Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	apostle_n	sin_n	word_n	4,593	5	4.4164	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45681	Infant baptism God's ordinance, or, Clear proof that all the children of believing parents are in the covenant of grace and have as much a right to baptism the now seal of the covenant, as the infant seed of the Jewes had to circumcision, the then seal of the covenant / by Michael Harrison ...	Harrison, Michael, Minister at Potters-Pury.	1694 (1694)	Wing H905; ESTC R9581	26,416	65

in all or some of those Families than any have to think there was none Obj. 9. The Baptism of Believers is come in the room of Infant Church-membership Ans it hath been abundantly proved that Infant Church-membership was no Ceremony or Type if any say it was let them prove it Therefore as it was never abolished nor Infants never unchurched nothing can be said to come in the room of it 2. That Baptizing Adult Believers should exclude Infants is as if the receiving and Circumcising the Gentile Proselytes into the Church of Israel had been a means to have unchurched their Infants which for any to affirm would be extremely ridiculous Obj. 10. How can Infants covenant with God or be engaged by this Sign or where doth God engage Parents to promise any thing for their Children Answ That Parents may and ought to covenant for their Children plainly appears 1 From Nature Lex naturae est Lex Dei may not Parents take a Lease for their Children who buyeth Lands and not for himself and Heirs are not Children bound by those Ties and then much more to God 2. From Scripture Deut. 29.10 11 12 13. here you may see the Parents Covenant not only for their Children then present but unborn and they were by Circumcision to enter them into Covenant so Deut. 26.17 18. and hath the Gospel taken away the Parent 's Right in his Child Obj. We promise what we cannot perform Ans We promise to educate this Child for God to instruct him in Gospel truths leaving the renovation and sanctification of the Heart to God who works when on whom and by what means he pleaseth May not a man covenant for himself and Heirs to pay a yearly Rent and what follows in case it be not paid but forfeiture of his Lease and that from the person that should have paid it Obj. 11. If Infants must be baptized why may they not as well receive the Lord's Supper 1. If there were that Scripture-proof to administer the Lord's Supper to Infants as there is for baptizing them we would do it when they have as clearly proved the one as we have the other 2. Baptism is the initiating Seal of entering into the Church which Infants being Disciples of Christ are capable of the Lord's Supper is the confirming Seal to be administred only to grown Christians therefore Infants have a right to the one but not to the other Obj. 12. If Infants ought to be baptized why is it left so dark in the New Testament Ans 1. It 's not dark which admits of such clear proof as you see this doth 2. That all Christ's Disciples ought to be baptized is not dark Matth. 28.19 Infants are Disciples therefore 't is plain they ought to be baptized Obj. 13. The baptizing persons before they know occasions much gross Ignorance Ans 1. Christ is the occasion of the ruin and damnation of thousands for he was set for the fall as well as the rising of many in Israel Luke 2.3 4. but had it been better the world had had no Christ 2. The Gospel is the savour of death to many had it been better then we had had no Gospel What will not the wicked take hurt by 3. Let them shew what in Baptism tends to breed Ignorance Is the entring a Boy 's name in the School the way to breed him in ignorance if a Child's name be put into a Lease is this like to hurt him what harm is it to be in Christ's Family from our youth Nay the contrary is the way to breed Ignorance and Prophaneness for how many sad Examples have we among the Anabaptists who refusing to dedicate their Infants to Christ they are ignorantly and bruitishly brought up live and die like Pagans Thus it hath been proved abundantly that Infant Baptism is God's Ordinance that the Infant Seed of Believers were once taken into the Church as visible Church-members that Christ owns them c. therefore they ought to be baptized that it 's a false and dangerous Doctrine to deny them Church-membership and Baptism Enough hath been said for the satisfaction of those who are seeking Truth such who wilfully shut their Eyes it 's in vain to set light before them because seeing they see but do not understand and hearing they hear but do not perceive There 's one thing more remaining viz. The right manner of baptizing that shall next be dispatched CHAP. VII Shewing that Washing Pouring or otherwise applying Water to the Body is the right way of Baptizing and not Dipping as now used by the Anabaptists WHEN the Anabaptists speak of Baptizing as 't is now done generally by all the Reformed Churches they do it with much scorn and contempt and can scarcely do it in any other terms than Sprinkling They say we may as well sprinkle a Lamb nay a Dog or a Cat as an Infant what Christian Ear doth not abhor such Language Our Protestant Divines usually define Baptism thus it is a washing in or of water or an applying water to the Baptized Or by sprinkling the Baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost None say the Anabaptists are rightly baptized but such as are dipped or plunged over head in the water To this I answer three things 1. That which is a plain breach of the Sixth Commandment Thou shalt not kill is no Ordinance of God but a most heinous Sin but dipping over-head in cold water in these cold Countreys is a plain breach of the Sixth Commandment Thou shalt not kill which forbids the taking away of our own Life or the Life of our Neighbour unjustly or any thing that tends thereunto Now dipping in cold water tends to the taking away Life as many have found by experience who have contracted such Distempers in dipping as have hastened their Deaths Therefore the so doing is a great Sin 2. The Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though it be derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to dip or plunge yet it 's taken for any kind of washing or cleansing where there is no dipping Mat. 3.11 Mark 7.4 and it sometimes signifies sprinkling yea to baptize by sprinkling 1 Cor. 10.2 They were all baptized unto Moses by the cloud in the sea all the world knows a Cloud doth but sprinkle Heb. 9.10 divers Washings or Baptisms 't is evident the Apostle means the sprinkling of Blood Exod. 29.20 21. and the Law of cleansing the Leper Lev. 14.4 to 9. 3. Washing sprinkling or pouring water upon the Body aptly represents the thing signified and the Sign need not exceed the thing signified The washing away Sin by the Blood of Christ is the thing signified in Baptism and this the Holy Ghost delights to express by washing sprinkling or pouring out water Psal 51.7 Ezek. 36.25 Zec. 12.10 1 Cor. 6.11 Tit. 3.5 1 Pet. 1.2 Heb. 9. and 12.24 Quest But did not the Apostles baptize by dipping did not Philip and the Eunuch go down into the water Ans 1. It was

never yet proved that persons were then dipped As for Philip's Baptism Act. 8.38 the particular manner is not exprest neither can it be collected neither doth the Greek Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 necessarily signify going into but rather unto the water as it 's frequently rendered in other places Matt. 15.24 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto the lost sheep So in all these and many other places Matth. 26.10 John 6.9.13.1 1 Cor. 10.2 2 Pet. 4.7 So that into and out of the water seems to be no more than unto and from the water Travellers tell us it was in the Village Bethsara where was a very small Fountain not sufficient to dip in 2. The Multitude John and the Apostles baptized it 's highly probable it was never done by dipping Matth. 3.5 6. nay almost impossible it should for these two Reasons 1. The extream scarcity of water water was extream scarce in those hot Countreys that there was not water to dip such multitudes in Enon where John was baptizing there was not much water 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is but Oculus an Eye a very little Fountain none in probability to dip a multitude in And so likewise Acts 2.41 when Three thousand persons were baptized St. Peter began to preach about the third Hour of the day which was about Nine of the Clock these Three thousand were converted by this Sermon and were all baptized the same day it must needs be for on before they began to baptize and there was no River near Jerusalem but the Brook Cedron which Travellers tell us was in Summer but a dry Ditch therefore 't is highly improbable that either John or the Apostles baptized by dipping 2. From the multitude of people that were baptized We do not find John had any to help him to baptize and is it likely he could dip such multitudes and is it to be imagined that Three thousand persons could be converted prepared for and be baptized by dipping in a few hours 3. If they were dipped it must be either naked or in their Cloaths 1. It 's very unlikely they were dipped naked for this would be very immodest for Ministers to baptize Women and Maids naked a means to stir up lust and unclean Affections and so a breach of the Seventh Commandment Thou shalt not commit Adultery which forbids all unchast thoughts words and actions now to look on a Woman's nakedness is an unchast action expresly forbidden Lev. 20.17 and for this reason God would not have the Priest go up to the Altar by steps Gen. 28.42 Besides there was a mixt multitude of men and women baptized together and if they were naked they must see one another's nakedness which would have been an horrible reproach to Religion 2. If they were dipped in their Cloaths it was either in all their Cloaths or some provided for the purpose If in all their Cloaths is it at all likely that they should go up and down in the wet Cloaths and that would not be dipping to speak properly but soaking Or was it in some Cloaths only as some light Under garment or something provided for the purpose there would be much immodesty in it and it would be little better than naked Besides Where must this multitude have Cloaths for the purpose must they go home and fetch them and provide them for they designed no such thing when they came together nay many of them lived at a very great distance Let mens Imaginations work which way soever it will appear extreamly unlikely that there was any dipping in their baptizing that which is most probable is That John the Baptist and the Apostle went unto the water or it may be into it with their Feet wearing nothing but Sandals and so with their Hands did take up water and sprinkle or pour on the persons to be baptized And how much less probability is there that in the baptizing of Housholds as the Jailor's in the night Lydia Cornelius and others that there was any dipping 4. If it were clearly demonstrated which never was yet done that persons were baptized by dipping yet would it be proved but occasional in those hot Countreys There is no Precept or Command for it and therefore it would be no way binding to us no more than our Lord's administring his Last Supper in an Inn and in an upper Room in the Evening to none but men and Ministers doth oblige us to do so Christ having no-where appointed the quantity of Water in Baptism no more than the quantity of Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper 'T is neither the quantity of Water in the one nor of Bread and Wine in the other that gives efficacy to the Ordinance Obj. But if it be God's way we must do it whatever be said against it Ans This is but to beg the question moreover we have proved it is not God's way Obj. But say they The significancy is not sufficiently exprest unless we are dipped in the water Rom. 6.4 We are buried with him by baptism into death which place the Anabaptists produce to prove Baptism by dipping as also the necessity of it whereas neither can be hence proved The Apostle's design there is to engage Christians to forsake and put off Sin as is evident v. 1. the argument he uses to enforce this is That in their baptism they were baptized into Christ into the likeness of his death and were so buried with him in baptism v. 3 4. so that as Christ dyed for sin by their Covenant-engagement they were to dye to sin and rise to newness of life So that what the Apostle here argues from is our Baptismal Covenanting with God which doth not necessarily suppose Dipping Obj. But the Apostle alludes to the Custom of going under the Water Ans How doth that appear they must prove the Custom before they can prove this is an allusion to the Custom so that this Text doth not prove the Custom and the Apostle's discourse may be well understood without it And if the Custom be owned yet the necessity of Dipping doth not thence follow Other Scriptures allude to Sprinkling we may as well thence infer the absolute necessity of the Custom of Sprinkling as 1 Cor. 10.2 where it 's said That the Children of Israel were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea or as the words may be read together with Moses by the cloud in the sea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes being so rendered Luke 4.1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Spirit so they were Baptized by Sprinkling for a Cloud doth but sprinkle by the cloud i. e. by Christ who was this Cloud or else appeared in this Cloud as is evident from Exod. 13.21 22. this was at least a figure and type of Baptism and in several other Texts APPLICATION IS this so That that Covenant of Grace made with Abraham whereof Circumcision then was and Baptism now is the Seal is a Covenant which comprehends all Believers and all

It shews that it is the will of God that it should be so because Christ passed through each Age to sanctify it to us Thus Irenaeus who lived about an hundred and fifty years after Christ these are his words Ideo per omnem venit etatem infantibus Infans factus c. Therefore Christ passed through every Age for Infants he was made an Infant sanctifying Infants in little Children being a little Child sanctifying them that have that very Age here 's clear proof from Antiquity of Infant Church-membership Argument 3. If Infants are federally holy then they have a right to visible Church-membership but Infants are federally holy 1 Cor. 7.14 as we have before shewed and all sound Interpreters tell us Argument 4. If Infants belong to the Kingdom of Heaven then they belong to and are Members of the visible Church but Infants do belong to the Kingdom of Heaven therefore they belong to the visible Church Now some Infants do belong to the Kingdom of Heaven Matth. 19.14 Suffer little children to come unto me and forbid them not for of such is the kingdom of heaven By the Kingdom of Heaven here must needs be meant either the Kingdom of Grace that is the Gospel-Church here and then the meaning is That the Gospel Church which is Christ's Kingdom on Earth is made up of Infants as well as adult persons and this is most likely to be the meaning And so the thing in question is clearly proved Or else by the Kingdom of Heaven must be meant the Kingdom of Glory That is Children shall go to Heaven as well as grown Persons If so still the consequence is clear if Infants are Members of the invisible Church then have they an undoubted right to be Members of the visible Church I grant a Person may be a Member of the invisible Church and yet no Member of the Visible Yet whoever is a Member of the invisible Church hath a right to visible Church-membership Argument 5. If Infants are to be received in Christ's name then they do undoubtedly belong to Christ's Church But we are commanded to receive Infants in Christ's name Mark 9.36 37. He that receiveth one such child in my name receiveth me c. Doth Christ take them into his Arms and would he have them cast out of his Church Are we to receive them in Christ's name and do they not belong to Christ nor to his Church See Mark 10.13 14 15. Did Christ say all this to deceive us certainly they are visible Members of the visible Church Now if this be so that some Infants were sometimes admitted by God's own appointment and that by vertue of the Covenant of Grace visible Church-members Then undoubtedly they ought to be baptized for Baptism is the only Rite that Jesus Christ who is Head of the Church hath appointed for the admitting Members into his Church Matth. 28.18 19. All that are or will be Christ's Disciples must be baptized in his name if any know any other let them shew it Now these two Arguments are abundantly sufficient to prove the Infants right to Baptism and it is needless to name any other But yet because some think a thing never proved unless much be said and many Arguments be brought I shall therefore add some other Arguments though I shall not dwell nor enlarge on them because the right understanding of these already mentioned will give light to what remains CHAP. IV. Containing the Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh Eighth and Ninth Arguments for Infant Baptism ARGUMENT III. IF any Infants are Christ's Disciples then those Infants ought to receive the Badg of a Disciple which is Baptism But some Infants are Disciples Act. 15.10 Why lay you a yoke upon the necks of the disciples Now this Yoke was Circumcision as v. 1. and v. 5. There were some that would impose Circumcision on the Disciples of Christ Now this must needs be understood of Infants as well as others because that Circumcision was most commonly administred to Infants Therefore if Infants are not only meant they are chiefly intended now that all Disciples of Christ ought to be baptized there is a plain command for it and so a command for Infant Baptism Matth. 28.19 Go therefore teach all nations but in the Greek it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Go disciple all nations baptizing them Infants are Disciples as before therefore ought to be baptized ARGUMENT IV. If it hath been the constant custom of the Church of Christ all along from the Apostles days to baptize Infants none never denying It till some hundreds of years after Then we may rationally conclude it was the practice of the Apostles to baptize Infants but the former is true therefore the latter Now that Infant Baptism was practised in the Primitive Times by the whole Universal Catholick Church is evident Irenaeus who had seen Policarpus St. John's Disciple and therefore lived very near the Apostles days saith Christ came to save and sanctify all sorts Qui per eum venascuntur in Deum Infantes c. All that are born to God Infants little ones and Children Born to God in the Ecclesiastical Phrase is but the same with Infant Baptism Tertullian who lived about the Year of Redemption 200. moved some Scruples about Baptism yet never denied the lawfulness of it And in case that the Infant was in danger of death did vehemently urge it Origen who lived but little after him speaks again and again of the baptizing little Children and saith They received it by Tradition from the Apostles About 150 years after the death of St. John there was one Fidus who raised a doubt Whether Infants might be baptized before they were eight days old because Circumcision was not to be administred till then Therefore Cyprian Bishop of Carthage and 66 more met to consider this Case and agreed That Infants recens nati new born might be baptized And thus we might cite Testimonies of Athanasius Chrysostom Augustin and many others that it was the constant custom of the Church to baptize Infants Which Custom is still continued in all the Churches of Christ all the world over as appears in all the Confessions of all the Protestant Churches As Helvetia Bohemia Belgia Auspurg Saxony Wittenberg Swedeland France and Peidmont and Histories tell us 't is practised by the Russians Muscovites and all the Christians in India Syria Cyprus Mesopotamia Babylon Palastine and in every part of the world where there be any Christian Churches planted ARGUMENT V. The Fifth Argument for Infant Baptism is this If the Infants of believing Parents be in the Covenant of Grace and the Promise of the Covenant do belong to them then they may and ought to be baptized But such Infants are in covenant and the Promise of the Covenant doth belong to them therefore they ought to be baptized That they are in covenant as well as their Parents is undeniably evident from the tenure of that Covenant made with Abraham which was a