whom were appointed Matt. x. 1-5, and the other 70, Luke x. 1, beheld the Lord as he ascended, and a cloud recieved him out of their sight. These returning to Jerusalem with 39 others, began a prayer meeting which continued to the Pentecost. Acts i. 14. During this 8 days meeting we find something like a church in embryo; these 120 disciples having all been baptized by John the Baptist, Acts i. 21, 22, had their names registered, Acts i. 15, and by a vote of that body, numbered Matthias among the twelve. Acts i. 26.

In this unfinished state their church rested till the next blessed morning, when their king, from the throne of his glory, poured upon them the promise of the Father, not only to sanction what they had done, but to guide them in completing their organization. They were soon made the instruments of converting 3000 Jews, devout men,(not infants,) and before the day was past they had a church of 3120 baptized believers. It is thus evident that the God of heaven did set up his kingdom (not in the days of Moses or Abraham, but) in the days of the Caesars, and gave it to the saints of the Most High. Dan. vii. 18. From this time there were added to this church, daily, such as should be saved. Acts ii. 47. It does not appear that the 500 brethren, 1 Cor. xv. 6, and the multitude of others who had been baptized from time to time, were at first constituted members of this church; but it is probable they were brought in among the daily additions. Acts ii. 47. At Acts vi. 5, 6, this church appoints her deacons; and this is the first place where the Bible speaks of such a class of officers; and a solid reason for which is, that before the church at Jerusalem, there was no church of God for deacons to officiate in. And, it is also evident that this church remained for some time the alone organization of the kind; for when Paul was converted and baptized, at Damascus, he traveled to Jerusalem to join himself to the church. But this

cautious body would not receive him on the relation of his own experience, till they had full testimony from the brethren that he was truly converted, Acts ix. 26, 27; and there is no mention made of any other church until after the disciples were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen. Acts xi. 19. But then the blood of the martyrs became the seed of the church, and by divine appointment, Matt. xxviii. 19, 20, churches were planted in many places.

"As to his kingdom, he took possession. when the Lord said unto him, Sit thou on my right hand. Christ, as the Son of God, was ever at God's right hand, equal to him in might and majesty; but, as man, was exalted to honor, not before his glorious ascension. Acts ii. 34: Eph. i. 20."-Dr. Clark's Analysis of 110th Psalm.

"After, the death of Jesus, a great number of his disciples collected at Jerusalem, celebrated there together, and in his name, the feast of Pentecost, and thus formed the first community of Christians which had taken place." Villers, on the Reformation, page

174.

"Now, indeed, was formed a community of the disciples which was called a church.”—Dr. Campbell's Lectures on Ecclesiastical History. Lec. 2.

"Our Savior, first speaking of it, mentions it as that which then was not, but afterwards was to be, when he spake to Peter, And upon this rock I will build my church. But, when he ascended into heaven, and the Holy Spirit came down; when Peter was made an instrument of the conversion of 3000 souls, which were added to the former disciples, then there was a church. For, after that, we read, the Lord added to the church daily."-Dr. Piersons, on the Creed.

The Jewish Church and Church of God not one and the same.

WM. T. HAMILTON says, "The sameness of the church under the Old Testament and the New Testament economy is a vital point, it is indeed the turning point of the whole controversy."-Essay on Baptism, p. 36.

Mr. SAWYER asserts their identity on pp, 12, 13, 14, 15; but this assertion is not only a logical but a theological error. However this question may be treated in this age, it is evident that Christ and the apostles never did attempt to prove Judaism and Christianity to be one. The question before us is not can we find a society which resembles the Jews or Mahomedans? but is the Jewish church and the church of God the same?

1. The Jewish church was a type of the church of God. "Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service and a worldly sanctuary, which stood only in meats and drinks and divers washings, and carnal ordinances imposed on them until the time of reformation."-Heb. ix. 1-10. "For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things," &c.-Heb. x. 1. 1. "There were typical persons, as Adam, Abel, Enoch, Abraham, &c. 2. Typical places, as Canaan, Zion, the Temple, &c. 3. Typical classes of persons, as Israelites, &c. 4. Typical utensils, as the Ark, Shew Bread, Candlesticks, &c. 5. Typical offerings. 6. Typical seasons. 7. Typical purifications, &c." Browne's Bible Dictionary.

"I would understand it not merely as if he had said that this similitude of comparison may be properly used in this present time, as to the temple of Jerusalem, which has its holy of holies, as the Mosaic

tabernacle had; but that the constitution before described was a figurative representation of the Christian Dispensation."-Doddridge's Expos. Heb. ix. 9. "That nation was a typical nation. There was then, literally, a land that was the dwelling place of God, which was a type of heaven, the true dwelling place of God, and an external city of God, which was a type of the spiritual city of God, and an external temple of God, which was a type of his spiritual temple. So there was an external people and family of God, by carnal generation, which was a type of his spiritual progeny; and the covenant by which they were made a people of God, was a type of the covenant of grace."-President Edward's inquiry into the qualifications for communion, page 88.

Now when pedobaptists have identified a substance and its shadow-a type and its antitype-they will have identified the two churches, and not before. They can find neither precept or example for infant church membership; therefore they undertake to make out a warrant for their practice by calling the whole Jewish nation a church, and because there were infants in that nation, and God (as they say) has not forbidden infant baptism, it is right to practice it. But why not carry out this reasoning, and make it our duty to abstain from, and practice all, that the Jews did, if not expressly taught otherwise in the New Testament? Why do pedobaptists eat swines' flesh? Lev. xi. 7 Isa. lxv. 4, and refuse to take the brother's widow? Matt. xxii. 24. Why do they keep company with any but of their own church? Acts x. 28. Why do they not continue all the Jewish feasts, sacrifices, &c. &c.?

Again. 1. The Jews had an High Priest, therefore we must have a Pope. 2. This High Priest by Urim and Thummin, was infallible; so our Pope must be. 3. The number seven was sacred, thus:

seventh day, seven clean beasts, &c.; therefore we must have seven sacred things or sacraments. 4. The Jews united their civil and ecclesiastical affairs in one code of laws; so we must submit to the Cambridge and Saybrook platforms, which are after this model. 5. As the Jewish government had a right to tax all the people one tenth for the support of the clergy, &c.; so priests now should have power not only to tax and distress indiscriminately, but also to imprison, whip, banish or kill Quakers, Baptists, witches and other heretics. 6. We ought to sprinkle water on both male and female, at any age when convenient, (pedobaptists say,) because the Jews circumcised their males at the age of eight days, and the New Testament has not forbidden it. I wish to see pedobaptists consistent with themselves; for, while they exert every power to prove that Christ baptized infants, and yet fail, it is obvious that they have his example for several of the Mosaic customs, which they utterly neglect.

Mr. SAWYER has found eight points of similarity between the nation of the Jews and the church; he, therefore, boldly asserts their identity. But I will pledge myself to find fifty stronger similarities between a mouse and a horse. Thus the one has flesh, blood, bones, skin, hair, head, two eyes, two ears, four legs,-eats oats, drinks water, &c. &c.,-is called beast, brute, creature, animal, &c.; all of which is true of the other. Is a mouse, therefore, a horse? "Is every

thing which is like another in any respect, to be called by the same name? Is a man an elephant, because both have the faculties of hearing and seeing?"President Day on the Will, page 130. See also Locke, on Identity and Diversity.

Does diversity loose its power of destroying identity when it comes in contact with pedobaptism? Judaism still exists, and can be compared with the