Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
scripture_n tradition_n word_n write_a 3,323 5 10.7817 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
B20542 Believers-baptism from heaven, and of divine institution Infants-baptism from earth, and human invention. Proved from the commission of Christ, the great law-giver to the gospel-church. With a brief, yet sufficient answer to Thomas Wall's book, called, Baptism anatomized. Together with a brief answer to a part of Mr. Daniel William's catechism, in his book unto youth. By Hercules Collins, a servant of the servants of Christ. Collins, Hercules, d. 1702. 1691 (1691) Wing C5360; ESTC R224066 50,763 158

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

were first taught 'T is as if a King should give a Commission to an Herauld to proclaim throughout his Dominions whoever in the Nation Male or Female would go to School and learn the Greek Tongue should have a Wedg of Gold Doth this follow that every one in the Nation should have a Wedg of Gold because a part of the Nation No not unless they do learn the Greek Tongue So in like manner A dreadful piece of Infant-Baptism appeared when the Heads of 6000 Infants were found murdered and buried in a Warren near a Monastry no more in the Nations are to be baptized than what are first taught and learn Christ Christ did no more intend that every one in the Nation should be baptized than the Prophet Haggai did So superstitiously zealous were some in the 7th Century for Infant-Baptism that a dead Child was taken from the Grave and Christened its Father's Name given unto it that every individual in the Nations of the World would desire our Lord's coming because he saith the Desire of all Nations should come Hag. 2.7 which is only the Believers in all Nations God did not intend Infants had robbed him when he said Ye have robbed me even this whole Nation they being not capable of it No more are Infants of Baptism tho a part of the Nation being not first taught and made Disciples according to the Commission Object 17. Men of Years were first Circumcised afterwards Infants So in the Gospel Baptism was first administred unto Men and Women but afterwards Infants were Baptized I Answer You say well Men and Women were baptized first Infants were never baptized by virtue of a Commission from Christ tho Believers were and it was about three hundred Years after Christ before any Infant was Sprinkled Danvers on Baptism p. 204. Christ's Commission was to baptize Believers now unless any can show where this was abrogated and a new Commission for Baptizing Infants given this remains and will to the end of the World Indeed Abraham was Circumcised when he was old as a Seal of the Righteousness of his Faith to assure him he should be a Father of many Nations a Spiritual Father unto Believers Jews and Gentiles And after this God commanded him to Circumcise his natural Seed and when any can shew us as plain a Command for Believers to Baptize their Infant-Seed as Abraham had to Circumcise his the Controversy shall end Object 18. Infant-Baptism is an Apostolical Tradition Tho this Tradition be not written in any Apostolical Book yet it is of no less Authority with us than the Scripture Bellarmine and though the Scripture be silent in the Case the uninterrupted Tradition and Vsage of the Church makes up that Defect I Answer Tradition ought to be proved by more than one Evidence viz. Origen whom all other Ages have condemned of Errors Dr. Taylor And whose Works are so spurious that he that reads them knows not whether he reads Origen or Ruffinus Erasm With Dr. Taylor Tradition saith he must by all means supply the place of Scripture and there is pretended a Tradition Apostolical that Infants were Baptized But at this saith he we are not much moved for we who rely upon the written Word of God as sufficient to establish all true Religion do not value the Allegation of Tradition The pretended Proof for Infant-Baptism being an Apostolical Tradition from Dionysius the Areopagite Justin Martyr's Responses Origen's Homilies Cyprian in an Epistle to one Fidas a Priest have been examined refuted and found fabulous and forged Danvers on Baptism pag. 133 to 150. It is very improbable that Infant-Baptism should be an Apostolical Tradition when decreed by several Councils in the 4th Century the Council of Carthage of Neocesarea and Laodicea c. they did hold forth the necessity of Confession and Profession before Baptism In short It is against the Reason of a Man to conclude this an Apostolical Tradition because this were to make the Apostles act beyond their Commission which were to Baptize only Believers Object 19. Infants were once Church-Members and that Law was never abrogated neither do we find they were cut off I Answer John the Baptist abrogated this sufficiently when he told the Pharisees and Sadduces it was a vain Plea to say Abraham was their Father that was a good Argument for Infant-Church-membership under the Law by Circumcision but signified nothing to Church-membership under the Gospel by Baptism now the Dispensation is alter'd If any bring not forth good Fruit in his own Person the Ax being laid to the Root of the Tree it is to be hewn down and cast into Eternal Fire The Apostle Paul in Rom. 11.20 ends this Controversy plain enough where he asserts the natural Branches were broken off by Unbelief and if they come to believe they may be grafted in again Who can shew any Instance where Infants were accounted Members of the Church under the Gospel but until then they remain broken off and that Law of Infant-Church-membership is as plainly abrogated under the Gospel as the Passover and Circumcision c. which all grant is void tho not so formally done as once commanded there being no need the Substance being come necessarily Shadows cease Object 20. In Mat. 3.11 John Baptist said I Baptize you with Water unto Repentance And in the 6th Verse Were Baptized of John in Jordan confessing their Sins Here say some is Baptism before Confession or Repentance in the order of words therefore we being Baptized in our Infancy if we repent and confess our Sins afterward 't is sufficient and we need not be Baptized again I Answer 1. If you were only sprinkled in Infancy you were never yet Baptized 2. 'T is said they were Baptized in Jordan confessing their Sins but I never heard of an Infant confess Sin in the Act of Baptism as these did I will gladly Baptize any Souls that shall truly confess themselves Sinners in the very Act and Administration of that Ordinance to the Glory of the Messiah who came to save Sinners 3. Tho the Text says I Baptize you unto Repentance none dare say that John Baptized them before they did manifest Repentance because when many of the Pharisees and Sadduces came unto John's Baptism he said O Generation of Vipers John's Baptism is called The Baptism of Repentance for Remission of Sins because Christ preached Remission of Sins to the Penitent Believer Piscator on Mark 1.4 bring forth Fruit meet for Repentance and think not to say you have Abraham to your Father 4. John's Baptism is called the Baptism of Repentance Mark 1.4 Can any other be the meaning than this that John was appointed of God to demand Repentance from dead Works of all that were Baptized and Faith also in him that was to come Acts 19. and upon this John did preach unto them the Remission of Sin I think it never did enter into any Man's Heart that John did first Baptize