Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	church_n	see_v	true_a	2,943	5	5.0760	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45834	A stop to a lying pamphlet falsly called Truths plea for infants lately published by Mr. Alexander Kellie, in answer to a book lately published, intituled, Infants baptism disproved ... / by Jer. Ives ...	Ives, Jeremiah, fl. 1653-1674.	1656 (1656)	Wing I1106; ESTC R9585	6,806	16

you may see in my Book page 2. Again A sixth Lye he tells a few lines after in the same 2 page of his Book where he saith that I said Infants could not blesse This is false for I said that Infants could not CALL Christ blessed as you may perceive by what I say toward the lower end of the third page of my Book for there is a sense in which all the works of God blesse and praise him Psal 145.10 But doth it follow therefore that all his works CALL him blessed Therefore to say I said Infants could not blesse or praise is false A seventh Lye is in page 9. where he supposeth me to Interpret Esay 65.20 as though Infants should live an hundred years before they dye a naturall death or else that they must dye in their estate in glory Both which are falsly suggested for I said the contrary that there should be no infant of dayes in the new Jerusalem and so saith the Text That the child not an infant in his sense should dye an hundred years old Now Reader how that which I have said in the 13 page of my Book can give a man that puts away lying lips occasion to suppose that either I must mean that Infants must live a hundred years before they dye a naturall death or else that they must die after they come to an estate of glory judge The eighth Untruth that he tells is page 10 of his Book where he saith That I like a base fellow said in the 16 page of my Booke that God makes but a bare promise but is not so good as his word Indeed if I had said so I had been base but there is no such saying of mine in the whole Book Sure this man might have been called Alexander the Coper-Smith since he can forge Lyes to wrong his Neighbour with so much confidence and publish them in Print as he hath done The ninth Lye I shall mention is in the 40 page of his Book towards the lower end of it where he saith That I said there was no Antiqnity for Infants baptisme in the first three hundred years after Christ This is false I said not so as you may see in the 68 page of my Book where I have these words viz. That Eusebius who wrote the History of the first three hundred years doth not mention the baptizing of one infant I also said in the same page That the Churches did not receive men to baptism but upon profession of faith and also That infants baptism was no Apostolicall Custome nor SO MUCH the Custome of those times as he did imagine Doth this prove that I said there was NO Antiquity for Infants baptism in the first three hundred years after Christ Nay doth not those words before mentioned and which are found in the beginning of the 69 page of my Book prove the contrary viz. That it was not so MUCH the Custome of those times c. Which plainly shewes that this error was crep in even in the first three hundred years though it was not so MUCH their Custome as it was afterwards Again Did not Origen live in the first three hundred years And doe not I say page 68 that Origen was thought to favour Infants baptism and yet this man dares to tell his Reader that I say there was no Antiquity for Infants baptism the first three hundred years which nothing is more false However I have shewed that if some Christian Parents who were eminent lights in the Churches in those times did not baptize their infants it much makes such a practice questionable that 's all I brought those passages for for many errors were crept into the Church at that time and the being of them then doth not prove the truth of them I shall now give a Catalogue of his unsavory speech that plainly will shew what spirit did assist him in writing his Book which because there was a word Printed in my Epistle to my Book that was not true Orthography that is to say not truly spelt that therefore I did no more know what the word meant then the heele of an old Cheese * See his Book towards the latter end of his Answer to my Epistle Suppose I had spelt the word false and that it had not been the Printers Errata doth this prove what he hath spoken that I doe not know the meaning of it no more then the heele of an old Cheese Doth it follow that because a man cannot spell a word that therefore he doth not know what is meant by it As for example Doth it follow that though a man should not spell Horse aright that he knowes no more what a Horse is then the heele of an old Cheese Nay further whereas he talks of the Mathematicks I know many Seamen that are better Mathematicians then Mr. Kellie that doe not know how to spell all the tearms of Art belonging to it and yet doe understand them better then the heele of an old Cheese By this you may see he matters not what he saith Again in his Book page 4. he saith That I would make simple people believe the Moon was made of green Cheese but he saith the Cheesmonger hath never a taster to make them find it so Again page the 6 he saith meaning my self You are a sweet youth Again page the 9 he calls me Miserable bold fellow In the same page about the latter end of it he saith He perceives the knavery of Hereticks This he applyes to me because of what I answered to his Argument in my Book page 17. Which if in that Answer there is any thing that renders me a knave read and judge Again page 21 he saith When my Nose is Cheese the Cats shall eat it Again page 22 he hath these words Vp Robin the Ram's in the Rye Again page 34 he saith I talke like an Asse If these words savour of the Spirit which is from above judge Again he would faine make us whom he calls Anabaptists odious by telling his Reader that we are divided among our selves as you may see in the beginning of his Answer to my Epistle and that there be none more contradictious then we both to all the godly learned in the world and likewise to one another Some he saith are for the Glasse-house some for Pauls some for Beach-lane some for Arminians some against them Many that frequent one of our places he saith think it abomination to goe to another of them Many of us he saith are turned Ranters and Quakers c. The like you shall find in the 36 page of his Book To all which I Answer That this is as false as the rest to say that NONE are more contradictious then those he calls Anabaptists for first They that are for Infants baptism are more contradictious as for instance Some are Papists some are Lutherans some are Calvinists some Arminians some Arians some Athanasians some for the salvation of all both men and Devils as