Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	adam_n	die_v	life_n	4,790	5	5.0368	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A41787	A religious contest, or A brief account of a disputation holden at Blyton in the county of Lincoln between Mr. William Fort minister of the perochial congregation at Blyton on the one part, and Thomas Grantham, servant to the baptised churches on the other part : whereunto is added Brief animadversions upon Dr. Stilling-fleet his digressions about infant baptism in his book intituled, A rational account of the Protestant religion, &c., in both which are shewed that the generality of the nations now professing Christianity are as yet unbaptised into Christ : 1. Because their sprinkling and crossing the fore-head is not the right way of baptising, 2. Because infants ought not to be baptised.	Grantham, Thomas, 1634-1692.	1674 (1674)	Wing G1544; ESTC R39430	28,329	42

by the offence of once the Judgement came on all men to condemnation so by the obedience of one the free gift abounded towards all men to justification of life Mr. Fort. These places do not prove that all Infants dying in infancy shall be saved for he speaks here only of the resurrection of the Dead T. G. These places do shew that what death and condemnation came on infants by Adam is made void by the death of Christ and I desire you to answer me this Question whether you believe that any infants dying in infancy shall be damned Mr. Fort. yes I do be●ieve some infants dying in infancy shall be damned here the people gave a general sigh as disliking so harsh a saying T. G. Then you are no friend to infants shall the Lord tell us the Son shall not bear the iniquity of the father and shall we no● believe him Mr. Fort. The Lord doth say he will visit the iniquities of the father upon the children unto the third and fourth generation T. G. yea Sir but it is of them that hate him but yet I grant in respect of temporal punishments the children do often bear the iniquities of their fathers yea all infants do bear the sin of their father Adam to this day but our discourse is of eternal condemnation in which respect I say infants shall not bear the iniquity of their father seeing Christ saith of infants indefinitely of such are the kingdom of God Mr. Fort Well I have shewed that infants being in the Covenant ought therefore to be baptized and it is said 1 Cor. 7. that infants are holy and so they are in Covenant with their believing parents T. G I have answered your argument by distinguishing betwixt the duty of the covenant and the mercy of eternal life in the first I say infants are not in the covenant but in the other I say they are for they shall be saved by Christ And for the holiness the 1 Cor. 7. it is expounded by Erasmus and others of your own Doctors to be only a legi●timate holiness and indeed being derived from the unbelievers being sanctified it cannot fairly be understood of any other kind of cleanness then that which is Matrimonial Mr. Wright Mr. W. interposed saying Diodate doth expound that place of a covenant holiness T. G. I grant he doth so yet Augustine far more antient then he saith that whatsoever that Ho●iness is it is certain it is not of power to make Christians or remit sins Mr. E. I marvel you ●…ould deny infants the seal seeing you grant them to be in the covenant T. G. I do not deny them the seal any more then your self who deny them the Lords Supper which was allowed them in old time for 600 years together Mr. F. What Author saies so I do not think you can shew that in any good author T. G. I can shew it from your own Doctors in a learned treatise called a Scholastical discourse about symbolising vvith Anti-Christ in Ceremonies Mr. Fort. Infants being in the Covenant are in the Church and therefore cannot be denyed baptism T. Grantham I answer by the former distinction if by being in the Covenant and in the Church you mean the whole number of the saved I grant infants to be in the Covenant and in the Church but if you mean those onlie who are in the actual profession of gospel Ordinances as baptism and the like I say no Scripture shews them to be so in the Covenant Mr. Fort repeating what he said before rose up to go away then Tho. Grantham said Gentlemen though we differ in opinion yet I desire we may endeavour to maintain the great duty of Charitie towards each other till God shall rectifie our judgements in these things Mr. W Mr. Wright replied saying it was not meet to place all our Religion in these ●hings but to walk in love one towards another or to this effect and thus in a f●iendlie manner the meeting was dissolved everie man went away in peace The next day the baptised Christians met together to preach the Word Mr. Fort and Mr. Wright came to the meeting and i● a very civil manner assaied to discourse with them about the Authoritie by which they Preach supposing that they had no ordinarie calling to the ministry but when it was shewed them that no man was allowed to minister in the baptised Churches in the capacity of a Pastor or other Officer without due election and ordination by fasting and prayer with the laying on of hands by the Presbiterie Bishops or overseers of the Church they then onlie opposed that libertie of Prophecie which we allow saying that gifted men in the church as meer gifted christians might not praie or expound the Word in publick assemblies we on the contrarie alledgd that gifted christians as such might lawfullie speak in the church to exhortation c. in a modest and humble manner for the improvement of gi●ts and the profit of the church Quoting to this purpose 1 Pe. 4 10 11 1 Cor. 14. 31. Acts 18. 25 26. We spent about half an hour in friendlie discourse about the meaning of those Scriptures but not agreeing in our expositions Mr. Fort took his leave and we proceeded in our work FINIS Brief ANIMADVERSIONS UPON Dr. STILLINGFLEET'S Digressions about the Baptising of Infants In his Book intituled A Rational account of the grounds of the Protestant Religion c. Wherein The insufficiency of his grounds for Infant Baptism is discovered By Thomas Grantham Job 14. 4. Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean one Isa 29. 16. Surely your turning things upside down shall be esteemed as the petters Clay LONDON Printed in the Year 1674. To the Reader IT is not any conceit of my fitness to contend with Learned Men in the controversies depending about sacred Baptism which moves me to this present undertaking but the experience I have of the mistake of some persons who take the things brought by Dr. Stilling-fleet in favour of Infant Baptism to be of greater weight then what hath been done by other Men in that question as also I might by this Paper move some abler hand to reckon morefully and Methodically with his new devices if upon consideration they find themselves concerned to do it But chiefly my aim is to move if it may be the learned Authour to consider how much he injures the Cause he manages against the Papists with so much Judgement and Learning whilst he endeavours to support his Traditional Infant Sprinkling for Baptism it is not which being allowed other innovations of Popery or other Sects will certainly be supported together with it as having the same grounds and in some respect fairer pretences to obtrude upon the Church of God from all which errours let her be delivered by the protection of the Almighty to whose grace I comit thee Thine to serve thee in Christ Tho. Grantham Brief Animadversions upon Dr. Stillingfleet's Digressions about

verse 49 One Law shall be to him that is home born and unto the strager that sojourneth among you Thus we see the Law is as express for the circumcising Proselites and their males as for Israel themselves Diodate also expounds the first place by the second The servant that is born meaning saith he the Proselite who of his own free will shall add himself to the Church by the profession of Gods true worship But now if we admit Dr. S. his rule that the measure as to the capacity of Divine Institutions must be fetched from the ends thereof yet will he be so farr from gaining that he will quite lose his cause For if by the ends of Baptism he means the things signified in Baptism as that he does for he said they who are capable of the thing signified ought not to be denyed the sign then we shall certainly gain one thing out of two and either of them will serve our turn to shew his mistake viz. either Infants are not capable of Baptism becau●e not capable of all things signified thereby or else that the Protestants do violate their own rule in denying Infants some other holy signs as general as Baptism when yet they are capable of some of the things signified thereby and this shall evidently appear ●y running the parralell between us as to the grounds upon which you deny Infants the priviledge of the Lords Table and we deny them Baptism And first 1 The things signified by the Lords Table as the ends of that Institution is Christ Crucified for us and to c●me again to receive us to him●elf of these mercies Infants are capable because they shall be saved by the death and comming of the Lord Jesus thus they have the thing signified yet you deny them the sign because they understand not the thing represented by the sign Answerable to this we say by Baptism is signified the death and resurection of Christ and our salvation thereby of this mercy signified in Baptism Infants are capable but yet the sign is not given to them because they understand not the thing signified thereby 2. The ends or things signified by the Lords Table on our part are the profession of our fa●th the manifestation of our union with the Church c. of these ends Infants are not capable therefore then do not admit them to the Lords Ta●le Answerable to this we say the things signified in baptism on our ●●rt are the profession of o●r faith and manifestation of our union 〈◊〉 the Saints c. of these ends ●nfants are not capable therefore 〈…〉 them not to baptism 3. Our coming to the Lords Table holds forth abstainence f●om the Levened bread of malice and wickedness and our feeding upon the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth of these ends as they are duties Infants are not capable therefore you admit them not to the Lords Table Answerable to this we say baptism holds forth our death to sin and the newness of life from our baptism to the end of these ends of baptism Infants are not capable and therefore we admit them not to baptism for the rule and measure as to the capacity of divine Institutions is to be fetched from the ends of them The same might be said concerning the imposition of hands with prayer for the Spirit of Promise seeing it was practised by the Apostles upon the newly baptised indifferently yet you admit no Infants to this Divine Institution though you suppose them to be baptised although according to Protestant Doctrine they are capable of the promise Act. 2. 38 39. And the benediction signified and obtained thereby by which your inconsistancy with your own rule is further manifested and hence I infer according to your own words by a parity of reason built on equal grounds you ought not to baptise Infants because the rule and measure as to Divine Institutions or the capacity of the subjects ther●of are to be fetched from the ends thereof Not from some ends only and those too only which we please as Dr. S doth unadvisedly teach for so there would be no Man or but very few but might be brought to Baptism or other ordinances seeing they are capable of several things signified therein as the death of Christ for the sins of the world and his Resurection by which all shall rise again and whether they believe it or no yet he is the Lord that bought them and a mediator between God and them that his long-suffering might lead them to repentance Wherefore your instance of our Saviours being baptised without repentance avails you nothing unless you were a le to prove a special case to be a general rule for the practise of ordinances which yet you cannot but know is pernicious many ways nor can you rationally believe that because Christ who was no sinner was baptized without repentance that therefore you must baptise sinners without repentance also if otherwise then why may not Persons be admitted to the Lords Table without self examination seeing Christ did partake of it without self examination having no need to do so certainly though Christ did this it shall never be demonstrated that the Members of his Church may do it without self examination and yet thus went the matter in old time for hundreds of years together so true is the maxim admit one absurdity and more will follow But to make an end of this its evident Christ in being baptised did his duty to God and had he not been baptised he had not fulfilled all righteousness Let it now be shewed that it●s the duty of infants to be baptised or that they or any body else commits sin in refusing infant baptism and then we shall stand upon no further capacity on their part nor oppose this instance as to the end for which it is brought but till this be done we justly reject such Argumentation Neither is it true that what we say of the incapacity of infants c. reflects upon the wisdom of God in appointing circumcision for infants for Gods command made them fit subjects for it together with the nature of the covenant which he made with Abraham and his according to the flesh which covenant he also ordained to be in their Flesh by circumcision Gen. 17. 13. Now therefore when it shall appear that the covenant of the Gospel I mean it as established by Christ in his Church is made with any Man and his seed according to the Flesh and that God hath required the Gospel covenant should be in their Flesh by baptism and so every infant born of them or servant bought with Money to be baptised we shall then grant that to insist on the incapacity of infants would reflect upon the wisdom of God but sith this neither is nor can be done all these pretended reflections falls really upon Dr. S. for denying infants the Lords Supper because of their incapacity who yet were admitted to the Passeover of which they were as