Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	church_n	member_n	visible_a	4,197	5	9.3868	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62869	A plea for anti-pædobaptists, against the vanity and falshood of scribled papers, entituled, The anabaptists anatomiz'd and silenc'd in a public dispute at Abergaveny in Monmouth-shire Sept. 5. 1653. Betwixt John Tombes, John Cragg, and Henry Vaughan, touching infant-baptism. By John Tombes, B.D.	Tombes, John, 1603?-1676.	1654 (1654)	Wing T1811; ESTC R206989	34,969	48

are propounded to us as our rule His testimony out of Bellarmine intimates that Bellarmine said There is no impediment to infants baptism because the case is clear as if Bellarmine would not have said it had the case not been clear whereas it is more likely to be false than true because Bellarmine a Jesuit saith it yea it is manifestly false for the institution being onely to baptize Disciples prohibits baptizing of infants which are not such but for want of being Disciples uncapable of Baptism But Mr. Cragg in his fourth Argument will prove infant-baptism commanded Matth. 28. 19. because Nations are commanded to be baptized To this I answered before in the Dispute and my answer is and was Nations are not commanded to be baptized without any other circumscription but Disciples of the Nations Mr. Cragg confessed pag. 48. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is Ye shall make Disciples and then baptizing is of Disciples His speech Infants are not uncapable of Baptism because they have not faith and repentance because Christ was baptized without repentance is frivolous for there is not the same end of Christs Baptism and ours and therefore though repentance were not required of him yet it is of us and the want of it makes infants uncapable of Baptism It is false that God requires no more of persons in Covenant and born of believing Parents to their Baptism but a meer objective power or receptability as he cals it as was in the world at its creation or in the regeneration which he new makes us And it is meerly false that upon any such account as he speaks of many whole families were baptized or that any infants were included The very Texts which speak of the baptizing of the housholds either there or elsewhere speak of their fearing God Acts 2. 2. that all the houseshould be saved by Peters words Acts 11. 14. had repentance and the like gift with the Apostles v. 17 18. had the word spoken to them Acts 16. 32. believed v. 34 Acts 18. 8. addicted themselves to the Ministery of the Saints 1 Cor. 16 15. Which shew no infants were meant under the houshold for they did none of these things Mr. Cragg goes on Argument 5. They that are capable of the Kingdom and the blessing which is the greater are capable of Baptism which is the lesser But infants are capable of the Kingdom and the blessing which is the greater Therefore they are capable of Baptism which is the lesser To which I answer The major is false if it were true it would follow infants are capable of the Kingdom and the blessing which is the greater therefore they are capable of the Lords Supper Ordination to the Ministery Church-discipline which are the less Though into the Kingdom of Heaven infants be admitted by God who knows who are his without any visible expression yet into the visible Church persons are not admitted without visible testimony of their faith of which sort were all added to the Church Acts 2. 47. Not one of those Texts Mark 10. 13. to 17. Mark 9. 14 36 37. Mat. 18. 2 3 4. Matth. 19. 13 14 15. Luke 9. 14 15. Luke 18. 15 16. severall nor all joyntly prove infants visible church-Church-members The kingdom of God Mark 10. 14. is not the visible Church for into it such as are not humble as little children may enter which our Saviour denies v. 15. but the same with the Kingdom v. 23 24 25. into which it is so hard and impossible for a rich man or one that trusts in riches to enter which is called v. 17 30 eternal life It is false that Christ saith The Angels of little ones in age see the face of his Father which is in Heaven But of little ones in spirit who are converted and believe in Christ Matth 18. 3 6 10. for whose sake they are sent Heb. 1. 14. They are but Paedebaptists dreams that the three Evangelists recorded Christs blessing little ones to check Antipaedobaptists or to declare that which Mr. Cragg cals a precious truth though it be a very ly and may be gathered to be so even from the story For sure if infants had been to be baptized Christ would have then appointed them to be baptized and blamed his Apostles for not doing it And therefore Mr. Craggs questions are answered by questions 1. Doth Christ take children in his arms and would be have all put out of his visible Church Answ. Doth Christ no more but take them up in his arms lay his hands on them and bless them And shall we presume to do more without any warrant of his even to admit them into his visible Church by Baptism 2. Would he have us receive them in his Name and yet not receive them into his visible Church c Answ Where doth Christ ever bid us receive little children in age Where did he ever send them that they might be received in his name must we make Christs words to import that which we would in another censure as a spice of madnesse when he hath told us plainly they are his Apostles and other Preachers he hath sent whom we are to receive in his name Mark 9. 41. Luke 9. 48. though they are as mean and contemptible as a little child How should children be received but by providing Nurses would Christ have us provide Nurses for little children our Lord Christ expresseth a cup of cold water to drink as some part of the reception in his name Mark 9. 41. Is this a thing fit to entertain an infant with This is enough to answer Mr. Craggs frivolous questions And in answer to the words of Mr. Baxter who is the godly and reverend Divine he means I say for my part seeing the will of Christ is that I must walk by and his word that I must be judged by and he hath given so full a discovery of his will in this point I will boldly adventure to follow his rule to baptize disciples professing faith and had rather answer him upon his own incouragement for not admitting by baptism those he never appointed to be baptized than to adventure upon the doing like Uzzah upon mine own head that which doth prophane the ordinance of baptism and corrupt the Church of Christ Mr. Craggs sixt argument is Infants are disciples therefore they may be baptized The antecedent he would prove from Acts 15. 10. in that it was circumcision which was the yoke which he proves from ver. 5. But he confesseth it was not circumcision only but the attendants and that it is no shift but a cleer truth that it is not circumcision as acted on infants but as taught imposed on the consciences of believing Gentiles with the rest of Moses his Law as necessary to salvation by some teachers which cannot be said of infants is so manifest from the text that I dare boldly say they that assert that by disciples Acts 15. 10. are meant do but wrangle against cleer light