Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	aaron_n	apostle_n	receive_v	25	3	5.0584	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62868	Felo de se, or, Mr. Richard Baxter's self-destroying manifested in twenty arguments against infant-baptism / gathered out of his own writing, in his second disputation of right to sacraments by John Tombes.	Tombes, John, 1603?-1676.	1659 (1659)	Wing T1806; ESTC R33836	48,674	44

considerate men then the too common pollutions of others which are meerly through negligence but not justified and defended Let Master Baxters own words judge him who makes the same foul work in the Ordinance of baptism by admitting Infants to it upon a Parents or Proparents as he terms them profession when all his proofs of the necessity of profession to go before baptism are of the profession of the party himself to be baptized and this device of a Parents or Proparents profession instead of the Infants is his own invention that hath not any intimation in Scripture and by his own proofs makes Infants capable of the Lords Supper and perverts the nature of Sacraments which his own words do fully express thus Pag. 123 124. The first Argument of Master Gillespies 20. is from the nature of Sacraments which are to signifie that we have already faith in Christ remission of sin by him and union with him The sense of the argument is That seeing Sacraments according to Christs institution are confirming signs presupposing the thing signified both on our part and on Gods therefore none should use them that have not first the thing signified by them Though I undertake not to defend all the Arguments that other men use in this case yet this doth so much concern the cause of baptism which I am now debating that I shall give you this reply to it What Divines are there that deny the Sacraments to be mutual signs and seals signifying our part as well as Gods And how ill do you wrong the Church of God by seeking to make men believe that these things are new and strange If it be so to you it is a pity that it is so but sure you have seen Master Gataker's Books against Doctor Ward and Davenant wherein you have multitudes of sentences recited out of our Protestant Divines that affi●m this which you call new It is indeed their most common Doctrine that the Sacrament doth presuppose remission of sins and our faith and that they are instituted to signifie these as in being It is the common Protestant Doctrine that Sacraments do solemnize and publickly own and confirm the mutual covenant already entred in heart as a King is Crowned a Souldier Listed a Man and Woman maried after professed consent So that the sign is causal as to the consummation and delivery as a Key or Twig and Turff in giving possession but consequential to the contract as privately made and the right given thereby so that the soul is supposed to consent to have Christ as offered first which is saving faith and then by receiving him Sacramentally delivered to make publick profession of that consent and publickly to receive his sealed remission Master Cobbet cited by you might well say that primarily the Sacrament is Gods seal but did he say that it is onely his and not secondarily ours And in the next words you do in effect own part of the Doctrine your self which you have thus wondered at as new and strange saying I confess it is a Symbol of our profession of faith If you mean as you speak taking profession properly then 1. you yield that the Sacrament is our symbol and so declareth or signifieth our action as well as Gods 2. And it is not onely a sign of our profession but a professing sign and therefore a sign of the thing professed for the external sign is to declare the internal acts of the mind which without signs others cannot know As therefore the words and outwards actions 〈◊〉 ●wo distinct signs of the same internal acts so are they two wayes of profess●●● My signal actions do not signifie my words which are plainer signs the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therefore need not darker to express them but they both expre 〈…〉 mind So that they are not only symbols of our professi●● as you spea 〈…〉 t professing symbols 3. And if so then they must be signs and professions of those internal acts which correspond with them The Fourth Argument of Master Gillespy is from Rom. 4. 11. Circumcision was a seal of that righteousness of faith therefore so is baptism therefore it belongeth onely to justified believers He that maketh it the instituted nature or use of circumcision to be a seal of righteousness of faith which the person had before doth make his circumcision a proof of his foregoing righteousness of faith Pag. 133. You cannot shew where ever the wicked are commanded to communicate with the Church in the Sacrament but in this order First to be converted and repent and so baptized and so communicate Gillespy Aarons rod blossoming pag. 514 515. The assumption that baptism it self is not a regenerating ordinance I prove thus 1. Because we read of no Persons baptized by the Apostles except such as did profess faith in Christ gladly received the word and in whom some begun work of the Spirit of grace did appear I say not that it really was in all but somewhat of it did appear in all Baptism even of the aged must necessarily precede the Lords Supper Pag. 144. My Twelfth Argument is from Matth. 22. 12. Friend how camest thou in hither not having on a wedding garment and he was speechless To come in hither is to come into the Church of Christ By the wedding garment is undoubtedly meant sincerity of true faith and repentance so that I may hence argue If God will accuse and condemn men for coming into his Church or the communion of Saints without sincere faith and repentance then it is not the appointed use of baptism to initiate those that profess not sincere faith and repentance But Infants profess not sincere faith and repentance as is manifest by sense therefore it is not the appointed use of baptism to initiate Infants Pag. 145. The Thirteenth Argument is this We must baptize none that profess not themselves Christians But no Infants profess themselves Christians as is manifest by sense therefore we must baptize no Infants The major is certain because it is the use of baptism to be our solemn listing sign into Christs Army our initiating sign and the solemnization of our mariage to Christ and professing sign that we are Christians and we do in it dedicate and deliver up our selves to him in this relation as his own So that in baptism we do not onely promise to be Christians but profess that we are so already in heart and now would be solemnly admitted among the number of Christians the minor I prove thus 1. No man is truely a Christian that is not truly a Disciple of Christ that is plain Act. 11. 26. No man is truly a Disciple of Christ that doth not profess a saving faith and repentance therefore no man that doth not so profess is truly a Christian The minor I prove thus No man is truly a Disciple of Christ that doth not profess to forsake all contrary Masters or Teachers and to take Christ for his chief Teacher consenting to learn of him the way