Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n apostle_n prophet_n word_n 1,617 5 3.9680 3 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A85311 The answer of Giles Firmin, to the vain and unprofitable question put to him, and charged upon him by Mr. Grantham, in his book, entituled, The infants advocate : viz. whether the greatest part of dying infants shall be damned? : Which advocate, while he shuts all infants out of the visible church, and denies them baptism, opens heaven to all dying infants, justifying those of his party, who admit them all as he doth, into Heaven without regeneration. Firmin, Giles, 1614-1697.; Grantham, Thomas, d. 1664. Infants advocate. 1689 (1689) Wing F954A; ESTC S122452 14,558 22

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

I never spake it I never wrote it I never thought it It was never the Question Those which I treated of were Quest I. Whether God Regenerates any Infants 2. Whether God Circumcise the Hearts of any Infants Which your Disciple said true come both to one Both which were denied by two of your Sect and the latter denied by your self * Against Mr. Petto p. 51. I proved if Infants be Saved they must be Regenerated 3 Joh. 3. They must be Sanctified Heaven is an Inheritance only for Sanctified Persons 20 Act. 32. and 26 chap. 18. They must be made meet for it 1 Col. 12. I am sure they are not meet for it by Nature But whether God Regenerates all Infants or the greater or the lesser part of Infants I wrote not one word How should I know what God hath not revealed 29 Deut. 29. How could you then charge such a Doctrine upon me in your Title-page In the Conclusion of your Book you tell your Reader Mr. Firmin seems displeased at the multitude which shall be saved if my Opinion be true all dying Infants are saved c. I shall answer you very briefly That you might shew your self to be a Learned Man in the Arminian Controversie which I gave you no occasion to meddle with you tell me Presump p. 8. This strange Doctrine of damning the greatest part of the World and that before the World was makes God the Author of all sin c. To the first part I only answered by Christ's words 7 Matth. 14. As for Huberus and Caelius Secundus Curio they were of your side But mark your own words Mr. Grantham the damning of the greatest part of the World not the greatest part of Infants I hope the World and Infants are not the same then as yet you cannot fasten this Cruel Doctrine upon me As for the words of Christ 7 Matth. 14. Few find it you answer me quoting 2 Pet. 3.9 c. That the far greater part will despise the Riches of God's goodness c. But I say if they do so finally they are damned and this is strange Doctrine with you As for Infants say you they are in no danger by this Text they may be you should say they are not may be all saved and so the number of the saved be much greater by them For none of them walk in the broad way therefore they must needs go the way which lead to Life But I pray is the number of them that are saved so much greater by them that the words of Christ Few find it are not true Else you do not take of my Answer You Confute not me but our Lord the words are his not mine As for your proof David saith 58 Psal 3. The wicked are estranged from the Womb they go astray as soon as they be born speaking lies The Apostle tells us 1 John 5.19 The whole World i. e. all that are not born of God lieth in wickedness Infants are a part of the World tho' not the whole World. The corrupt Nature in them do biass and incline them to walk in the Broad Way not in the Narrow Way Betimes we see their little Feet i.e. their Words and Actions stepping in the Broad Way So that our Lord's Words may be true tho' the greater part of Infants be saved As for the Hellish Torments you speak of so much Bellarmin * Tom. 4. p. 144. ● Militissima omnium poena Aug. tells the Pelagians who are your Friends and Catharinus allow Infants Eternal Life and Natural Blessedness without any pain other Opinions you may read in him if you please But where the Scripture is silent why should we speak Having named Pelagius and charging you in my Answer to your Book with Pelagianisin I will here consider your Outcry against me p. 28. where you tell me what you have written in your Book which you call Christianisinus Primitivus I never saw any of your Book nor did I ever hear of your Name till I saw your Book against my self there I found you did own Peccatum Originans but not Originatum So I told you But for all your great Words in that Page I still say Mr. Grantham is a Man very corrupt in the Doctrine of Original Sin or he must grosly contradict himself For First Against Mr. Pet. p. 27. Twice in one Page you tell us Infants are not guilty of any Sin of their own Then they have no Sin of their own It is impossible to part Sin and Guilt tho' God pardon the Punishment If Infants have no Sin of their own Circumcision was Instituted before Christ 1923. Bucolc then the Administration of Circumcision to Infants of eight days old almost two thousand years was a vain Administration In a Sacrament there is the Sign and the thing signified What was signified in Circumcision 10 Deut. 16.30 Deut. 6.4 Jer. 4. 9 Jer. 26. tells us the Vncircumcision of our Flesh is joyned with our Estate dead in Sin 2 Col. 13. But if Infants have no Sinof their own then the thing signified was not there so that it was no Sacrament but the Administration of a Lye according to your Doctrine Secondly Ibid. p. 11. You tell us They need not any Laws to be written in their Hearts during Infancy Answ Infants are born either with that Image in which God Created Man or not If they be born with it then they never fell from God and so have no need of Christ If not so born then there is a Privation of that Righteousness which ought to be and a Position as in a Disease of that Vnrighteousness and Evil which ought not to be This Image is not restored but in Regeneration in which the Law is written in the Heart Thirdly Ibid. p. 13. You tell us Infants are innocent Answ Then they never fell from God. You could stich Innocency and Pardon together in your former Book now you stitch Innocency and Sin together You quote Dr. Taylor to justifie you But he does not stitch Innocency and Pardon together However I read Dr. Taylor 's words but he was neither a Prophet nor Apostle a very godly Man Mr. Anthony Burgess and as learned a Man as himself who traced him in his Writings gives this Character of him He is not meerly Pelagian Papist Arminian or Socinian but an Hotch-potch of all Like a Second Julian in triumphing Language with much boldness he hath decryed Original Sin as if it were but a Non Ens. Thus he We know sin in one sence is not Ens * As Ens convertitur cum Re. and that this Learned Man knew well Dr. Taylor 's Authority and yours are both alike to me Fourthly I suspect you from your Description of Original Sin. p. 23. p. 28. In both your Books you tell us Original Sin is that came Upon all even Infants This word Vpon I do not understand Paul calls it Indwelling Sin 7 Rom. 17.20 I was