Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	bear_v	enter_v	kingdom_n	5,396	5	6.1932	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A76517	Remarks, and animadversions, on Mr. Keith's two sermons, being his first after ordiantion, [sic] preached at the parish church of St. George's Butolphs-Lane, London, May the 12th. 1700. on St. Luke i. 6 Now impartially compared with his former writings, setting George against Keith, and endeavouring to reconcile them, by shewing what he should have said upon the subjest. By W.B. a communicant of the Church of England.	W. B.	1700 (1700)	Wing B224; ESTC R230841	17,705	18

for some long time some now taking such Opinions up only upon trust and without consulting or advising with the Learned entertains them as sure and certain Now to free those from their former mistakes and consequently from their Errors I know of no other way than wholly to forsake these Doctrines sucked in with their Mothers Milk which are turned to natural Food and Nourishment and totally adhere to the Pure and Unerring Word of God and not bring Hearts to it preposest with Doctrines and Opinions learned of their Grannums but to come with Hearts and Consciences free and not pre-ingaged in all Meekness Uprightness and Simplicity of Heart to hear what the Holy Jesus with his faithful and true Witnesses viz. the Apostles have and do say touching the Point and so receive and believe that alone tho' never so differing from the Opinions and Doctrines of some nay of many Tho' such are and may be offended at it yet I have chose rather to build on the clear Word tho' alone than on any blind Conjectures tho' magnified and embraced by many Thus far Mr. Dell to p. 5. So as he further saith In my inquiry meeting with that place in Heb. 6.2 where the Apostle speaks of the Doctrine not only of Baptism but Baptisms in the plural number which made me think and conclude that there belongs to every adult Christian more than one Baptism and what these then were being such necessary principal and fundamental Points I thought it my bounden Duty to enquire out and with Mr. Dell p. 8 9. have gathered and so concludes that they are two distinct Baptisms the first by Water to initiate and make us Members the other by the Spirit to strengthen and confirm so as to make us Children and if Children as St. Paul argues Rom. 8.17 then Heirs of God and joynt Heirs with Christ c. The first called Water-Baptism from St. John the other being Fire-Baptism from Christ or his holy Spirit both which are confirmed by St. August contra liter Petil. 2. c. 39. where he saith Alium fuisse Johannis Baptismum alium Christi And both absolutely necessary to the Salvation of the Adult tho' by reason of a dark and dim Glass Mr. Dell could or at least would but see the one for as our Saviour argues about other things and this also so may I withal observe the one ought to be done and the other not to be left undone John 3.5 Verily verily I say unto thee except a Man be Born of Water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God And 1 Pet. 3.20 21. Eight Souls were saved by Water the like Figure whereunto even Baptism doth now save us c. And since that the Learned and Eloquent Apollos being as St. Paul tells us Acts 18.25 instructed in the way of the Lord spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord knowing only the Baptism of John Some of which things was undoubtedly Water-Baptism and consequently the Lord's as well as John's Nay further when St. Paul Acts 19.3 4. found certain Disciples which had only been Baptized with John's Baptism he Baptized them with the Holy Ghost by laying his hands upon them as verse 6. Now this with Mr. Dell p. 13. I must confess being a second Baptism was not as the Anabaptists fondly think a Renewing or Dipping them in Water but only a laying his hands upon them that the Holy Spirit might come to empower them I think Mr. Dell p. 14. has made an Objection and drawn a Conclusion from it which no wise Man either did or could ever make or draw viz. That John 's Doctrine was the same with Christ therefore his Baptism the same True tho' the Doctrines were the same yet this forced conclusion could not follow That their Baptisms were And p. 16. he saith That John 's Baptism was brought in besides the rite and manner of the Law and so a sign of a great Change to follow It 's but a mistake which proceeded either from Wilfulness or Ignorance for John's Baptism was brought in not besides but according to the rite and manner of the Law for the Jews admitted all their Proselites by it and their Children also were washed as well as circumcised neither was it a Sign that it should be changed or left off till the End for only the intolerable and burdensome Cerimonies of the Law such as Circumcision c. were to be abolished For John's Baptism as he tells us p. 17. is tho' Weak and Imperfect yet very Honourable was Evangelical as well as Legal being from Heaven Luke 3.2 John 1.6 33. so that God was and is the Author of this as well as the other for 〈◊〉 Publicans which received this Baptism are said to Justifie God when as the Pharisees and Lawyers that refused it did then reject against themselves that is to their own hurt the Counsel of God Luke 7.29 30. I wish there were none such now nay Christ himself who was Born under the Law and so Circumcised to fulfil it was subject to this Divine Institution of being Baptized with Water as Mat. 3.13 not that he had any Sins to report of himself but for us to imitate him in it for our Sins that he might fulfill all Righteousness Mat. 3.15 and tho' Jesus Baptized not himself but his Disciples more than John's as John 4.1 2. true our Lord the chief Bishop of our Souls as our chief Bishops now Baptized none It did not become him neither doth it them he had greater Work to do so have they He left it to his Apostles which were Subordinate so do our Bishops to the Subordinate Curates as a thing still needful to be done No wonder then if the great Apostle in such a large Circuit or Diocess as from Jerusalem to Illiricum Acts 15.9 Baptized no more than two or three Believing Families since he had a greater Work to do than lay that Foundation which was laid by Subordinate Ministers So as he saith Heb. 6.1 2. therefore leaving the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ let us go on unto Perfection not laying again the Foundation of Repentance Faith the Doctrine of Baptisms c. Now tho' Water-Baptism gives not the yet it initiates into the Church and makes Members in order to be Baptized by the Spirit to become Children as Acts 19. and tho' it doth not give Kepentance and Remission to be Happy yet it 's in order to these Infants indeed having never committed any actual Sins have no need of Repentance only of Remission for their Originnl Sin which is done away by the Blood of Christ which the Water represents So that if they Dye in their Infancy they are undoubtedly Happy So that contrary to Mr. Dell's Ipse dixit in pages 26. 29. and 28. Water-Baptism both was and is absolutely necessary and to continue till the end so to make Infants dying before they commit actual Sins and also the Adult which is Born again of

Water as well as of the Spirit yea of both to make I say such Eternally Happy as the Lord himself has assured us John 3.5 so to pass by his empty and frivilous Objections where in the 3d. he has shewed himself a Pharisee p. 29 30. I 'll only take notice of the Weak and Impertinent Answers he makes to the 5th c. That it is meant of Material Water is Manifest from the Coplative and with the Ensuing Verse That which is Born of the Flesh is Flesh to which the Water-Baptism belongeth but that which is Born of the Spirit is Spirit which is not improperly call'd a Second Baptism or New Birth by the Spirit in the Adult But he further Objects p. 34. Saying Then upon the same ground Material Fire in Matth. 3.11 as well as Material Water is meant in the forecited Text which is absurd To which I Answer To be Baptized with the Holy Ghost and with Fire as Matth. 3.11 Being an Hebraism denotes only the Efficacy cy of the Holy Spirit since at Penticost the holy Spirit appeared unto them in shape of Cloven Tongues like as of Fire as Acts 2.3 So Infants which have committed no actual Sin by being washed or baptized with Water are like to the eight Souls in Noah's Ark saved as it appears from 1 Pet. 3.20 21. and p. 36. he saith That our Soviour in that Commission bid them not Baptize or Dip them in cold Water as John did but into the Name of God And p. 38. That tho' their Lord had given them a Form yet was not since as we ever heard or read of any where else used by the Apostles and that St. Paul baptizing but two or three Families yet established many Churches whose Members were never washed at all by Water And p. 42. probably most Apostles did the like Seeing that Christ's Baptism included John's and was sufficient without it and that there 's but one Baptism from Eph. 4.20 All this is but an Ipse Dixit without any Reason or Proof the contrary ●●th manifestly appear in every particular for all which the Apostles baptized were by the same Form in the Name of the Lord Jesus c. as Acts 19.5 Nor as we read did they ever Lay their Hands upon any Member as to be Baptized by the Spirit but what were either before or after Baptized with Water as Acts 10.43 44. Can any forbid Water that these should not be Baptized which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we and he commanded them to be Baptized in the Name of the Lord. So that you may understand that the Baptizing by the Spirit was not sufficient but the Baptism of the Water must be added True St. Paul tells us Ephes 1.5 That there 's but one Baptism Answ No more there is but one Man but he consists of two necessary parts viz. Flesh and Spirit so is Baptism said to be one where our Saviour explains it thus in John 3.6 saying That which is born of the Flesh is Flesh and that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit Therefore to be Christians let us take the Apostles advice to 2 Cor. 7.1 Having therefore these Promises by Water and the Spirit to be found Members and Children viz. Sons and Daughters let us cleanse our selves from all filthiness of the Flesh and Spirit perfecting Holiness in the Fear of God And since as St. Peter Acts 2.39 assures us That the Promise is to us and also to our Children and to all that are afar off even to as many as the Lord our God shall call And since there are others which differing with and dissenting from our Church do pretend to observe and walk in all the Commandments and Ordinances of the Lord so as be thought at least blameless which alas I find being seduced with popular Examples have unwarily imbibed a groundless Prejudice against all the Children of Christian Parents which as I humbly conceive has been caused by not knowing or want of Ephod and Terephim among them so not understanding the Scriptures which they have been apt to wrest but yet I hope not to their Childrens tho' it to their own hurt And that which they have grounded their Error on is on Mat. 28.19 and some others which mentions Teaching before Baptizing and that we have no possitive Command for Initiaing Infants as under the Law and that we have neither Precept nor a Primitive President for so doing To which I Answer That in that Commission Christ had a more peculiar regard to the Persons to whom the Apostles were sent which were ignorant Superstitions and prophane therefore he mentions such Qualifications antecedant to Baptism for it was not fit that such should be admitted to a Covenant of Grace and Reconciliation with God till they with Abraham were converted and reclaimed and understood the Covenant and then as he was Circumcised they to be Baptized In short the matter was this The Adult were first to be made Disciples by a saving Faith the case of the Children was distinct to be considered afterwards when their Parents were not only Converted but well grounded or settled and then also the Church judged it safest to take Proxies or Sureties viz. some Old and steady Converts lest the Parents Apostatizing as they often did and so the Children being under their Tuition it s presumed that they would have the same Principles and Perswasion of the Parents Apostatized then the Proxies took care and trained them up in the Christian Faith And thus Infants as to the Covenant and Privileges are accounted in the state and right with their Parents Therefore as the Children of Unbelievers upon this account may in some cases be said to be partakers of their Parents Infidelity since they are like to be brought up in it and for that Reason they are denyed Baptism otherwise they are capable and may be admitted where there is sufficient Satisfaction given to the Church that they shall be educated in the Christian Religion for it would be preposterous to admit such into a Religion which they were never likely to be instructed in afterwards Now when Circumcision was thrown off which was not at the first then in all probability began the Jews to Start the case of Infants admission who by Circumcision were admitted but that being abolished their privilege would be lo●● And these Absurdities would have naturally followed as Frst That Infants under the New Covenant were in a far worse condition than those under the Old for they were entred Secondly That the Priviledges under the Gospel were to Infants straiter and narrower than those under the Law which would be abominable 3dly If it was God's Will that Infants under the Gospel should be reckoned as out of his Covenant which before were in it then it must follow that our Saviour was forgetful and unfaithful to his Church in that he never acquainted her with this alteration which is also both base and absurd Nay and this might justly raise Clamours and Complaints in the Jewish Children so as to hinder the bringing in of their Parents Indeed I must confess that Believing and Repentance in the Adult are absolutely necessary where Infidelity and Iniquity are found as in Abraham yet this doth not prove that the Infants of Believers were and are to be excluded because they cannot actually believe yea they are rather to be included and baptized as Isaac was Circumcised for the Scripture intimates that the Innocency of harmless Babes whose Original Guilt is done away by Christ who have not by actual Transgression offended such innocency is as pleasing to God and as agreeable a Qualification for the admission of such to a Covenant of Grace and Mercy by sealing it with the not Intollerable but Easie Seal of Baptism as either the Faith of an Actual Believer or the Repentance of the Penitent this may be illustrated by Examples which I shall own omit What if Infanss do not as under the Law understand the Covenant verily that is no bar for if we were but as wise in Spirituals as in Temporals we find it in no wise disagreeable to Reason that Infants are bound in Covenants to the future Performance of Conditions which they at present know nothing of nor can be capable of performing till they come to Age. This is common in Wills in settling Estates on Infant-Heirs having Guardians c. But you 'll say the Covenant is not the same Answ It 's the same in Substance tho' not in the Accidents True it differs in this The first being in Works had Circumcision for its Seal The last of Grace which has Baptism for its Acts 2.39 For the Promises is to us and our Children which that we may embrace God grant for Christ's sake Amen FINIS