Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	prophecy_n	word_n	write_v	3,353	5	6.1475	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A93867	A precept for the baptisme of infants out of the New Testament. Where the matter is first proved from three severall scriptures, that there is such a word of command. Secondly it is vindicated, as from the exceptions of the separation, so in special from the cavils of Mr. Robert Everard in a late treatise of his intituled Baby-Baptisme routed. / By Nathaniel Stephens minister of the Gospel and Fennie-Drayton in Leicester-Shire.	Stephens, Nathaniel, 1606?-1678.	1651 (1651)	Wing S5451; Thomason E623_9; ESTC R206373	68,618	79

especially from the word For which as a band doth unite and couple the two parts of the Text together He exhorteth them first be baptized every one of you and then useth this motive for the promise is to you and your children Now on the other side if your assertion be true that the words be baptized every one of you cannot be spoken to Father and Child how will this answer to the motive For the promise is to you and your children And what will become of the word For the band or the connexive particle that knits the parts of the sentence together Sir By this time you may understand who the man is that may be likned to a theevish Gleaner that doth dragge out St. Peters words by the eares and doth spoile the union of the sentence I will conclude with your own words pag. 5. lin 22 Sir I desire you to take heed that place do not fall upon your head Rev. 22.18 for I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the Prophecy of this book If any man shall take away from the words of the book of this Prophecie God shall take away his part out of the book of Life and out of the holy City and from the things which are written in this book I come now briefly to your other particulars Secondly You say that these words be baptized every one of you were spoken to the same You which the Apostle directed his speech unto and you never read of any Command given to Infants but on the contrary Deut. 11.2 pag. 6. lin 15. I answer these words were mediatly and secondarily spoken to the children though they were primarily and immediatly directed to the Parents that did engage for them In the institution of circumcision the Lord saith This is my Covenant which you shall keep betwixt me and you and thy seed after thee every manchild among you shall be circumcised and ye shall circumcise the flesh of the foreskin and it shall be a token of the Covenant betwixt me and you And the uncircumcised manchild whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised he shall be cut off from his people he hath broken my Covenant Gen. 17.10 11 14. Here in these words the Command is principally and explicitely given to the Parents yet so as it is secondarily and inclusively spoken to the children that do enter into Covenant either in or with their Parents If this be not a truth how can it be said the uncircumcised man-child shall be cut off from his people he hath broken my Covenant If he may be cut off from his people for breach of Covenant he may be supposed to Covenant and the Lord may look upon him in the notion of a Covenanter Whereas you say you never read of any Command given to Infants but on the contrary Deut. 11.2 I pray you let us read the Text And I know you this day for I speak not with your children which have not known and which have not seen the chastisement of the Lord your God his greatnesse his mighty hand and his stretched out arme and his miracles and his acts which he did in the midst of Egypt c. Here I demand shall we absolutely conclude that God did not speak at all to the children of these parents who only were eye-witnesses of his miracles done in Egypt Surely then we must conclude that all the exhortation in Moses his law did concerne the Parents only that were then alive and not the children in after generations Doth not this glosse crosse the whole scope of Scripture Do we not read everywhere that the Parents were to teach their children and that the children were to remember the wonders and miracles which the Lord had done in Egypt For the Text the scope of it is this Moses doth more specially exhort them that were alive to love the Lord their God to keep his charge and his statutes vers 1. because their eyes had seen all the great acts which he had done vers 7. Now Sir Whereas it is said that the Lord did not speak to the children you cannot conclude this absolutely that he did not speak to them at all but only respectively in that particular sense Now what is this but a fallacy as Logicians terme it à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter But supposing that these words could not be spoken to the children you go on and enquire whether they were spoken to the Apostles when you say to me pag. 6. lin 23. But happily you conceive that in these words a Commission was given to the Apostles to baptize Father and Child but be baptized every one of you cannot help you there neither For if these had been words spoken to the Apostles then the Apostles had been commanded to repent and be baptized Such a dexterity you have to make difficulties where none be Therefore to the clearing of this matter from this mist which you would purposely cast over it you are to note in the administration of Baptisme there is the administrator and the person baptizing and there is the subject and person baptized Now I say the Command doth extend to both it doth extend to the Administrator to minister Baptisme from the Commission of Christ and it doth appertain to Beleevers to receive Baptisme they and the children under their education when they come to professe the Christ come in the flesh In case the Parents neglect the bringing of their children to Baptisme they do in sense omit the publick profession of the Faith a considerable part of which is to engage themselves and those that live under their education to the Lord Christ But now to the third point Thirdly You say it is a great mistake to judge these Jews to whom Peter spake to be Beleevers they are your own words If there were no beleeving Parents there could be no Beleevers Infants Sir I do agree with you that the Consequence is good but that these men who were exhorted by the Apostle to be baptized they and their children that they were not looked upon by him in the notion of Beleevers before Baptisme this I deny Indeed according to the usuall method of your partie whose cheif designe is to make the people you bring in two or three simple reasons of your own to prove them Beleevers and patch them upon my back as if I were the author of them But first I do not say because the Promise did belong to them that therefore they were Beleevers for then all the seed of Israel would be Beleevers of the last dispensation Secondly Neither do I say because they were cut to the heart and had the spirit of bondage that therefore they were Beleevers for to speak truly a Beleever doth make speciall application of the general promise but the spirit of bondage doth arise from the particular assent to the general threats Yet neverthelesse in the particularity of the sin from whence the spirit of bondage