Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	new_a	scripture_n	testament_n	8,305	5	8.0705	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A57687	Paedobaptismus vindicatus, or, Infant-baptism stated in an essay to evidence its lawfulness from the testimony of the Holy Scripture, especially St. Matthew, XXVIII, 19 : the grand, if not sole place, so much insisted on by the antipaedobaptists, to prove their mistaken principle : handled in a different method form other tracts on the subject, as appears in the contents : with an account of a conference publickly held with an antipaedobaptist of no small fame / by J.R., A.M., a Presbyter of te Church of England.	Rothwell, John, d. 1661.	1693 (1693)	Wing R2005; ESTC R6073	107,326	230

understood the Nature and Difference of Covenants better I believe than any Antipaedobaptist in England To all which he made no return but after some Pause and an Harangue to the People he told me he would not be satisfied unless I brought him an Example out of the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament for any Child being Baptized or a Command for his admission into Covenant that way To which I urged the probability of Children being Baptized Acts xvi 15.33 when it is said That Lydia was Baptized and her Houshold and of the Jaylor That he was Baptized and all his straitway 1 Cor. 1.16 and when St. Paul saith I Baptized also the Houshold of Stephanas and to speak ingenuously the only thing considerable he said was the proving the probability there were no Children in those Families I am very sorry I have forgot what he said but if I could remember it I would do him that Justice as to relate it for I would pay my Adversary that respect as to declare all the Truth and Reason of him that his Cause will bear or that he can with good ground desire but that which is but probably true may notwithstanding be false However that I may allow my Adversary all he can reasonably ask supposing there were no Children in those Houses mentioned Dato sed non concesso disputandi gratia Allowing but not granting it as we say sometimes in the Schools for disputation-sake yet the Argument is not weakned because the Holy Apostle spoke those Words not with the consideration of there being Children in those Families but in allusion to known Customs among the Jews in their receiving Proselytes of Righteousness as we have made appear in the Book Afterwards he urged the necessity of a direct Command in the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament In totidem verbis for the Baptizing Children in so many Words whereupon I asked him If he believed such a Command necessary to which he replyed He did I returned upon him I thought it was undecent if not absurd so positively to assert a thing necessary and offer no Reason beside I said if he would give a Reason why he believed it necessary I would do that which by Rules of Disputation he could not oblige me to for no Man is bound to prove a Negative viz. prove it not necessary Hereupon he made a longer Pause than before and after he recovered himself made so long an Harange to those present I was forced to pull him by the Sleeve and desire him not to make my House a Meeting-place and assume or take so much Considence as to instruct my People unless he thought me not able for such an Employment which if he did I desired him to make proof and when he had done to make his complaint to my Reverend Diocesan Upon which with a sort of flattering smile he complemented me and told me he thought me able for my Office and said he and I might agree well in all points but one viz. Infant Baptism for he heard I was an Arminian and so was he Whereupon I told him I somewhat doubted whether he understood the Quinquarticular Controversie managed at the Synod of Dort and knew what an Arminian was but whether he did or no was not material now but I acquainted him I desired not to pass under any Character but that of a Christian nay that Honourable Name for the best things may be abused in some Cases and Circumstances if I understand St. Paul right where it is used for a Faction in opposition to Christian Peace is blame worthy Now this I say that every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollos and I of Cephas 1 Cor. 1.12 13. and I of Christ Is Christ divided was Paul Crucified for you or were you Baptized in the Name of Paul So that there were four Parties in the Church of Corinth And therefore did I affect to be called by a Name that should preserve Universal Charity I would espouse that of a Reformed Catholique without renouncing the Name Christian And then I offered a Reason why there was no necessity for an express Text of Holy Scripture in the New Testament for the Baptizing Infants because it was so long known in the Jewish Church before our Blessed Saviour's days and as he took the other Sacrament from the Jews Post-coenium or After-Supper so he took this from their way of admitting Proselytes of Righteousness before they Circumcised them And why should we not for the same Reason debar Women from the Lord's Supper as Children from being admitted by Baptism into the Covenant seeing there is no more Command for one than for the other So that Christ's not saying whether Children were admitted to Baptism is so far from being a cogent Proof that weighing the former Jewish Customs it is the strongest Motive to believe it But still notwithstanding all I said to shew the absurdity of his Request and the Arguments I offered to signifie the unreasonableness of such a Demand without answering one of my Reasons my Adversary importuned me for an express place of Holy Scripture in the New Testament for the Baptizing Children whereupon I asked him if I brought a place of Holy Scripture whose Sence could have no other tolerable meaning but the allowance of Infants to be Baptized it were not the same as if I brought express Words for Baptizing Children which he yielded Upon which it pleased God as if he would assist the defence of his Divine Truth for I thought not on it before this I own because I am not willing to ascribe any thing to my self to suggest to my Mind that place of St. Paul For the unbelieving Husband is sanctified by the Wife 1 Cor. VII 14. and the unbelieving Wife is sanctified by the Husband else were your Children unclean but now are they Holy Where Interpreters understand by the unbelieving Husband or Wife an Infidel and by the Wife or Husband that sanctifies a Christian from whence I drew this Argument That if Children as soon as born had a right to the Covenant by the Parents Faith where but one of the Parents is a Christian then Baptism being the Sign of the Covenant and not the Covenant as the Antipaedobaptists own It follows by the Argument à Majori ad Minus from the greater to the less if the Child when born hath a right to the Covenant he hath a right to the Sign Omne majus includit in se minus for according to the Logical Maxim The greater includes the less and he that should deny this would be as absurd as he that should say he that receiveth Ten Pounds receives not Five And then I told him there were but two sorts of Holiness with reference to Men though there may be a Relative Holiness with respect to things a Personal and a Foederal Holiness at which he stared on me as if he understood me not on which I

circumcised becometh a Debtor to keep the whole Law which the Jewish Children were as uncapable of keeping as Christian Children are of the Holy Gospel and so the Objection lieth as strong against Circumcising as Baptizing Children And it is reasonable according to the Laws of Men too For it is well known to all Lawyers that it is a common thing to admit a Child to an Estate by Guardians and Tutors under several Conditions which the Child cannot undertake the Performance of till he come to that Age wherein he can exercise his Reason And is it not full as reasonable to admit Children on certain Terms to an Holy Gospel Estate as to a secular one on Conditions they are uncapable of executing And thus we have the Laws of Heaven and Men too against our Adversaries Nay we have three strong Weapons to defend the Truth if we know but how to wield and manage them 1. The Holy Scripture which is the Sword of the Spirit 2. Reason which I may call the Sword of Nature 3. The Law which I may name the Military Sword And being thus secured with spiritual natural and material Armour we may be so courageous as not to fear the most violent Attempts that shall be made against us and may believ according to an Holy Scripture Phrase very proper to our Case that against Truth and us too while we hold the Truth and stick to sound Principles no Weapon formed shall prosper or have its intended effect and when I had delivered these three Accounts from the Pulpit in defence of Infant-Baptism I was thinking that if I could make the Sense of this last Text viz. St. Matth. XXVIII 19. Go teach all Nations baptizing them I say if I could prove those Words to be not only not for the Antipaedobaptists but against them and for us I did believe I should say all was sufficient to prove its Lawfulness from Holy Scripture And meditating one Morning I employed my Thoughts to give the Words such a Sens and to justifie it when I had done And in order thereto I did humbly and fervently implore the Divine Assistance and God who is never wanting to help them who with Humility and Faith address themselves to him suggested this Account of the Text to my Mind that I have offered in the following Papers which when I had composed I penn'd down because I was not willing to forget what my Thoughts had delivered as the proper meaning of the Text according to my Judgment and I made use of no Book but the Greek Testament to satisfie my self in the Account the Original giveth of Acts II. 39. which with 1 Cor. VII 14. I made use of as collateral Proofs to confirm the Sens given For I did believ the comparing of one Place of Holy Scripture with another one of the best ways of coming to its tru Meaning which when I had drawn out it made about two Sheets of Paper which was all at first I did design to print But the Occasion of enlarging it was this A Neighbour-Clergy-man with whom I discoursed about the Sens given of St. Mat. XXVIII 19. and the Confirmation I brought from those two other Places of Holy Scripture beforementioned acquainted me he had a Book of an ingenious Antipaedobaptist that did seem to invalidate any Proof for Infant-Baptism from those two Texts which I desired to read and he lent me When I came home I did without prejudice peruse what he had wrote and at the first sight I was somewhat surprized but on consideration and retiring into my self I did find his Arguments against the Sens I offered were but weak as I hope will appear to any impartial Reader by the Answer I have given After I had done this I resolved to use all Means I could think of or remember to establish the Sens I had given of the Text and accordingly read over some useful Treatises upon the Subject and because as Pliny somewhere saith Ingenuum est profiteri per quos profeceris Plinius An ingenious thing it is to own by whom we have profited I will give an Account to whom I am obliged and more particularly I stand engaged to the reverend Dr. Hammond in his Resolution of Six Queries one whereof is about Infant-Baptism the other is the Excellent Author of the Case of Infant-Baptism Which was one of those cases the Reverend Lord Bishop of London did out of a pious and excellent Design engage his City Clergy to state and resolve for the satisfaction of Dissenters and to reduce them to the Church of England As for Dr. Hammond I have used his words in a manner and for the other I have in most if not in all places altered his words and taken his sens that I might adapt it to my own style that the Work might look the more alike and seemingly appear all of a piece Something I have borrowed from Mr. Ellis in his Book called Pastor and Clerk or a Debate real concerning Infant Baptism As to the Authorities I have used to confirm the sens delivered I have not taken things on Trust but perused and examined good Editions of the Original Authors and have been careful neither to mis-report their words nor misrepresent their sens and having made this Ingenuous Acknowledgment I cannot be accused of Plagiarism because I give my Authors all the Reputation they can desire by owning what I have taken And now I hope I may without any conceitedness say I have used all the proper Methods for reducing Gainsayers into the Paths of Truth and Peace For besides three Rational Arguments for Infant-Baptism I have endeavoured to prove it from that place of Holy Scripture the Adversaries think against it and to engage the belief of the most avers and pre-possessed I have offered all the proper methods of Conviction 1. I have given a clear Exposition to confirm the meaning 2. I have much enlarged that Exposition 3. I have proved the Sens by the Coherence 4. I have confirmed the meaning by the Original for in some places of Holy Scripture no Translation cometh up exactly to the Original for in every Language there are some peculiar Idioms that cannot well be translated into another Tongue 5. I have strengthened the Sens by two other places of Holy Scripture for the Holy Spirit by comparing one place with another doth best interpret his meaning 6. I have given some general Observations to establish the Sens of the three Texts delivered 7. I have defended the Exposition given by an Allusion to Jewish Customs without which Account it is impossible to come to an understanding of some places of Holy Scripture in the New Testament 8. I have confirmed what I have offered as the sens of the three places of Holy Scripture from the Authority of some of the Ancient Fathers who living nearest the times of the Holy Apostles may reasonably be presumed best to know the sens of their Writings and I could have produced more in