truth are often stiled by, yea and your word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, i. e. sucklings too, which you make so much of a little below, yea and the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which is the very diminutive of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a child, which word you make such a matter of when you find it Acts 2.36. in proof of all which consult Iohn 21.35. Gal. 19. 1 Iohn 2.1.12, 13.18.28.3.7.18.4: 4. also 1 Pet. 2.2. even this very phrase that is here used viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is also used by Christ himself to his disciples Mat. 18.42. and a place where∣in as no little infant (as here) was apparently present, so compare it with the two foregoing verses, in which the same, who are call'd little ones and disciples, ver. 42. are stiled Prophets, Righteous men, and I'le say you sell your selves to stark so••tishness, if you expound it of any other then of such, as are (from Disco their having learn'd the truth, as infants yet have not) stiled Christs Scholars or Disciples.

But above all, the most undoubted reason of all the rest, which to me doth, and may to any one most plainly clear it, that he means not infants is even this ve∣ry expression, viz. [which believe in me] whereby he denotes and denominates his disciples distinctly enough from all little infants, who are in no wise capable to do that he here ascribes to the other, i. e. to believe in Christ, for this infants being utterly uncapable to do, it shews plainly that he means not them: whereas Mr. Willcock, whose argument this was, and whose urging it ore again in print if this be, it shall not trouble my conscience, if it do not his own, whereas he I say argues thus, viz. [These little ones which believe in me] therefore infants do believe, I argue quite contrary from the same Scripture thus, viz. these of whom Christ speaks Mat. 18.6. did believe, therefore they could not be infants, who cannot possibly believe.

And if you ask me how I prove it that infants cannot believe, I might answer out of the mouth of Paul, Rom. 18.14. how can they believe on him of whom they have not heard? but sith you have a reply to this, p. 18 Ile onely hint that here, and handle it further, as I have occasion given me to do by your answe∣ring it, as our objection, when I come to review your review, and at present prove the matter out of Mr. Willcocks own mouth, that infants cannot believe, for to believe is to act faith, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 credere (as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Docere 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 legere, &c,) are speeches that point at the act and not the Habit or faculty, denoting actum secun∣dum, non primum: This Mr. Willcock knows as well as I, yet the same Mr. Willcock, page 8. asserts as plainly and truely, so clearly to the contra∣diction of himself in this place, that infants have not the exercise and fruit of faith, have it not in actu secundo &c. but I spare him, in hope that he will con∣sider it of himself, verbum sat sapienti: but suppose it were meant of infants li∣terally; yet however it could be but a Prosopopeia, i. e. a figure whereby that is attributed to certain creatures, as done by them, which yet is neither really done, nor so much as capable to be done by them at all, by which figure that is some∣times attributed not only to infants, but even to but sensible and bruit, and some∣times

to insensible things, which can properly be done by none possibly but men at years, as not onely David is said to be made to hope in God while he hung upon the breasts, because God indeed was, even then the God that did defend him, yea as well in as from his mothers womb, though he was never sensible of, nor acquainted with it, so as to hope it in the womb, but the whole creation also figuratively, Rom. 8.19, 20, 21, 22. is said to groan, wait, hope, desire, expect deliverance, because it stands in need of it, from the bondage of corruption, and God also hath determined the time wherein by Christ to redeem it, though many creatures under the curse are no more sensible of it, or capable to groan, then the fruitless fig tree Christ cursed, and the Ox, Ass, Horse, Sheep, and sensible creatures that may groan are capable to hope for, and expect such a glorious day as shall once come to the creation: thus figuratively indeed infants may be said to believe on Christ because they have need of his protection, and all the help they then have comes from him also, though in infancy they knew it not, nor him, so as actually to hope and trust in him for it, or properly to believe in his name, even more then in∣animate creatures in the other case, this is the first way, whereby you profess to prove infants of believing parent onely (if you speak to your proposed purpose) to have faith, which how weak it is the weakest eye may discern it, that is not disposed to be blind, and the second is like unto it, which is as followeth, by two arguments of inconsequence.