Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
spirit_n beget_v father_n son_n 11,645 5 6.8465 4 true
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
A80622 The grounds and ends of the baptisme of the children of the faithfull. Opened in a familiar discourse by way of a dialogue, or brotherly conference. / By the learned and faithfull minister of Christ, John Cotton, teacher of the Church of Boston in New-England. Cotton, John, 1584-1652.; Goodwin, Thomas, 1600-1680. 1646 (1646) Wing C6436; Thomason E356_16; ESTC R201141 171,314 214

There are 8 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

establish their owne righteousnesse which is by the law And though some of them received Christ as did the false Teachers in the Churches of Galatia and did also acknowledge their freedome from the sacrifices and burnt offerings and from many other Leviticall Ceremonies of the Law yet so long as they looked to be justified by the works of the moral law and retained circumcision as still necessary by the law they still pertained to Hierusalem that now is as the Apostle calleth it and all of them were children of the bond-woman that is of the Covenant of the Law given on Mount Sinai It is therefore a grosse error and withall a notorious injury to the godly Saints that lived in the dayes of the Old Testament to account them the children of Hagar and to make it a part of their bondage that their Infants were received into the fellowship of the Church with themselves No no whilst themselves believed in the promised seed for righteousnesse and salvation and their children were circumcised into the grace of the Covenant the righteousnesse of faith they and their seed were accounted the children of the Covenant of grace the free-woman till any of them rejected that grace as Ishmael and Esau did By this which hath been said may easily bee understood what is meant by Sarah not the state of the Church of the New Testament as you confine it rather then define it but the Covenant of Grace by which God of his Grace gave himselfe to bee a God to beleevers and to their seed both in the Old and New Testament till any of them should afterwards grow up to renounce him and the Grace of his Covenant which if they doe then their Circumcision is made uncircumcision and they renouncing the Covenant of Grace fall under the Covenant of the Law and come to bee accursed by the Law But for the children of this Covenant of whom Isaac was a type they are not onely such as are Regenerate above the ordinary course of Nature by vertue of the Covenant of Grace and so doe beleeve in the promise of Grace for righteousnesse and salvation but also the children of such beleeving Parents whom their Parents doe beget in the Faith of the Covenant and Promise of Grace to themselves and their seed For Isaac himself when he was an Infant born hee was not as then born anew of the promise and spirit of Grace but his Father begot him in the Faith of the Promise And his Mother Sarah by Faith received strength to conceive seed because shee judged him faithfull who had promised Heb. 11.11 The second main pillar upon which your glosse on this Text is held up is that the two sons Ishmael and Isaac type out the different subjects of these two states of Churches Ishmael being a type of the estate in generall of the Church of the old Testament and Isaac being a type of the state of the Churches of the New Testament But neither will this glosse stand with the Apostles words For the Apostle maketh these two sons to bee the children engendred or bred of these two Mothers Now children as they are engendred or bred of their Mothers they are not properly the subjects of their Mothers though they bee subject to them but their effects The Mothers therefore being not the twofold state of the Churches of the Old and New Testament but the two Covenants of the Law and of Grace Ishmael the son of Hagar the bond-woman is the type of all those Members in the Church whether of the Old or New Testament as who look for righteousnesse and salvation by the works of the Law and doe therefore lye under the bondage and curse of the Law such were those in Micah 6. who thought God would be pleased and appeased with thousands of Lambs and ten thousand Rivers of oyle v. 6 7. Such also at that time was the whole body generally of the Priests and Rulers and People of Hierusalem in the Apostles dayes which hee calleth the Hierusalem that now is And such were all the false Apostles and false Teachers and their Disciples in the Churches of Galatia Phil●ppi and Colosse who refused the righteousnesse of God by faith in Christ Jesus and sought to establish their owne righteousnesse by the works of the law on the other side Isaac being the sonne of Sarah the free-woman and Sarah representing the Covenant of Grace he is the type of all those members in the Church whether before Christ in the Old Testament or since Christ in the New as are begotten and bred of the promise and Covenant of grace wherby by God giveth himselfe to bee a God to the believer and his seed who therefore looke for all their righteousnesse and salvation to themselves and their seed not from the workes of the Law nor from all their outward priviledges but from the grace and righteousnesse of God in Christ Jesus Onely thus much further I will not stick to grant you That as the two Covenants are the two mothers that are represented by Hagar and Sarah so those Churches that are begotten and bred of either of these Covenants and so are themselves the children of the one or of the other of these Covenants they may be said to bee the mothers of those particular members which by their Ministery are engendred and bred whether of the carnall seed of the Covenant of the Law or of the spiritual seed of the Covenant of Grace For in the Hebrew language any whole Society is called a mother and the particular members thereof are called children sons or daughters And this may somewhat further help to cleare the words and meaning of the Apostle in this place For the Apostle here maketh the Covenant of the Law to answer to Hierusalem that now is v. 25. as if so bee the Covenant of the law and the Church of the present Hierusalem which stood for the Covenant of the law were both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of one rank and either of them might be called an Hagar a mother ingendering their children unto bondage And indeed the Church engendereth and breedeth her children by dispensing and administring the seed of that Covenant of which themselves are begotten In like manner the Apostle maketh the other mother Sarah the Covenant of grace to be all one with the true Church of Christ which he calleth the Hierusalem which is above and maketh her the mother of us all v. 26. Because though shee bee her selfe begotten and bred of the Covenant of grace yet shee dispensing and administring the same spirituall seed begetteth children like her self partakers of the lib●rty of the sons of God And yet to adde a word more which may tend further to clear the words and meaning of the Apostle as this seed of the Covenant of Grace dispensed and administred by true and pure Churches is rightly called spirituall seed in which the Spirit of grace delighteth to breath and worke and therefore they that are begotten
of such is his Kingdome Mar. 10.14 whose divine testimony of them is as clear an evidence to us that God giveth them right unto the fellowship of the Church and to the seal thereof as the testimony of men can give unto themselves or others by their verball profession or any other visible effects of Faith Doe not say that you are farre from denying in the least measure salvation unto Infants For if Infants dye in their Infancy you have apparently declared it above that you doe not acknowledge them to bee subjects capable either of election to grace and glory or of Union with Christ or the Covenant of Grace And then how wee should beleeve you when you say you doe not in the least measure deny salvation to Infants and yet deny all such meanes of salvation without which it is impossible they should bee saved judge you But to come to the ground you work upon in denying to them Baptism whereas Circumcision was granted to them of old and in both a promise of salvation sealed up to them untill they came to reject it Though Baptisme you conceive succeed Circumcision yet you put a great difference between them both in matter and manner in persons and things And what might that great difference bee in so many particulars Circumcision say you sealed to things temporall and carnall as well as to spirituall and so were the subjects carnall as well as spirituall Baptisme onely sealeth to Faith in Christ and to Grace in the New Birth I pray you doth not Baptisme seale to the Covenant of Grace as well as Circumcision in whose room it succeedeth And doth not the Covenant of Grace contain promises of temporall and carnall or outward blessings as well as spirituall Hose 2.18.21 22 23. Hath not godlinesse in the New Testament as well as in the Old the Promises of this life as well as that which is to come 1 Tim. 4.8 Doth not Baptisme expressely seale up unto us our deliverance out of Affliction as well as out of corruption yea to the raising up of our bodies out of death in the grave as well as of our soules out of the death in sin 1 Cor. 15.29 It is therefore utterly untrue that Baptisme sealeth onely to Faith in Christ and to grace in the New Birth For it sealeth to all the blessings of the Covenant as well those of this life as of that which is to come That which sealeth to this grand blessing of the Covenant that God will bee a God to such or such sealeth unto all other gifts of God also God never giveth himself alone but hee giveth his Son and his Spirit also And hee that giveth us his own Sonne saith the Apostle shall hee not with him give us all things else also Rom. 8.32 Yea where Christ is given hee giveth Repentance unto Israel and conversion or turning of the hearts of the Fathers to the Children and of the Children to the Fathers and both of them to the Lord. Act. 5.31 and Luk. 1.16 17. And Baptisme is a seale of these promises as of the whole Covenant And therefore Baptisme is not onely as you say a seale to Faith and to the Grace of the New Birth as if it onely confirmed our own Faith touching our own estates and our own New Birth But it confirmeth also our Faith that God will give Faith and Repentance to our Children and turn their hearts both to the Lord and to us And therefore hee powreth the water of Baptisme upon our Children that hee may confirme this promise of Grace the powring out of clean water of his Spirit and of his blessing as well upon our seed and off-spring as upon our selves Isai 44.3 Another difference which you put is that Circumcision sealeth to things to come as under Types and shadowes and so to subjects in a cloud and darknesse whereas Baptisme confirmeth Faith in things come and already done and hath for its subjects Children of the light in the clear evidence of the Spirit with face open Suppose this difference were true That Circumcision sealed to things to come and Baptisme to things come Circumcision to things vailed Baptisme to things open Yet this is but a circumstantiall difference in the manner of revealing the blessings promised but this argueth no materiall difference at all in the persons the subjects of the seale It will onely argue thus much that whereas the same Christ and the things of Christ were sealed up to them and to their seed more darkly they are sealed up to us and our seed more clearly and plainly Besides it is not altogether true that Circumcision sealed up to them things to come For both Baptisme and Circumcision doe seale to both things come and things to come Circumcision sealed to Abraham God to bee his God and the righteousnesse of Faith both which were already come to Abraham before hee was circumcised It sealed up also sundry things to come to him and his seed as their deliverance out of Egypt their inheritance of Canaan and the comming of the Messiah But when the Israelites came to enjoy Canaan Circumcision did not then seal to their deliverance out of Egypt or to their inheritance of Canaan as things to come but as to things come and already done Circumcision sealed to the children of Israel that God would circumcise their hearts and the hearts of their seed Deut. 30.6 which was a thing to come to such of them as were unregenerate But after they were Regenerate the same Circumcision was a seale of that blessing which God had already done for them So is it with Baptisme Now that Christ is come in the flesh Baptisme sealeth that to us as a thing already done which to them was a thing to come And yet the comming of Christ into our hearts is a thing partly done in the Regenerate and yet more fully to bee done even to us and to many of our children it is a thing to come To the children of God that walk in darknesse and see no light which is the case of many and at some time or other of all the return of the Comforter is a thing to come and Baptisme is a seale thereof and yet it is a seale also of the first fruites of the Spirit which are already come Baptism is a seale of the Redemption of Christ which is already wrought for us And it is a seale of our deliverance from all afflictions and from all temptations and from all corruptions and from all enemies even from death it self and many of these are yet to come So that I can but wonder why such a difference as this should bee alleged to prove a personall difference of the subjects of Baptism and the subjects of Circumcision If it bee said as you partly expresse and partly imply that wee who live under Baptisme are the children of light but they that lived under Circumcision were the children of darknesse and therefore though their children being in
one to partake in the outward dispensation of Gods Covenant and to enter into Gods rest or to profit by the Word your Leaders should make more conscience of alledging and applying Gods holy Word impertinently impertinently I say both to Gods meaning and to their owne which is one kinde but too frequent of taking Gods holy name in vaine The next place which you quote out of Heb. 11.5 6. sheweth us that without faith it is impossible to please God which argueth indeed that no man either in his person or in his work can be acceptable to God without faith but doth not prove that God cannot receive any into the outward fellowship of the Covenant without faith much lesse doth it prove that the New Testament doth exclude all unbelievers from the Covenant more then did the Old Testament for those words in Hebrews 11.5 6. were spoken of Enoch who I need not tell you lived in the dayes of the Old Testament Your next place in Rom 97 8. sheweth indeed that all the children of the flesh of Abraham are not the elect seed of Abraham which we willingly grant but doth not shew ●hat the children of Abrahams flesh were not the seed of Abrahams Covenant Many were called and received into his Covenant who yet were not chosen to partake in the sure mercies and everlas●ing blessings of the Covenant Your last place out of Gal. 3.22 26 29. argueth the same that the former places have done that believers are partakers of Christ by faith and of adoption by Christ that they are the justified seed of Abraham and heires according to promise So was it in the Old Testament and so is it still to this day But this doth not prove now no more then it did then that all are excluded from the outward dispensation of the Covenant but believers onely But notwithstanding all this though the Covenant which God made with Abraham before Christ Silvester and this under Christ be in some respect in substance the same yet in the outward dispensation and profession of them the difference will appeare to bee very great both in respect of persons and things wherein our dissent chiefly lyeth 1. That Covenant admitted of a fleshly seed this onely of a spirituall Gen. 17. Rom. 9. 2. That in the flesh this in the heart Gen. 17.13 with Jer. 31.33 Rom. 2.28 29. 3. The seale and ordinances of that Covenant confirmed faith in things to come this in things already done 4. That Covenant was Nationall and admitted all of the Nation to the seales thereof but this personall and admitteth none but such as believe 5. That Covenant begot children after the flesh as all Abrahams naturall posterity But this onely begets children after the Spirit and onely approveth of such as are begotten and borne from above in whose hearts God writeth his Law Jer. 31. Ezek. 36. Heb. 8. John 3.5 6. That Covenant with Abraham and his posterity comprehended a civill state and worldly government with the like carnall subjects for the service of the same But this Covenant now under Christ comprehendeth onely a spirituall state and an heavenly government with the like spirituall subjects for the service of this also 7. That Covenant held forth Christ in the flesh to the hea●t vayled this holdeth him forth after the Spirit to a face open 2 Cor. 3. In all understand the visible profession of the Covenant and the outward dispensation of the priviledges thereof There is indeed some difference betweene the Covenant made not onely with Abraham in the Old Testament and with us in the New but also in the Old Testament Silvanus between that made with Abraham and that with his posterity And yet the Covenant both in the Old Testament and in the New both to Abraham and his posterity yea and to us also one and the same for substance to wit God to be a God to believers and to their seed To Abraham some blessings were given by this Covenant which were not given to all his posterity as to be the Father of Christ to be the Father of many Nations To some of his posterity and not to all it was given to enjoy the land of Canaan for an inheritance which in the Letter belongeth not unto us though in the spirituall Antitype we also in the New Testament partake therein in that it is given to believers and our seed to enjoy the inheritance of the church whereof Canaan was a type Besides that Covenant made with the seed of Abraham by Jacob admitted the holding forth of Christ in sundry vailes and shadows which were not given to Abraham and from us in the New Testament they are taken away But neverthelesse the differences which you put betweene the Covenant with Abraham and with us so farre as they are brought to exclude the seed of believers from the fellowship of the Covenant they will not stand nor abide triall by the Scriptures Seven differences you put let us weigh them in the ballance of the Sanctuary and see if they bee not too light First say you that Covenant admitted of a fleshly seed this onely of a spirituall Gen. 17 with Rom. 9. Answ The place in the Romans speaketh of the seed of promise to be the seed of Abraham and to be accounted not onely in the New Testament but in the Old also For the Oracle in Isaac shall thy seed be called Rom. 9.7 was given to Abraham in the Old Testament Gen. 21.12 And that after Ismael was cast out of the Covenant for his mocking and persecuting of Isaac So that this Scripture in Rom. 9.15 is three wayes wrested and wronged in this Quotation First in that it is brought to prove that the Covenant of grace in the dayes of the new Testament admitteth onely of a spirituall seed whereas Paul speaketh not of the Covenant of grace but of the election of grace Secondly in that the place is brought to shew what is now the seed in the New Testament different from that of the Old whereas Paul speaketh of the same seed both in the Old and New Testament alike Thirdly in that Ismael is accounted by you as a fleshly seed and so as rejected out of the Covenant from the womb whereas he was not cast out of the Covenant till himselfe cast off the Covenant by mocking and persecuting Isaac The second difference you put is that that Covenant in the old Testament was in the flesh this in the heart Gen. 17.13 with Jer. 31.33 Rom. 2.28 29. Answ This difference is put by you but not by the Spirit of God in Scripture For as that Covenant that is the signe of the Covenant was in the flesh so is Baptisme the signe of the Covenant now upon the flesh Secondly as our Baptisme signifieth and sealeth the washing away of the filth of flesh and spirit so did their circumcision of the flesh signifie and seale the circumcision of the heart Deut. 30.6 Thirdly as in our Baptisme the Lord
doth not regard nor esteeme the outward washing of the flesh 1 Pet. 3.21 So neither was the circumcision of the flesh without circumcision of the heart of any account before God either before Christ or since It was not only so adjudged in Pauls time in the New Testament that Circumcision of the flesh was nothing without Circumcision of the heart but also in Ieremies time in the Old Testament For Ieremy threatneth ●hat God will punish the circumcised with the uncircumcised Egypt Edom Ammon and Moab with Iudah for all these Nations are uncircumcised al the house of Israel are uncircumcised in heart Ier. 9.25 26. It hath been said of old shall a man make Gods to himself and they are no Gods So may it be said in some proportion shall a man make differences to himself to turn him off from the way of God and they are no differences To the third there is as little difference in that as in the former for as the seale of that Covenant confirmed faith in things to come but the seale of this confirmes faith in things already done so the seale of that Covenant confirmed the faith of Abraham in the righteousnesse of faith which he had already received and the faith of those that were in Canaan of the possession of it And our Baptisme sealeth up to us mortification of sin deliverance out of affliction resurrection of the body whereof some are yet to come in part some wholly The like may bee said of the other Ordinances of the Covenant But what is it to the purpose what if sundry ordinances of the Covenant as it was dispensed in the old Testament confirmed faith in things to come and what if the Ordinances of the New Testament confirmed faith in things past yet what is this to argue that children of believing Parents are excluded from the Covenant of grace in the new testament though not in the Old To the fourth when you say that Covenant was Nationall and admitted all of the Nation to the seales thereof But this personall and admitteth of none but such as believe This difference is founded in an untruth for it is untrue that the Covenant given to Abraham was Nationall it was rather domesticall at first and did not comprehend the whole Nation of any of Abrahams seed till Iacobs time And Iacob speaketh of his blessing which was a proper adjunct and peculiar priviledge of the Covenant that it did exceed the blessing and so the Covenant of his progenitors Gen. 49.26 For whereas in Abrahams house though Isaac was received to the blessing of continuance in the Covenant yet Ismael and the seed of Keturah were excluded and in Isaac's house though Iacob inherited the blessing yet Esau was excluded yet in Iacobs family all his sonnes were received to the blessing of continuance under the outward dispensation of the Covenant and not themselves onely but all their posterity the whole twelve Tribes which proceeded from them Now it is not said in Scripture that the blessing of Jacob is come upon the Gentiles for then none of our posterity might cut themselves off from the outwa●d dispensation of the Covenant and then our Covenant would be Nationall and admit all of the Nation to the seales thereof but the Scripture saith that the blessing of Abraham and so the Covenant of Abraham is come upon the Gentiles Gal. 3.14 that is upon the believing Gentiles and their seed whereby it commeth to passe that believing Gentiles and their Infant-seed are admitted to the Covenant and to the seale of the Covenant as Abraham and his Infant seed were But if when they bee growne up to yeares they shall grow to mocke and sleight the Covenant as Ismael and Esau did then they and their seed are cast out of the Covenant and that keepeth the Covenant from being national And so it was in Abrahams time so it is now When you say this Covenant with us is personall and admitteth onely of such as believe It hath been refuted above and this truth cleared that upon the faith of the Parents the grace of the Covenant is promised also unto their seed And if the Covenant did admit onely of such as believe then the faith whereby we believe were not given to any by Covenant Whereas it hath been shown above that faith and the saving knowledge of God by faith and the writing of the Law of faith as well as of love in our hearts is given by Covenant Jer. 31.33.34 Your fifth difference is like the rest devised in your own imagination not founded in Scripture That Covenant say you begot children after the flesh but this onely begets children after the Spirit and onely approveth of such as are begotten and born from above c. Answ Doe you any where read in Scripture that the Covenant of Abraham approved of any then more then now but such as are begotten from above Did not Abraham and Israel of old renounce the owning and acknowledgement of such children of theirs as were degenerate from their faith and obedience Esay 63.16 When you say that that Covenant begot children after the flesh doe you not meane that men under that Covenant begot children after the flesh And if that be your meaning doe you thinke it is not so now that men under the Covenant of grace now in the dayes of the New Testament as well as in the Old doe beget children after the flesh It is true those believing Parents who doe beget children by believing the Promise and Covenant of grace to them and to their children they doe bring forth and bring up spirituall children or as you call it children after the Spirit But so did Abraham and other faithfull parents in the Old Testament as well as now The places which you quote out of Ier. 31. Ezek 36. Heb. 8. Ioh. 3.5 6. doe neither prove your assertion nor disprove ours but rather approve it For in Ier. 31. the Law of faith and saving knowledge is written in our hearts by the Covenant so it is now in the New Testament and so it was in the Old In Ezek. 36. God takes away the heart of stone and gives an heart of flesh and a new spirit so hee doth now to his chosen and so he did then Numb 14.24 The place in the Heb. 8. is the same with that in Ieremy 31. That in Iohn 3.5 6. argueth that none born of flesh can enter into the kingdome of heaven but are carnall and fleshly But thus it was in the Old Testament as well as in the New there is no difference in this point Your sixth difference is that that Covenant with Abraham and his posterity before Christ comprehended a civill state and a worldly government with the like carnall subjects for the service of the same But this Covenant now under Christ comprehendeth onely a spirituall state and an heavenly government with the like spirituall subjects of this also Answ 1. The Civill State and worldly
the Lords Sapper But this seemeth a double mystery to mee how persons are fit and capable of union in a state that are not fit and capable of Communion in the Ordinances of the same state And yet more mysticall how one should bee a capable subject of Baptisme and not of the Supper I can see no rule for such a practise in all the Book of God And it is against the rule of Nature that when a Childe is born it should bee kept from food It troubleth mee to hear you call such plain points both in Religion and Nature Mysteries Silvanus whereby you mean dark Riddles above your capacity It was a sad speech of our Saviour concerning such as to whom it was not given to know the mysteries of God Matth. 13.11 The Lord give you understanding in his heavenly Mysteries When you make it a mystery how persons can bee fit and capable of union in a state and yet not bee fit and capable of Communion in the Ordinances of the same state You know wee esteeme infants fit and capable Persons of the Covenant and of the seale of it Baptisme If you thinke otherwise then you doe expresly make Infants unfit and uncapable of Union with Christ or with his Church and so uncapable of the Kingdom of Heaven Which sometime you disclaime But if you speak of all Ordinances you speak against common sense and experience Infants are members of the Common-wealth and so are they also of the family and accordingly fit and capable of Union with both estates And yet they are neither capable of the Ordinance of Goverment nor of the Ordinance of obedience to the Laws and orders in either state And why should it seem more mysticall to you that Infants should bee capable of Baptism and yet not bee capable of the Lords Supper You have seen even now a reason of both both in Religion and Nature And therefore doe not say you can see no rule for it in all the Book of God and it is against a rule in Nature to keep a Childe born from his food For Baptisme holding forth the death and buriall and Resurrection of Christ if there bee food in these as there bee food indeed then children born that want not these as in Baptisme they are administred to them they want not food Yea children in the wombe before they bee born to see the light yet they want not food but are fed by the Navell from the blood that is gathered in the mothers wombe before they come forth to suck the brests And so is it with the Infants in the Church they are fed by the blood and Spirit of Christ in Baptism before they can suck the sincere milk of the Word Silvester The Church of the New Testament succeedeth the Old but it will not follow that the like subjects succeed each other also For no rejected Ishmaelite and Esau are to bee admitted either unto Union or Communion in the Church under the New Testament by Christs appointment therefore though Baptisme succeed Circumcision yet the same subjects doe not so Silvanus The Church of the Old Testament consisted of no other subject matter then such as professed the Faith of the God of Israel and their seed And the Church of the New Testament consisteth of the like Grounds and proofes whereof wee have given above Ishmael and Esau when they shewed themselves to bee rejected of God they were not admitted to any further Union or Communion with the Church in the Old Testament No more were Simon Magus Ananias and Sapphira allowed any longer Union and Communion with the Church of the New Testament after they once shewed themselves like Esau or Ishmael to bee rejected of God But before that time Simon Magus Ananias and Sapphira were as well admitted into Union and Communion with the Church of the New Testament as young Ishmael and Esau in the Old Silvester Yea but such were not admitted into the Church of the New Testament by Christs appointment Silvanus What say you then to Judas a man as bad or worse then any of them either in Old or New Testament Did not Christ himself appoint him to an Office yea to an high Office in the Church And can you then say he had no Union or Communion with the Church of the New Testament Silvester The two Testaments are as Wills containing certain Legacies given and bequeathed onely to such whose names are expressely set down in the same as Rev. 21.27 In the Old Testament as the first will a male of eight dayes old or a Proselyte Exod. 12.48 49. Gen. 17.10.14.23.25 Joh. 8 Phil. 3.4 5. In the New Testament as the last will of Christ the Legacies therein contained as the Priviledges and blessings of Abraham they are given only to such as beleeve and to none else Gal. 3.14.22.29 Rom. 8.17 and 4.11 12. and 9.7 8. Gal. 3.6 7. These are such as are begotten again by the immortall seed of the Word born of the Spirit and so children of God the onely true heires of the Kingdome of God with the prviledges thereof as Jam. 1.18 1 Pet. 2.23 Joh. 1.12 13. Joh. 3.5 6. 1 Joh. 3.9 10. Rom. 8.17 These are the holy seed which God so approves of in the Scriptures as Subjects of Grace and Heires of Life and being in Covenant they only have right to the priviledges thereof And their children and off-spring are such as succeed them in the same Faith and Truth and so are called the Generation of the Righteous succeeding each other in the way of Righteousnesse and not their Infants or personall seed proceeding from their loynes by carnall generation as Isa 43.5 and 44.3 and 54.3 and 59.21 and 66.22 and 61.9 and 65.23 Compare Rev. 12.17 Gal. 4.26 to 31. Silvanus I willingly acknowledge that the two Testaments are two Wills containing such Legacies as are bequeathed and given onely to such whose names are either expressely set down or whose condition is plainly described in them Otherwise if you stand upon expresse names are there any such names expressely set down as William and Rowland Richard and Robert Godfrey and Geoffrey or the like And would you exclude all such whose names are not expressely set down from any Legacies in either Testament But I take your meaning to bee by names to understand Natures or Conditions and by expressely set down to understand plainly described The place which you alledge out of Revel 21.27 is a part of the description of the pure Church of the Jewes after their last Conversion the New Hierusalem by the condition of such Proselytes as from among the Nations shall enter into fellowship with them They shall not bee prophane persons defilers and corrupters of others nor makers of images which are abominations and lies And thus far the description agreeth to Infants as well as to men of riper yeers As for the other part of the description that none shall enter but such
infant to be solemnly presented and offered to him in that seale of the Covenant till the seven dayes were fulfilled However it was certaine it is that the limitation of the eighth day was not a morall appendant to the Covenant of grace And therefore the Infants of believers both in those former times and in these now partaked in the Legacies of the Covenant of grace as well before eight days as after Nay say you in the New Testament as the last Will of Christ the Legacies therein contained as the Priviledges and blessing of Abraham are given onely to such as believe and to none else Two things let me here answer you 1. It implyeth a contradiction to say the blessing of Abraham is given to believers and onely to believers and to none else intending thereby to exclude the infants of believers For what is the blessing of Abraham Is it not this promise of grace that God will bee a God to him and his seed If this blessing then come upon believers then this promise commeth upon them That God will be a God to them and their seed You must therefore either deny the blessing of Abraham to come upon believers or else you must grant the promise of grace to come upon them and upon their seed also Yea say you upon their believing seed such as succeed them in the same faith and truth not upon others If that were the meaning of the promise it could not bee said with any congruity of speech that the promise commeth upon the seed of believers at all For when the children of believers come to be believers the promise commeth not to them at all as the seed of believers but as believers themselves The children of Pagans when they come to beleeve may as well claim the promise to belong unto them as may the children of believers when themselves doe believe The second thing that I would answer you is that all the places which you alledge to prove that the priviledges of the Kingdom of Christ doe belong only unto believers they onely speake of saving priviledges flowing from faith All which wee readily grant you as a point out of controversie doe all of them belong to believers and not immediately to the children of believers till they come on themselves to believe likewise But this wee further claime in the behalfe of the children of believers which wee have proved before though you are willing to take no notice of it that the children of believers doe come on themselves to believe by reason of the Covenant of grace which God hath made with believers and their seed for by that Covenant hee hath promised to write the law of faith as of all other saving graces in their hearts that they also may come in Gods time and way to enjoy all the other saving priviledges of the Covenant as did their Fathers before them To take a short survey of the places which you quote that Text in Gal. 3.22 holdeth forth that the promise to wit the promise of eternall life of which he spake in the next verse before is given by faith to them that believe So is also the righteousnesse of faith given to them that believe as the other places you quote shew Rom. 4.11 12. Gal. 3.6 7. So likewise the inheritance of glory is given to sonnes even the regenerate sonnes of God who have received the spirit of adoption as your other place sheweth Rom. 8.17 But what doth all this prove That no Legacies of the New Testament no priviledges of the Covenant of grace no blessing of Abraham belongeth to the children of believers It proveth indeed that the righteousnesse of faith and eternall life and glory doe belong to believers and to such as are regenerate by the spirit of adoption But what thinke you of faith it selfe and the spirit of adoption Are they not also Legacies of the New Testament Are they not the Priviledges of the Covenant and of the blessing of Abraham And these when they are first given they are not given to believers who have them already but to such as have them not And therefore the children of believers are capable of these Legacies and priviledges by the blessing of Abraham in the new Covenant For this is a promise of the new Covenant they shall all know mee from the least of them to the greatest of them Jer. 31.34 And that knowledge is faith upon which sinnes are forgiven Isa 53.11 And this is another promise of the same Covenant I will poure my Spirit upon thy seed and my blessing upon thine off-spring Isa 44.3 If then the Spirit and Faith be given by the New Testament or which is all one the new Covenant then all the Legacies and priviledges and blessings of the Covenant are not given onely believers but some also to the children of believers that they may receive the spirit and faith also It is therefore a slender evasion to alledge as you doe that the children and off-spring of believers are such onely as succeed them in the same faith and truth and so are called the generation of the righteous For they did not succeed them in the same faith and truth and righteousnesse till it was given them and given them it was by a legacy of the New Testament when they were onely the children of the faithfull and had neither faith nor truth nor righteousnesse in them The other places which you quote do shew that men of yeares as well as children are sometimes called the seed of the Church And that the godly ones amongst them are begotten of the immortall seed of the word and are regenerate by the spirit of grace have a seed of God dwelling in them are maligned by the carnall seed are approved of God and acknowledged as heires of the Kingdome of glory All which are truths out of question But none of all the places doe exclude the Infants of believers nor their growne naturall children from being subjects of this grace of the Covenant to have the Spirit of grace and faith poured upon them by vertue of the Covenant One onely place of all the rest might seem to look that way which you quote out of John 3.5 6 where it is said that the carnall seed as being flesh and destitute of the spirit cannot enter into the Kingdom of God And indeed if by the Kingdome of God were meant the Church as oftentimes it is the objection would bee more difficult to resolve But the truth is in that place by the Kingdome of God is plainly meant the Kingdome of Glory not the Church For Nicodemus did not scruple his Church estate nor enquire how hee might enter into the visible Church but how hee might bee saved and inherit the Kingdome of Glory And therefore Christ directeth him to Regeneration and to beleeve in his Name that hee might attain unto everlasting life Joh. 3.5.14 15 16. And though hee speak of water as co-working with the Spirit in Regeneration
darknesse in such a dark time might bee capable of Circumcision yet in the light of the Gospel our children are not capable of Baptisme till they become children of light This is a carnall reasoning not savouring of the Spirit of God or speaking the language of the Scripture For though the Spirit of God in Scripture do call the children of God the children of light in opposition to their former carnall estate whether in their Pagancy or in their unregeneracy 1 Thess 5.5 Ephes 5 8. yet God never called the children of God in the Old Testament nor the children of his children children of darknesse Neither doth hee use such a phrase as to call the children of the New Testament children of the light in opposition to the children of the Old Testament as children of darknesse Neither is it altogether a true speech that faith in Christ and grace in the new birth cannot bee where there is not first a begetting by the immortall seed of the word of life For it hath been shewed above that the grace of the new birth and so faith were not wanting in John Baptist Jeremy and others in their mothers wombe who yet had never heard the Word of life Though the hearing of the Word of life bee the ordinary instrument which the Spirit of God is wont to use in begetting the grace of the new birth in men of understanding yet the Spirit himselfe being a principall part of the immortall seed of the Word hee can beget the grace of the new birth without the Word when yet the Word cannot doe it without him And yet I will not deny that in some sense though not in yours it may be granted that the Spirit ordinarily never worketh the grace of the new birth in the children of the faithfull but by the immortall seed of the Word of life For when the Spirit begetteth the grace of the new birth it is by the Ministery of the Word of life to their Parents one of them at least For they hearing the Word of life promising grace and life to themselves and to their seed the Spirit co-working with that Word begetteth faith in them to believe for themselves and for their seed And according to their faith it is done The Spirit begetteth the grace of life as well in their seed as in themselves The greater is the danger of those infants whose Parents like you doe not beleeve the grace of Christ can reach unto your infants and so it is no wonder if your children be deprived of the grace of the new birth for your unbeliefs sake Be it therefore granted which you take for granted in your next words That for this end to wit for begetting the grace of the new birth God hath ordained in the Gospel preaching and believing to goe before baptizing Mat. 28.9 with Mar. 16.15 16. yet this only proveth that the preaching of the Gospel and the begetting of faith by the Gospel is requisite to enstate the hearer in the grace and blessing or which is all one in the Covenant of the Gospel But if the hearer be a Parent of children and so doe believe the Gospel and Covenant of grace to belong to him and to his seed both hee and they according to the order of the Gospel and Covenant of grace are rightly baptized into the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghost All which persons do joyne together in making this Covenant and sealing to it to be a God to the believer and his seed And if it were not so the place which you quote out of Mark Chap. 16. v. 15 16. would utterly cut off the children of believers dying in their infancy from all hope of salvation which you said even now you were far from For if infants for want of hearing the Word in their owne persons want faith and for want of faitsh may not bee baptized then for want of faith they cannot be saved For so run the words in Marke He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved hee that believeth not shall be damned If for unbeliefe they must not be baptized for unbeliefe they must then bee damned But if by the Gospel we understand as the Scriptures meane the glad tydings of the Covenant of grace and so of redemption and salvation by Christ preached and proclaimed to believers and their seed then al such as doe believe these glad tydings to themselves and to their seed they are commanded by the Order of the Gospel to be baptized themselves and their children with them for their children are by the faith of their Parents wrapped up in the Covenant and so are become capable subjects both of the Covenant and of the seale thereof For though the infants themselves be not it may be then actually believers when their Parents are baptized and themselves with them yet God who calleth things that are not as though they were Rom 4.17 He accepteth them into his Covenant by the faith of their Parents and so they are no longer Pagans and infidells but the children of the faithfull and holy in whom God hath covenanted to worke faith and the grace of the new birth in the elect seed and to offer it and the meanes thereof unto all the seed till they utterly reject it And requireth therefore of the Parents by his Covenant to neglect no meanes of grace for the holy institution of their children And for this end the seale of the Covenant is administred to the Infants to confirme the same to their children on both parts If therefore we delighted in returning reproaches for reproaches as you say to us give the baptizing of believers to Christ and the baptizing of infants unto Antichrist so might we more truly and justly returne it to you Give the baptizing of believers and their seed unto Christ For the Covenant of Christ is to believers and their seed and the seale of the Covenant is due where the faith of either Parent is fit to receive it to their holy seed but give the denyall of baptisme of Infants to Infidels onely and out-laws from the Church where neither of their Parents being believers their children also are Infidels and outlawes like their Parents neither believers nor holy according to Covenant You need not therefore ask what advantage will it be to Infants to come before they bee called For Christ called for little children to come unto him and was displeased with such as did forbid them Marke 10.14 If calling for Infants to come will suffice they cannot bee said to come before they be called Suffer saith he little children to come unto me and forbid them not for of such is the Kingdom of God And they being such hee put his hands upon them and blessed them If you ask why he did not baptize them too for who can forbid Baptisme to such as are blessed of Christ and by imposition of hands set apart to a blessing and to the Kingdome of God I
of it are said to be borne after the Spirit So the seed of the Covenant of the Law is rightly called seed as that which leaveth men that are begotten of it more carnall then they were before For it either puffeth them up to a carnall confidence of their owne strength and righteousnesse or else sinketh them into an horrible pit of diffidence and desperation And therefore they that are begotten of it are rightly and fitly said to be borne after the flesh And that is the very true meaning of the Apostles words Gal 4.29 As it was then so is it now He that was borne after the flesh persecuted him that was borne after the Spirit Where by such as are borne after the flesh the Apostle doth not mean as you understand him such as are born by an ordinary course of nature in a way of a naturall generation but such as are bred and begotten of the carnall seed of the Covenant of the law which as it begot in Ishmael a carnall confidence of his own strength or else he would never have sleighted and mocked the promised seed so it begot in Cain and Saul and Judas an utter despaire of grace and salvation Thus then you see I hope at the length a true and just answer unto your first argument against the Baptisme of Infants taken from the supposed want of command or example of the baptizing of Infants in all the New Testament By that which you have heard it appeareth to the contrary that the Baptisme of Infants hath not wanted a commandement from Christ in the institution of Baptisme Mat. 28. nor a commandement from the Apostle joyned with an example in the first solemne administration of Baptisme Acts 2. nor a commandement and example from the Lord God in the institution of a proportionall seale of the same Covenant in the dayes of Abraham Gen. 17. which though you seem to undervalue because it is fetched out of the Old Testament yet be not you deceived by the equivocation of the name For the Old and New Testament is sometimes put for the Covenants of the Law and of grace as Gal. 4.24 25. sometimes for the Books of the Old and New Testament as 2 Cor. 3.14 Now true it is that the institution of the Covenant of grace and of the seale of the Covenant of grace Gen. 17. is found indeed in the bookes of the Old Testament but the substance of the New Testament and the circumstances of that Ordinance which are changed in the books of the New Testament they are not changed by way of abrogation or diminution but by way of accomplishment and enlargement The Covenant is inlarged from the stock of Abraham to all Nations the seal of the Covenant Circumcision is translated to another more easie and acceptable the time is inlarged in respect of the day the Minister is inlarged in respect of his publike place the subject is inlarged in respect of the sex and surely not diminished nor straitned in respect of the age It is therefore a needlesse pretence to plead That surely the New Testament and the Order Government and Administration thereof are no way inferiour to the old Testament where all things are directed by expresse rule For a great part of the New Testament or Covenant is expresly delivered in the bookes of the Old Testament Paul professeth publickly he taught nothing but what Moses and the Prophets did say should come Acts 26.22 And the greatest part of the bookes of the Old Testament hold forth the Doctrine Worship Order and Government of the New Testament to such who have not a vaile laid over their hearts in the reading of the Old Testament 2 Cor. 3.14 Let us therefore proceed to your other arguments against the baptism of Infants and consider if there bee any greater weight on strength in them CHAP. V. Silvester I Have met with this as a second argument against the Baptisme of Infants That in the Baptisme of infants there is an high contempt and injury offered to Christ as hee is the husband of the Church his holy Spouse to force upon him a naturall wife himselfe being spirituall and desireth the like associate whereas such a Church is founded upon the natural by th namely Infants because commonly to one that is born of the spirit there is twenty born of the flesh Silvanus Christ did not take it as such an high contempt or injury offered to him by Abraham Isaac and Jacob and the whole house of Israel that the infants of his people and of the Proselytes that joyned to them were received into Covenant with him and admitted to the seale thereof when as yet himselfe was as spirituall then as now he is You doe herein apparently charge Christ himself with folly and with indignity offered to himselfe that he should so much forget himselfe that he being spirituall should take so many thousand Infants into the Covenant with him who for the most part are naturall and as you say for one that is born of the Spirit there were twenty born of the flesh But againe let me tell you that though Christ in taking a company to be a Church unto himselfe doth enter into marriage Covenant with them both in the Old Testament Jer. 31.32 and in the New 2 Cor. 11.2 yet not into a marriage Covenant with each member at first Christ entred into a marriage Covenant with the Congregation of Israel in the wildernesse Ezek. 16.8 yet the children of this Congregation he calleth them not his Spouses but his children v. 20 21. Furthermore you shall doe well to observe what Spirit breaths in such a speech when you say That such a Church as receiveth infants of beleeving parents into the fellowship of the Covenant and seale thereof that such a Church is founded upon the naturall birth For the Lord himselfe speaketh of such a Church of Israel as founded upon his Covenant Ezek. 16.8 And the Apostle saith We are built upon the same foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Jesus Christ himselfe being the chiefe corner stone Eph● 2.19 20 21. See what a vast difference there is betweene the Spirit of your language and the language of the Spirit of Christ CHAP. VI. 3. I Finde this for a third Argument Silvester against the Baptisme of Infants That this practise overthroweth and destroyeth the body of Christ the holy Temple of God For in time it will come to consist of naturall and so a Nation and so a Nationall Generation and carnall members Amongst whom if any Godly bee they will bee brought into bondage and become subjects of scorn and contempt and the power of Government rest in the hands of the wicked This Argument ●utteth a feare where no fear is Silvanus or at least a causelesse feare For suppose all the Children of the Church bee baptized it is an unwonted and unexpected enlargement in th●s● dayes for one Congregation to grow so populous as to become a Nation