Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	apostolical_a	faith_n	tradition_n	2,256	5	9.3848	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47448	A counter-antidote, to purge out the malignant effects of a late counterfeit, prepared by Mr. Gyles Shute ... being an answer to his vindication of his pretended Antidote to prevent the prevalency of Anabaptism, shewing that Mr. Hercules Collins's reply to the said author remains unanswered : wherein the baptism of believers is evinced to be God's ordinance, and the baptized congregations proved true churches of Jesus Christ : with a further detection of the error of pedo-baptism : to which is added, An answer to Mr. Shute's reply to Mr. Collins's half-sheet / by Benjamin Keach.	Keach, Benjamin, 1640-1704.	1694 (1694)	Wing K54; ESTC R18808	95,415	63

they affirm they do perform it by their Sureties Answ. If Suretiship for Children in Baptism is not required of God and the Sureties do not cannot perform those things for the Child then Suretiship is not of God and so signifies nothing but is an unlawful and sinful Undertaking But Suretiship in Childrens Baptism is not required of God and they do not cannot perform what they promise Ergo. Do they or can they cause the Child to sorsake the Devil and all his Works the Pomps and Vanities of this wicked World and all the sinful Lusts of the Flesh In a Word Can they make the Child or Children to repent and truly believe in Jesus Christ for these are the things they promise for them and in their Name Alas they want Power to do it for themselves and how then should they do it for others Besides we see they never mind nor regard their Covenant in the Case and will not God one Day say Who has required these things at your Hands Arg. 7. If there be no Precedent in the Scripture as there is no Precept that any Infant was baptized then Infants ought not to be baptized But there is no Precedent that any Infant was baptized in the Scripture Ergo. If there is any Precedent or Example in Scripture that any Infant was baptized let them shew us where we may find it Erasmus saith 'T is no where expressed in the Apostolical Writings that they baptized Children Union of the Church and on Rom. 6. Calvin saith It is no where expressed by the Evangelists that any one Infant was baptized by the Apostles Iustit c. 16. Book 4. Ludovicus Vives saith None of old were wont to be baptized but in grown Age and who desired and understood what it was Vide Ludov. The Magdeburgenses say That concerning the baptizing the Adult both Jews and Gentiles we have sufficient Proof from Acts 2 8 10 16 Chapters but as to the baptizing of Infants they can meet with no Example in Scripture Magdeb. Cent. l. 2. p. 469. Dr. Taylor saith It is against the perpetual Analogy of Christ's Doctrine to baptize Infants For besides that Christ never gave any Precept to baptize them nor ever himself nor his Apostles that appears did baptize any of them All that either he or his Apostles said concerning it requires such previous Dispositions of Baptism of which Infants are not capable viz. Faith and Repentance Lib. Proph. p. 239. Arg. 8. If whatsoever which is necessary to Faith and Practice is left in the Holy Scripture that being a compleat and perfect Rule and yet Infant-Baptism is not contained or to be found therein then Infant-Baptism is not of God But whatever is necessary to Faith and Practice is contained in the Holy Scriptures c. but Infant-Baptism is not to be found therein Ergo. That the Scripture is a perfect Rule c. we have the Consent of all the Ancient Fathers and Modern Divines Athanasius saith The Holy Scriptures being Inspirations of God are sufficient to all Instructions of Truth Athan. against the Gentiles Chrysostom saith All things be plain and clear in the Scripture and whatsoever are needful are manifest there Chrysost. on 2 Thess. and 2 Tim. 2. Basil saith That 〈…〉 ould be an Argument of Infidelity and a most certain Sign of Pride if any Man should reject any thing written and should introduce things not written Basil in his Sermon de Fide Augustine saith In the Scriptures are found all things which contain Faith manner of Living Hope Love c. Let us saith he seek no farther than what is written of God our Saviour lest a Man would know more than the Scriptures witness Arg. in his 198 Epistles to Fortunat. Theophilact saith It is part of a Diabolical Spirit to think any thing Divine without the Authority of the Holy Scripture Lib. 2. Paschal Isychius saith Let us who will have any thing observed of God search no more but that which the Gospel doth give unto us Lib. 5. c. 16. on Levit. Bellarmin saith That though the Arguments of the Anabaptists from the defect of Command or Example have a great Use against the Lutherans forasmuch as they use that Rite every where having no Command or ●xample theirs is to be re●ected yet is it of no Force against Catholicks who conclude the Apostolical Tradition is of no less Authority with us than the Scripture c. this of baptizing of Infants is an Apostolical Tradition Bellarm. in his Book de Bapt. 1 1. c. 8. Mr. Ball saith We must for every Ordinance look to the Institution and never stretch it wider nor draw it narrower than the Lord hath made it for he is the Institutor of the Sacraments according to his own Pleasure and 't is our part to learn of him both to whom how and for what End the Sacraments are to be administred Ball in his Answer to the New-England E●●ns p. 38 39. And as to the Minor 't is acknowledged by our Adversaries it is not to be found in the Letter of the Scripture And as to the Consequences drawn therefrom we have proved they are not natural from the Premises and though we ad●●●● of Consequences and Inferences if genuine yet no● in the case of an Institution respecting a practical Ordinance that is of meer positive Right Arg. 9. If Infant-Baptism was an Institution of Christ the Pedo-Baptists could not be at a loss about the Grounds of the Right Infants have to Baptism But the Pedo-Baptists are at a great Loss and differ exceedingly about the Grounds of the Right Infants have to Baptism Ergo 't is no Institution of Christ. As touching the Major I argue thus That which is an Institution of Christ the Holy Scripture doth shew as well the End and Ground of the Ordinance ●s the Subject and Manner of it But the Scripture speaks nothing of the End or Ground of Pedo-Baptism or for what reason they ought to be baptized Ergo 't is no Institution of Christ. The Minor is undeniable Some affirm as we have shewed p. 15. it was to take away Original Sin Some say it is their Right by the Covenant they being the Seed of Believers Others say Infants have Faith and therefore have a Right Others say They have a Right by the Faith of their Sureties Some ground their Right from an Apostolical Tradition others upon the Authority of Scripture Some say All Children of professed Christians ought to be baptized others say None but the Children of true Believers have a Right to it Sure if it was an Ordinance of Christ his Word would soon end this Controversy Arg. 10. If the Children of believing Gentiles as such are not the natural nor spiritual Seed of Abraham they can have no Right to Baptism or Church-Membership by virtue of any Covenant-transaction God made with Abraham But the Children of believing Gentiles as such are not the natural nor spiritual Seed of Abraham Ergo. Arg. 11. If no Man can

prove from Scripture that any spiritual Benefit redounds to Infants in their Baptism 't is no Ordinance of Christ. But no Man can prove from Scripture that any spiritual Benefit redounds to Infants in their Baptism Ergo. Arg. 12. That cannot be an Ordinance of Christ for which there is neither Command nor Example in all God's Word nor Promise to such who do it nor Threatnings to such who neglect it But there is no Command or Example in all the Word of God for the baptizing of little Babes nor Promise made to such who are baptized nor Threatnings to such who are not Ergo. That the Child lies under a Promise who is baptized or the Child under any Threatning or Danger that is not baptized let them prove it since it is denied Arg. 13. If no Parents at any time or times have been by God the Father Jesus Christ or his Apostles either commended for baptizing of their Children or reproved for neglecting to baptize them then Infant-Baptism is no Ordinance of God But no Parents at any time or times have been by God commended for baptizing of their Children c. Ergo Infant-Baptism is no Ordinance of God This Argument will stand unanswerable unless any can shew who they were that were ever commended for baptizing their Children or reproved for neglecting it or unless they can shew a parallel case Arg. 14. If Men were not to presume to alter any thing in the Worship of God under the Law neither to add thereto nor diminish therefrom and God is as strict and jealous of his Worship under the Gospel then nothing ought to be altered in God's Worship under the Gospel But under the Law Men were not to presume so to do and God is as strict and jealous under the Gospel Ergo. The Major cannot be denied The Minor is clear See thou make all things according to the Pattern shewed thee in the Mount Exod. 25. 40. and Levit. 10. 1 2. See how Nadab and Abihu sped for presuming to vary from the Command of God and Uzzah tho but in small Circumstances as they may seem to us How dare Men adventure this being so to change Baptism from Dipping into Sprinkling and the Subject from an Adult Believer to an ignorant Babe Add thou not into his Word c. Arg. 15. Whatever Practice opens a Door to any humane Traditions and Innovations in God's Worship is a great Evil and to be avoided But the Practice of Infant-Baptism opens a Door to any humane Traditions and Innovations in God's Worship Ergo to sprinkle or baptize Infants is a great Evil and to be avoided The Major will not be denied The Minor is clear because there is no Scripture-ground for it no Command nor Example for such a Practice in God's Word And if without Scripture-Authority the Church hath Power to do one thing she may do another and so ad infinitum Arg. 16. Whatsoever Practice reflects upon the Honour Wisdom and Care of Jesus Christ or renders him less faithful than Moses and the New Testament in one of its great Ordinances nay Sacraments to lie more obscure in God's Word than any Law or Precept under the Old Testament cannot be of God But the Practice of Infant-Baptism reflects on the Honour Care and Faithfulness of Jesus Christ and renders him less faithful than Moses and a great Ordinance nay Sacrament of the New Testament to lie more dark and obscure than any Precept under the Old Testament Ergo Infant-Baptism cannot be of God The Major cannot be denied The Minor is easily proved For he is bold indeed who shall affirm Infant-Baptism doth not lie obscure in God's Word One great Party who assert it say 't is not to be found in the Scripture at all but 't is an unwritten Apostolical Tradition others say it lies not in the Letter of the Scripture but may be proved by Consequences and yet some great Asserters of it as Dr. Hammond and others say Those Consequences commonly drawn from divers Texts for it are without Demonstration and so prove nothing I am sure a Man may read the Scripture a hundred times over and never be thereby convinced he ought to baptize his Children tho it is powerful to convince Men of all other Duties Now can this be a Truth since Christ who was more faithful than Moses and delivered every thing plainly from the Father Moses left nothing dark as to matter of Duty tho the Precepts and external Rites of his Law were numerous two or three hundred Precepts yet none were at a loss or had need to say Is this a Truth or an Ordinance or not for he that runs may read it And shall one positive Precept given forth by Christ who appointed so few in the New Testament be so obscure as also the ground and end of it that Men should be confounded about the Proofs of it together with the end and ground thereof See Heb. 3. 5 6. Arg. 17. That Custom or Law which Moses never delivered to the Jews nor is any where written in the Old Testament was no Truth of God nor of Divine Authority But that Custom or Law to baptize Proselytes either Men Women or Children was never given to the Jews by Moses nor is it any where written in the Old Testament Ergo It was no Truth of God nor of Divine Authority And evident it is as Sir Norton Knatchbul shews That the Jewish Rabbi●s differed among themselves also about it for saith he Rabbi Eli●zer expresly contradicts Rabbi Joshua who was the first I know of who asserted this sort of Baptism among the Jews For Eli●zer who was contemporary with Rabbi Joshua if he did not live before him asserts that a Proselyte circumcised and not baptized was a true Proselyte Arg. 18. If Baptism is of mere positive Right wholly depending on the Will and Sovereign Pleasure of Jesus Christ the great Legislator And he hath not required or commanded Infants to be baptized then Infants ought not to be baptized But Baptism is of mere positive Right wholly depending on the Will and sovereign Pleasure of Jesus Christ the great Legislator and he hath not required or commanded Infants to be baptized Ergo Infants ought not to be baptized This Argument tends to cut off all the pretended Proofs of Pedo-Baptism taken from the Covenant made with Abraham and because Children are said to belong to the Kingdom of Heaven it was not the Right of Abraham's Male Children to be circumcised because they were begotten and born of the Fruit of his Loins till he received Commandment from God to circumcise them Had he done it before or without a Command from God it would have been Will-Worship in him so to have done Moreover this further appears to be so Because no godly Man's Children nor others in Abraham's Days nor since had any Right thereto but only his Children or such who were bought with his Money or were proselyted to the Jewish Religion because they had no

A COUNTER-ANTIDOTE To purge out the Malignant Effects Of a Late COUNTERFEIT Prepared by Mr. GYLES SHUTE An Unskilful Person in Polemical Cures BEING An Answer to his Vindication of his pretended Antidote to prevent the Prevalency of Anabaptism Shewing that Mr. Hercules Collins's Reply to the said Author remains unanswered Wherein the Baptism of Believers is evinced to be God's Ordinance and the Baptized Congregations proved true Churches of Jesus Christ. With a further Detection of the Error of Pedo-Baptism To which is added An Answer to Mr. Shute's Reply to Mr. Collins's Half-sheet By BENJAMIN KEACH LONDON Printed for H. Bernard at the Bible in the Poultry M DC XC IV. THE INTRODUCTION I Cannot without Grief and Sorrow of Heart reflect upon the sad Consequences of our present Differences in and about the smaller Matters of Religion whereas we agree in all the Essentials thereof but do much more resent that bitter and censorious Spirit many shew and particularly appeareth in the Person I have now to do with which all that read his Books will quickly perceive Pray do but see what a kind of Advertisement he put twice into the City Mercury of his last Treatise c. wherein he positively denies those he calls Anabaptists to be Churches and their Baptism he affirms to be a Counterfeit which is the Baptism of Believers or adult Persons and that because we do not ground Gospel-baptism upon the Covenant God made with Abraham but upon the great Commission our blessed Saviour gave to his Disciples after he rose from the Dead as it is contained Mat. 28. 19 20. Mark 16. 15 16. This is such an Attempt that none of our Brethren who are Pedo-baptists nor any that ever I read of assayed to do Whether our Baptism be a Truth of Christ or a Counterfeit will appear in our Answer but why are we no Churches Certainly we are Churches for a Church may consist of wicked Men as well as of good Men but I suppose he means we are not true Churches of Christ he as I judge not knowing from what Theam that word is derived we must be wicked Persons or else Churches of Christ. This Man hath come too near to the Expressions and bitter Reflections John Child uttered against us falsely called Anabaptists who soon after fell under fearful horror of Conscience and Desperation He wrote a Book against us rendring us very odious to the World and casting Contempt upon our saithful Ministers but quickly was convinced of his horrid Design crying out in Despair That he had touched the Apple of God's Eye for said he if God has any People in the World those that I have vilified are his or to that effect The Lord deliver this Man from such a Spirit and dismal end but 't is bad modling as we used to say with edge Tools Our Saviour shews the danger of rash Judgment and what have ●e to do to judge our Fellow Servant much less Churches We may judge of Things and freely speak our Minds according to Light received but to censure a People after this manner and only because 〈◊〉 differ from him about the Subject and Mode of Baptism is hard 〈◊〉 considering that we are in all other things of the same Faith with himself and such that he hath daily Church Communion with is this lovely or just is this the Spirit of Jesus Christ O● doth he appear in the Wisdom that is from above that is first Pure then Peaceable Gentle ●a●●e to be Intreated full of Mercy and good Fruits without Partiality and without Hypocrisie and the Fruits of Righteousness that is sown in Peace of them that make Peace Jam. 3. 17 18. What kind of Scoffing Reproaching Railing and opprobious Language he hath cast on us I shall collect and set down in its proper Place and yet at the same time he bears very hard upon his Antagonists for using such kind of Terms c. p. 4. How will he escape who says a Man should not Steal if he Steals Or that a Man should not commit Adultery if he commits Adultery Rom. 2. 22. Or that says a Man should not scoff or rail on and vilifie his Brother when he doth the same thing and yet pretends he hath not do●e it I will not render Railing for Railing these are his Words and again saith I shall labour to declare in the Spirit of Meekness pag. 4. Hath he been as good as his word or hath he not they are proper Judges who have read his Book I think few Men who have had to do with us in this Controversie shewed a more four Spirit than Mr. Eaxter and yet did he ever deny us to be Churches or call our Baptism a Counterfeit Pray take his Sentiments of us when in a co●l Spirit these are his words viz. That the Anaebaptists are godly Men that differ from us in a Point so difficult that many Papists and Prelatists have maintained that it is not determined in in the Scripture but dependeth upon Tradition of the Church and I know as good and sober Men of that Mind as of thei●s who are most against them c. And again he saith That Augustin and many Children of Christians were baptized at Age and that the Controversie is of so great Difficulty that if in all such Cases none that differ be tollerated we may not live together in the World or Church but endlesly excommunicate or persecute one another Baxter's Book Principle of Love page 7. But Mr. Shute hath appeared so bold and rash as if he had an infallible Spirit and seems to be so lifted up as if he hath done more in his short Tract than all those learned Men who have formerly and of late times asserted Pedo-baptism And that now we are totally confuted and We and our Cause of Believers Baptism gone for ever See his Title Page And in pag. 113. saith he Thus I have given you one Broad side more by which I have brought your whole Opinion by the Lee and all the Carpenters and Calkers in the Nation cannot save it from Sinking I wish he knew his own Spirit and Weakness better and not thus to admire what he hath done Doth he think there is none can answer his Arguments No saving our Baptism and Churches from sinking to the bottom which he hath so furiously attacked sad Case What could Goliah of Gath or proud Rabshaketh say more But he forgot the old Proverb Let not him boast that puts on his Armour as he that puts it off If I or my Reverend Brother Collins have in any Writings of Ours used hard Words we have cause to be troubled for the Truth never gained any thing that way 'T is not hard Words but hard Arguments that must do the Business A soft Answer as Solomon saith turneth away Wrath. I must say I had rather have to do with a Man that hath more Argument and less Confidence than I can find in his Writing or Spirit I am sorry he