Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	call_v	lord_n	see_v	1,851	5	3.3775	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A67323	Infants baptism from heaven, of divine institution Being a brief yet satisfactory answer to some objections made by Hercules Collins, in his book entituled, Believers baptism from heaven, infants baptism from earth, &c. against certain truths proved in a book entituled, Baptism anatomized. Propounded in five queries, by Tho. Wall. Viz. 1. What water-baptism is? 2. What is the end for which it was instituted? 3. What giveth right to it? 4. Who are the true administrators of it? 5. Whether it be lawful for a man to baptise himself? Wherein the right that the infants of believers have to water-baptism is vindicated: the duty of believing parents in that matter asserted: and that by the contrary tenet and practice, they ought themselved to be excluded from the Lords-Supper, is plainly and fully proved. And wherein is also proved, that the covenant which God made with Abraham, Gen. 17. and with Israel, Exod. 19. and Deut. 29. are the covenant of grace in Christ, and not part of the covenant of works made with Adam before his fall.	Wall, Thomas.	1692 (1692)	Wing W484; ESTC R219349	20,257	43

saith he to try our Wits to prove Infants Baptism although by true grounded Reasons from God's Word we have proved it without the help of Man's Natural Wit which all your Wits cannot disprove Again you say I quarrel because you do not Baptise always on the Lord's day I tell you affirm that which you Practise not Answer I set down in my Book your own words Page 85. 87. from your Narrative P. 17. which are these That although the holy Apostles and others that were Preachers took their opportunities to preach the Word on the Jewish Sabbath day and other days of the Week when they had convenient opportunities afforded them yet we have say you no Example of the Churches then Assembling together to celebrate all the Ordinances of our Lord Jesus peculiar to them but on the first day of the Week Reader mark that which manifest practice of theirs say you is evidently as plain a demonstration of its being a day set apart for Religious Worship by the Will and Command of our Lord Jesus as if it had been exprest in the plainest words Wherein you grant that the Example of the Churches and the manifest Practice of theirs in the purest of Times is evidently a plain demonstration that the Lord's day is the time of Worship to administer God's Ordinances and that it is the Will and Command of our Lord Jesus so to do Then why blame you me for telling you that you do not administer the Sealing Ordinances on that day only which Christ hath Ordained therefore it is your evil in condemning your self by your Practice seeing the first Church-meeting was on the Lord's day Acts 2. when they did Baptise and break Bread and Paul stayed at Troas several days Acts 20. 6 7 until the first day came about to perform the Ordinances of Worship even in the Sealing Ordinances and the Example of the Churches all being commanded to keep that day holy in the practise of God's Ordinances is therefore not to be neglected So then you have well said but practice not the Example of extraordinary Officers by you to be granted is not the Church's Pattern to Baptise any day but the Example of the Primitive Churches in the purest of Times is for all Churches to follow as they were commanded by the Apostles Now then when else but on the first day of the Week were the Churches to perform God's Ordinances as the Will and command of our Lord Jesus 2ly As you in your Narrative have asserted and yet you blame me for telling of you you plead for that you practise not you say in P. 69. I insist upon the Order of words Mat. 3. I Baptise to Repentance In answer you say see your Book Pag. 54 55 56. Your answer there is if you were only Sprinkled in Infancy you were never yet Baptised seeing your answer is not to the disproving of what I have laid down I refer the Reader to my Book because in in your answer you run away from the Matter and tell us of such as were Baptised that Repentence was required of we grant that such as never were Baptised in the Name of Christ whether Men or Women who had actually sinned of such God requireth actual Repentance this is granted by me and proved at large in my Book Pag. 70 to 72 yet no way hindereth the Infants of such to be Baptised that are Sinners not by their own act but by Imputation and whereas you say if I were only Sprinkled in Infancy I was never Baptised I have refuted this in my Preface third Leaf in these words shewing as in the Lord's Supper it is not the quantity of Bread and Wine more or less but the right apprehension of it and sincere Affection to the thing signified so it is not the quantity of Water cast on the passive Subject Baptised with Water which is but one by the visible Sign of Washing away of Sin in the Blood of Christ which in the Spiritual Baptism is likewise signified by Sprinkling with the Blood of Christ namely with the Imputation of the benefit of Christ's Death to Sinners whether actual or imputative all visibly in the Covenant of the Gospel H. Collins further saith That is a false Argument so largely insisted upon in my Book Pag. 44. If Persons have a right to Remission of Sins they have a right to the Sign Baptism this Argument I have answered fully in Baptism Anatomized in Pag. 36 37. yet I find no answer by him to this matter but it is H. Collins way to object against what I lay down and make no answer to that I have asserted in my Book that is Infants are born Sinners and cannot be Saved but by Christ's pardoning their Sin and all that have the Testimony from God's Word that their Sins are pardoned have a right to the Sign of Remission Water-Baptism again Whereas H. Collins opposeth what I say in Page 43. from Acts 15. 10. that Infants are Disciples Answer The Jews which believed were pressing that the Gentiles should keep the Law of Moses and be Circumcised which Law required not only the Father but also the Male Children to be Circumcised for of old when a Proselite Gentile was joined to the Church of Israel he was to Circumcise all his Males see Exod. 12. ch even so in Acts 15. those who were required to be Circumcised by the Jews was the same the Law required before namely the Father and his Male Children therefore the answer of the Apostle was accordingly why tempt ye God to put a Yoke upon the Neck of the Disciples that is on the Fathers and the Children so that it is clear that in Acts 15. here Children with their Parents are called Disciples which is Scholars therefore the Law of God bound the Parents to bring their Children with them to hear the Law before they had understanding Deut. 31. 11 12 13. after they were Circumcised as we are now commanded to teach our Children after Baptised proved in my Book As touching a Womans partaking of the Lords Supper you shew no other command than is consirmed by Consequence which I never denied but the Evil lyeth at your door seeing you allow a Consequence in one thing and not in another and therefore partial for although the Woman be included in the Man and Woman is said to believe yet she must have actual Faith before she be fitly qualified to take and eat at the Lords Table yet you cannot see how the Promise of God includeth the Children in Infancy to the Believing Parents to have the Sign of Remission of their Sins set on them although this Truth shineth in the Scripture for God saith I will be a God to thee and to thy Seed by reason the Seed in Infancy are Sinners by Imputation but that it is not in that Sense I will be a God to thee and to thy Wife for both are actual Sinners and both must actually believe and Blessed is the People whose God

manifested in the Flesh an Infant born a Saviour for Infants as well as for actual Sinners and when he appeared in his publick Ministry owned them to be Subjects of his Kingdom and took them up in his Arms and Blessed them and they welcomed him into his Kingdom crying Hosanna to the Son of David as I have shewed more fully in my Book Baptism Anatomized Subjects they were and still are and in the last great day when all shall stand before him namely great and small he will say to them on his right Hand Sheep and Lambs Come ye Blessed of my Father Inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the Foundation of the World Matt. 25. 34. In the mean time Infants of Gods Covenant have Angels in this Life to attend them Matt. 18. 10. as Heirs of Salvation Heb. 1. 14. declared by the Lord Jesus to be with their Believing Parents in the State of the Converted Humble and Believing if the Word of the Lord Jesus may be believed before the word of any that say as aforesaid That Infants are out of Gods Covenant and so Heathens Again in P. 116. he saith That I say in the Preface they ground their Doctrin on Nature and plead Right to Gospel-Ordinances by the Act of Man Answer I have shewed in my Book what Mr. Keach hath asserted in these words That there is nothing less than Profession of Faith that can give any Soul Young or Old Right to Water-Baptism I have given my answer to it in Query 3. p. 38 to 44. which is too long to insert here therefore I desire the Reader to read p. 38 to 44. in my Book seeing H. Collins hath made no answer to it Again H. Collins saith I would insinuate Page 3. That in Baptism a Person is wholly Passive which is by me fully proved in Baptism Anatomiz'd and not by H. Collins in his Book refuted For is it not said John Baptised Philip Baptised by whom the whole act in Baptism was done by the Administrator proved in my Book aforesaid Page 3 to 20. and not by him refuted And whereas he saith I Nick-name them in calling them Anabaptists Answer I have shewed it is no Nick-name And because they name themselves Baptists they cannot prove to themselves that Title whereas all Christians Names must be called after Christ's Name Christians and not after John Baptist's Name or Paul or Cephas's as Paul sheweth in 1 Cor. 1. 12 13. unless they were Baptised in John or Paul's Name Now whereas you say if John was called John the Baptist because he Baptised why may not those be so called that follow his Practice Page 2. Answer Did not the Apostles Baptise as well as John yet no Title by it belonged to them Christ himself was Baptised yet not called by any Baptist And whereas you say the Calvinists are so called from Calvin and Lutherans from Luther yet should not those Names be owned by them unless they had been Baptised in their Names so that when you shall disown to be called Baptists and own your Baptism in Infancy and not Re-baptise again then to call you Anabaptists is a Nick-name You refer me to Page 64 65. but say nothing to purpose there but only you say we know but one Baptism Answer No more do we own but one Baptism in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost then all that are Baptised in Christ's Name whether Fathers Mothers or Children ought not to be Baptised again because they were Baptised in Christ's Name although in Apostacy as I have proved in P. 119 to 121. of my Book Baptism Anatomized Again H. Collins saith P. 119. That I will have Baptism a pouring of Water on the Face By way of answer he telleth me I am to know pouring is the most proper word which could be used for the Holy Spirits proceeding because it is above with God in Heaven and we upon Earth below here he granteth the Signification of the word Baptism may be understood in its natural Sense a pouring 2ly I answer the word Baptise in its proper signification is best explained by the Spirit of God to which H. Collins agreeth to be a pouring and therefore we ought so to understand it as it is opened to us by God as I have shewed in my Book P. 3 to 11. and seeing you grant that you own but one Baptism P. 116. if there be but one as there is then the natural signification of the word must be one arising from one and the same word then Water out of the Clouds God himself being the Administrator Water was poured on the Persons even then our Fathers saith the Apostles were Baptised standing in the Sea where the Water had been on dry foot so John when he Baptised we have shewed the Persons Baptised may be said to be in the Water or Sea when but standing at the brink where sometime the Water had flowed P. 7. according to the Pattern shewed him from on high as you grant to be by pouring even so John Baptising with Water must agree in one by pouring as by casting Water on the Persons Head or Face seeing I have proved in my Book P. 11. that the Face representeth the whole Person Now tell me what Example had John otherwise to follow than the way of pouring seeing in the Spiritual Baptism it is granted by you as you say I am to know pouring is the most proper word could be used therefore the meaning of the word Baptise is poured or pouring then as there is but one Baptism which likewise you grant the manner in the Administration must be one and the same as all coming down from above on the Person poured or cast on the Person either in the Spiritual or Water-Baptism so John Baptised with Water as they were Baptised with the Spirit by pouring or casting Water on the noble part Head or Face And because I have so fully proved this in my Book I refer the Reader to it to read Baptism Anatomized from P. 3. to 21. and so shall conclude this particular as Peter in another case did Whether shall we believe God or Men concerning the use and signification of the word Baptism let the Wise Judge Again whereas H. Collins saith That I charge B. Keach P. 80. in my Book with the whole Assembly of Baptised Believers as they call themselves that they were forced to try their Wits for want of literal words Remember to keep Holy the first day Answ I disprove not the whole Assemblies Arguments but have added more in my Book to confirm them that the first day is now to be kept Holy and not the Seventh But I blame all those that will allow one Point as an Article of their Faith to be proved by true gathered Consequence from the holy Scripture and not in another all such prove themselves not upright in Heart but Partial for was it not B. Keach that derided us that we were forced

5 6. 1 Pet. 1. 2. they would no doubt have continued with us and not have rent themselves from the Body but they went out that they might be made manifest they were not all of us even so Cain Ismael Esau c. were in the Church and in the Judgment of Man for a time a Holy Seed as was Demas a holy Person therefore concerning Demas one while the Apostle wrote in Commendation of Demas to the Colossians Col. 4. 14. Luke and Demas greet you and to Philemon vers 24. Demas Lucas my fellow labourers yet afterwards writes to Timothy 2 Tim. 4. 10. Demas hath forsaken me having loved this present World again in the Judgment of Philip Simon Magus was a Saint a Believer and had the sign of Remission of his Sins Water-Baptism administred on him now did Peter tell a Lye doth Hercules Collins think to say afterwards Judging him by his Fruits that he was in the Gall of Bitterness and Bond of Iniquity and had no part nor lot in that matter surely this Man Hercules Collins is utterly unfit to take Charge of Souls that thus by his Doctrin chargeth the Apostle to be a Lyer Thus as a blind Leader of the blind he leadeth the People into by-Paths out of the way of Understanding the Scriptures a Right for no other end but to maintain Falshood against the Right Infants of the God of Israel have to Remission of their Sins and so aright to the visible Seal thereof Water-Baptism Moreover he saith in P. 110 There are but two ways of being in Covenant absolutely or conditionally no Believer dares say all his Infants Seed are in the Covenant of Grace absolutely for then they must all be saved but we see that Abraham had an Ishmael Isaac an Esau David an Absolom Samuel Sons of Belial so that they cannot be Baptised under this consideration Reply As no Believer dares say nor did I ever say his Infants Seed are in the Covenant of Grace absolutely according to God's Secret Decree because that is only known to God so no Man dares say all visible actual Believers are in the Covenant of Grace absolutely which God only knoweth therefore Hercules Collins teacheth and granteth that no actual Believers may be Baptised under that consideration because he dares not say all actual Believers are in the Covenant of Grace absolutely and thus he hath again put an end to the Administration of Water-Baptism until he knoweth who the Persons be that are absolutely in the Covenant of Grace and in the mean time let all consider how this Man dissemblingly owned the Doctrin of Election when he put his hand to the Narrative aforesaid And therefore how contrary to God's revealed Will doth Hercules Collins take upon him to judge secret things concerning the state of Believers and their Infants and so censuring all Infants contrary to what the Scripture saith namely that they are the blessed of the Lord speaking of Believers and their Off-spring or Buds with them Esa 65. 23. A Godly Seed Mal. 2 15. A holy Seed Ezra 9. 2. 1 Cor. 7. 14. Children of the Promise Gal. 4. 28. Children of the Covenant Acts 3. 25. Yet this Man presumptuously for want of the Fear of God saith in his Book Page 82 as if he knew God's secret Council Those who Baptise Believers Baptise Christians but those who Baptise Infants Baptise Heathens all Children of Wrath by Nature before born again his Proof is Ephes 3. 2. Reply The Apostle having shewed what the state of Heathens is Eph. 2. 12. To be without Christ aliens from the Commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the Covenant of Promise having no hope and without God in the World and this is the state H. Collins accounteth Believers Infants to be in yea and their own Children to be Heathens in this woful Estate yet this Man hath the face so brazened over as to say that I in Page 3 falsly say if not maliciously that the Anabaptists deny Infants to be Redeemed with Christ's Blood if as aforesaid he saith They that Baptise Infants Baptise Heathens then what is the state of a Heathen but to be without God and Christ out of the visible Promise of the Pardon of Sin as they account their Children and not in the Covenant of Grace how can such Infants be in the visible state of the Redeemed by the Blood of Christ by H. Collins his Doctrin let the Spiritual Man judge Again he saith in Page 113 that I say they reckon their own Children dying in Infancy by their own Judgment are lost and perish to all Eternity see how H. Collins confirmed my words against them First in that he saith all Infants Baptised are Heathens that is without Christ as afore shewed 2ly In Page 87. of his Book he saith All Infants Baptised are not in the Covenant of Grace In his Parallel now let him shew since the Fall whether there is any Salvation promised to any Soul out of the Covenant of Grace until then he concludeth all Infants are Damned because he saith all Infants are Heathens Again in the same Page he further saith in his Parallel all Infants of Believers do not receive Remission of Sins Then I would know of him how Infants can be saved without their Sins are pardoned Therefore that word pierced the Heart of H. Collins that I said from their own Doctrin in my Book Baptism Anatomized Page 1. That the Anabaptists reckon their own Children dying in Infancy by their own Judgment lost and perish to all Eternity being out of the visible Covenant of Grace Which put him upon such streights which way he might take to clear himself of this Just Censure upon this Cursed Doctrin concerning the visible State of Infants The way he hath taken is by devising a Lye against me saying Is not this Man's Doctrin agreeable to the Church of Rome 's and the Council of Carthage who decreed If any asserted Baptism did not take away Original Sin they should be Anathematized Now I ask this Man where and in which Page of my Book I have given the least grant that Baptism washeth away Sin any otherwise than being the Sign of Remission but the contrary I always affirmed That every Soul that shall be saved hath his Sins washed away in the Blood of Christ and that Water-Baptism is but a Sign thereof see Baptism Anatomized but my words aforesaid have so wounded him whether for a savour of Life unto Life or a savour of Death unto Death to him God knoweth which hath forced him to oppose his former words when he accounted Infants Heathens out of the Covenant of Grace Now to say in opposition pretended to me but rather to Rome's Doctrin and not mine concerning the Council of Carthage saying Water in Baptism washeth away Original Sin We saith he can tell you a better way of washing away of Original Sin by the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to Infants dying in Infancy And thus the Reader may see