which are no Proofs. St. Paul alledges this Prophefie to prove, that the Infidelity of the Jews, and that Offence they fhould take at Chrift, was foretold in Scripture; which answers that Objection against his being the Meffias, that the great Body of Ifrael, to whom the Meffias was peculiarly promifed, fhould reject him when he came; which had it not been foretold, had been a very unanswerable prejudice; and yet if Chrift be not the Prophets tumbling Stone, this Prophefie does not foretel it. St. Peter urges this Prophefie to prove, that Chrift is the Foundation, Corner Stone, Elect, and Precious, on which the Church was to be built; but he abuses us also with a fham Froof, if this Prophefie were not meant of Christ. And thus thefe men, rather than they will allow the Scripture proofs, that Chrift is God, destroy all the Old Testament proofs of the Truth of Christianity; and I am afraid they are able to give us no good proofs of Chriftianity without them; and yet if fuch Texts as these must pass only for Accommodations and Allufions, I know not where they will find any proofs. St. John curiously obferves the feveral Circumstances of our Saviour's Death,and fhows that they were the Accomplishment of ancient Prophefies; and among others, that of piercing his fide with the Souldier's Spear, which was foretold by the Pro12 Zech.10. phet Zechary, They shall look on me whom they have pierced, which is confeffed to be spoken of God; and here he tells us again, That the words in the Prophet 19 John 37. are not by St. John interpreted of Christ, but accommodated to Chrift and his Sufferings. And thus, as faft as he can, one after another, he accommodates away all the proofs of Chriftianity: for we may as well prove the Gospel out of Homer, by accommodating

Page 65.

Homer's

Homer's Words and Phrases to it, and turning it into an Homerical Poem, as we know has been done, as prove it by accommodating the Phrafes and Lan guage of the Old Teftament to it, which were never intended to fignifie any fuch thing; this I think is to ridicule and prophane both the Old and New Te ftament, and to overthrow the Authority of both.

But I am quite tired with this Work, and therefore fhall pafs over his other Old Testament proofs; for what can we fay to convince thefe men, that fuch Old Teftament Texts speak of Chrift, who will not believe the Apostles themselves? And to conclude this I fhall only give you a Specimen, how they deal with the New Teftament allo, in two or three Inftan

ces.

I fhall begin with the Form of Baptifm; Go ye 28 Matth.19 therefore and teach all Nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. All the Fathers have made this an Argument, that, Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft are One God, becaufe we are baptized in their Name,and we muft not be baptized in the Name of any Creature; for to be baptized in their Name, fignifies to be devoted and confècrated by a Sacred and Religious Rite to the Faith, Worship, and Obedience of Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft; and it is Idolatry to joyn Creatures with God in fo folemn an Act of Religion; in the fame Act whereby we give up our felves to God, to give up our felves to Creatures, in the fame Form of words, without making any other difference between them, but the Order of Perfons.

And it is to no purpose to difpute, What is meant by baptizing in the Name, for whatever that be, it fignifies the very fame to be baptized in the Name of

E e

the

Page 77.

the Father, and to be baptized in the Name of the Son, and in the Name of the Holy Ghost; our Saviour makes no diftinction, and we must make none; and if Father, Son, and Holy Ghost be not one God, this Form of Baptifin destroys the diftinction between God and Creatures,and devotes us as intirely to Creatures as to God.

We must confider Baptifm, as the Sacrament of our Initiation into the Chriftian Religion, and our Admiffion into the Gospel Covenant, and therefore the Perfons in whofe Name we are baptized is that God, who receives us into Covenant, and to whofe Worship and Obedience we confecrate our felves. Our Hiftorian fays, That to be baptized in the Name of a Perfon or Perfons, is a Rite by which one delivers himfelf to the Inftitution, Inftruction, and Obedience of Such Perfon or Perfons: fo that to be baptized in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is to profess to be led or guided by them, or (as Grotius expreffes this matter) 'tis to declare we will admit of no other thing, as a part of our Religion, but what proceeds from thefe, that is, nothing but what is commanded by God or the Father, and has been delivered by his Son, the Lord Christ, and confirmed externally by Miracles, and internally with the Witneß and Teftimony of the Spirit, that is by the Power and Inspiration of God.

This is a very falfe Account of Grotius, and therefore I fhall confider it, as his own. Now I readily grant, that Baptifm does include our Profeffion of believing the Gospel, and making that the fole Rule of our Faith and Worfhip; those who are baptized do own, as Grotius fpeaks, tres dogmatis fui Audiores, Three Authors of their Doctrine or Religion, Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft; but then Baptifm be

ing a Religious Rite, it is a Religious Profeffion of this, a Religious devoting our felves to them, and therefore we give up our felves to their Inftitution and Guidance, not as to Creatures, but as to God, who is both the Author, and the Object of our Faith and Worship. No man muft religiously confecrate himself to a Creature, for that is Idolatry: even among the Pagans, their Myfteries terminated on their Gods, and they were initiated by them into the Worship of that God, whofe Mysteries they were; and it was never known yet, that men devoted themfelves to the Inftitution and Guidance of any Human Doctors or Masters by Religious Ceremonies..

Now if Baptifm be a Religious Rite, God and Creatures can never be made the joynt Object of Religion, and therefore the Son and the Holy Ghoft, must be One God with the Father. I defire to know what is meant by being baptized in the Name of the Father Is it only to take him for our Inftructor and Guide? or is it to worship and obey him for our God? And why then do not the fame words in the fame Religious Act fignifie the fame thing, when applied to the Son and Holy Ghoft, as they do, when applied to the Father? Let them fhow me any one Inftance in Scripture, where a Creature is joyned with God in any Act of Worship, much less in the Fundamental Contract of Worship (if I may so speak) fo wherein we devote and confecrate our felves to God.

Our Author with his ufual Affurance adds; 'Tis in vain, not to fay ridiculously pretended, that a Perfon or Thing is God, because we are baptized into it, or in the Name of it; for then Moles and John Baptist alfo would be Gods: Our Fathers were zed unto Mofes unto what then were you

E e 2

all baptibaptized ? c.10.1, 2

and

I

19 A&$ 3.

6 Rom.

3. 3 Gal.27.

and they faid anto John's Baptifm. That is faith the generality of Interpreters) unto John, and the Doarine by him delivered.

But in the first place he mif-reprefents the Argument, which is, That the Son, and Holy Ghoft are God, becaufe we are baptized in their Name, as we are in the Name of the Father; and together with him; in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; and I confess, he had answered this Argument, could he have shown us, that the Jews were baptized in the Name of God, and in the Name of Mofes, for that had joyned Mofes with God, as our Saviour joyns the Son and the Holy Ghoft with the Father in the Form of Baptifm.

But he is fo far front doing this, that in the next place I observe, that the Jews never were literally baptized in the Name of Mofes, or in the Name of John, as Chriftians are by our Saviours Institution in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Mofes did not Baptize the Jews at all, much lefs in his own Name,though St. Paul obferves, that they had a kind of Mystical Baptifm under Mofes in the Cloud, and in the Sea.

And therefore it is plain, that to baptize into Mofes is a figurative and allufive Expreffion, and does not, and cannot fignifie, that they were baptized in the Name of Mofes, because it is not true; for though we should grant, as he argues, that to be baptized into Chrift, and baptized in the Name of Christ, fignifies the fame thing, when men are litterally baprized in the Name of Chrift, yet it is a demonftration, that to be baptized into Mofes, and baptized in the Name of Mofes, cannot fignifie the fame thing; because those who were myftically baptized into Mofes,