Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
spirit_n belong_v eternal_a great_a 71 3 2.1566 3 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
A47591 Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the antient Britains [sic] being an answer to a book, iutituled [sic] Children's baptism from Heaven, published in the Welsh tongue by Mr. James Owen / by Benjamin Keach. Keach, Benjamin, 1640-1704. 1696 (1696) Wing K75; ESTC R32436 280,965 390

There are 12 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Rep. Here are a heap of words in a confused manner wrap'd up together without distinguishing one Covenant from another and without distinguishing between Seed and Seed 2. If the Covenant of Grace God made with Adam was also to all his Seed How happy is the whole VVorld All are Adam's Natural Seed Be sure that was the Covenant of Grace and the first discovery of it and this runs only to Christ the Seed of the VVoman and to all the Elect in him not to the Seed of the Serpent who were nevertheless Adam's Natural Seed as I shewed you before 3. God's Covenant with Noah had Grace in it and he was in the Covenant of Grace himself but that Covenant Gen. 9. 9. was also made with all the VVorld and with the Beasts of the Field and Fowls of Heaven even with every Living Creature Yet we will acknowledg thus much i. e. that all Covenants God made with Man since the Fall originally did spring from his special Love to his Elect and New Covenant-Grace designed for them and so they were chiefly for their Sakes But every distinct Covenant we read of was not material and formally the Covenant of Grace 4. The Covenants with Abraham and his Seed I have proved in this Answer to Mr. Owen was Twofold as he was a twofold Father Head and Representative and had a twofold Seed 1. The Covenant or Free-Promise of Grace God made with him the Apostle proves was not made to Seeds as of many but to thy Seed that is Christ Gal. 3. 16. If any Man be in Christ he is one of Abraham ' s Seed and an Heir according to the Promise ver 29. 2. The Covenant of Peculiarity God made with Abraham and his Seed we deny not refers to all his Natur. I Seed or Fleshly Seed as such to which Circumcision did appertain But this will do the Pedo-Baptists no service The Covenant God made with David runs primarily to Christ and in him to all the Elect this is the Eternal Covenant indeed Mr. Owen saith The Evangelical Prophet foretelleth that the Covenant of Grace should be of the same extent under the Gospel even as it was from the Beginning Isa 66. 22. For as the new Heavens shall remain before me so shall your Seed remain God's Covenant with the Seed of the Faithful is so stedfast as the new Heavens and the new Earth 1. Reply This all Men know only refers to the Elect Seed and not to the Seed of the Faithful as such 2. We deny not but the Covenant of Grace is of the same extent in the Gospel-Days as it was from the Beginning But from the Beginning none were truly and really in the Covenant of Grace but the Elect of God only But what Mr. Owen in the close of his second Epistle hath said may open the Eyes of his Reader tho his own be shut Take his words Distinguish between the outward Dispensation of the Covenant and the inward Dispensation thereof Rom. 9. 4 8. All the Seed of Abraham was in the outward Dispensation and the Seal of the Covenant belonged unto them but none were in the inward Dispensation save the Elect only Reply Are not all Men in the VVorld especially where the Gospel is preached in or under the outward Dispensation of the Gospel or Covenant of Grace Sure none can deny this But doth Baptism therefore belong to them all All the Natural Seed of Abraham we acknowledg were in the outward Dispensation of the Law or Covenant of Peculiarity God made with him and had great external Privileges thereby which in some things much differed from the Privileges of such who are under the Dispensation of the Gospel But let them be what they will the outward Dispensation of the Gospel of Grace doth belong as far forth to Unbelievers and their Children as to the Children of Believers For what is that more than the Privilege of reading and hearing the Gospel preached or attending on the Word in Christian Assemblies 2. I ask Mr. Owen how he can prove that the Seal of the Covenant of Grace doth belong to them who are only in the outward Dispensation of the Gospel This may seem strange to all thinking Men. They whom the Seal of the Covenant of Grace belongeth unto are assured of all of the peculiar Immunities Blessings and Privileges thereof as pardon of Sin Justification Adoption and Eternal Life 3. Tho I own no Seal or nothing to be a Seal of the Covenant of Grace save the Holy Spirit Yet was Baptism the Seal of it as Mr. Owen supposeth certainly it must if it were so seal to the Person baptized all those Spiritual Blessings or inward Graces signified thereby or otherwise the Seal would be an insignificant thing and the Party sealed would but be cheated or deceived He may think he hath some great Matter sealed to him when in truth he hath nothing sealed thereby Pray ask this Man what it is that Baptism seals to Infants 4. But is it so indeed Are none in the inward part of the Covenant of Grace or in the inward Dispensation of the the Gospel but the Elect then I infer that the Children of the Faithful as such are not in the Covenant of Grace i. e. the Spiritual Blessings or Fatness of that Covenant doth not belong to them as such but only to such of them as are elected or who do believe or are brought under special Vocation by the Holy Spirit And these things being so to what purpose is it for this Man and other Pedo-Baptists to make such a Noise about the Children of Believers as such being in the Covenant of Grace whereas he confesseth none are indeed in it but the Elect. I cannot see it is any thing he and others contend for in pleading for Infant-Baptism but only a Christian-Name or some outward thing the inward Grace not belonging to any but to the Elect only and who they are cannot be known till each Person comes to Age and is called by the Lord For it is only by effectual Calling that the Election of Persons is known to themselves or others But to conclude Let me add a word or two to you Pedo-Baptists that are sound in the Doctrine of Free Grace and Free Justification by Christ's Righteousness alone First May it not be worth your most serious Thoughts to consider how the Doctrine of Pedo-Baptism is a direct Violation of that Holy Precept of our Blessed Saviour Mar. 5. 33 34. It hath been said of them of old Time Thou shalt not forswear thy self but shall perform to the Lord thine Oaths But I say unto you swear not at all c. All voluntary and promisary Oaths and Vows and Religious Covenants as well as vain Swearing is directly thereby forbid and therefore sinful Now tho we grant that the true Baptismal Covenant is of Divine Institution yet since that only obligeth those that are the true Subjects thereof viz. Believers It followeth that that Vow or
sure when Zacheus believed in Christ he was a proper Subject of Gospel Baptism so were all that believed who were in his House but the Text doth not say that every particular Person that were in his House believed or that Salvation came so to his House but if it did no doubt they were all upon their believing baptized 2. But you may well say what is this to Baptism since he and all his House were baptized before even when he was in his Sins and a notorious Sinner the chief of the Publicans it is probable say you sure Sir 't is more then probable it was impossible that Zacheus and his Family should escape Baptism when John had baptized all the whole Country before all yea every individual Person that dwelt in Jerusalem Judea and all the Regions round about The truth is this is very impertinently brought in to prove Infant Baptism what doth it signifie that Salvation was come to Zacheus that day and not until then seeing John's Commission was to baptize all whether Godly or Ungodly Believers or Unbelievers whether Salvation was come to them or not let the Reader observe what darkness and ignorance this Man shews Peter say you when he first planted the Christian Religion among the Jews exhorted them saying be baptized every one of you for the promise is to you and to your Children Ans This of the promise being unto them and to their Children we have fully already answered but why doth Peter command these Jews who doubtless dwelt at Jerusalem to be baptized seeing John Baptist had baptized them and their Children before as you have positively asserted what must they be all rebaptized what inconsistency is there in your arguing 2. The latitude of this Command be baptized every one of you is no further then to all them that he commands to repent nor is the promise to any of their Children but such that the Lord our God shall all the Parents right and interest to the promise of the Holy Spirit Remission of Sins and eternal Life spring from their Interest in Christ by Faith and at that Door comes in the right and interest of all their Children or Off-spring that are called by the effectual operations of the word and spirit of God 't is the promise made to all the true spiritual Seed of Abraham but are the natural Seed of Abraham and the natural Seed of Believers as such or as so considered the spiritual Seed of Abraham 3. the promise here meant and the duty of being baptized are as you say of the same Latitude thus you argue viz. be baptized you and your Children for the promise is unto you and to your Children we so are to understand the Words the Promise and the Duty being of the same Latitude if the Promise belongeth unto them and their Children then bap●●●●● Ans I answer what is the promise but the Holy-Ghost and eternal Life and such that receive this Promise viz. the holy Spirit as an earnest of eternal Life we deny not are to be baptized and if no Child hath any other right to the Duty but such who have received the same Promise through Faith ziz remission of Sin and of the Holy Spirit then no Children but such that repent and believe ought to be baptized seeing the Promise and Duty runs to the Children or Off-spring as it runs to the Parents In the same manner you say when Peter planted the first Church among the Gentiles as might be gathered from the words of the Angel to Cornelius being the first Fruits of the Church of the Gentiles Acts 11. 13. send Men to Joppa and call for Simon whose Sir-name is Peter who shall tell thee words whereby thou and all thy House shall be saved the Gospel bringeth Salvation to him and to all his House Cornelius well knew the meaning of the Words for he being a proselite to the true Religion before that time though uncircumcised yet received the severe Commandment of Noah the substance of which might be seen Gen. 9. 1. God's Covenant was with Noah and his Seed c. 1. Ans I answer 't is said Peter should tell Cornelius words whereby he and all his House shall be saved but it must be such of his House that could hear and understand those Words Peter should tell them he shall tell thee and tell all thy House Words whereby you shall be saved but not unless he and they of his House believed and pray observe is it not said he was a devout Man and one that feared God with all his House Acts 10. 2. all his House the Holy-Ghost here intends were such who were of understanding and did fear God as well as himself also Cornelius said to Peter now we are all here to hear what things are commanded thee of God all his House were capable to hear c. Moreover is it not said while Peter yet spake these words the Holy Ghost fell on them which heard the word Verse 44. and all these were commanded to be baptized viz. that had received the Holy-Ghost for their reception of the Holy-Ghost is that argument the Apostle uses to command them to be baptized Verse 47 can any Man forbid water that those 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 Verse 48 them that did believe them that had received the Holy-Ghost them that spake with Tongues and magnified God and if it was every individual Person in his House let it be so the greater Grace of God was manifested but here are no Children mentioned in Infancy that were baptized 2. Besides I wonder at you 't is said Peter should tell Cornelius words whereby he and all his House should be 〈◊〉 sure you do not believe what you seem to plead for pray answer when the Parent believes and is saved or assured of Salvation are all his Children and whole Family by his Faith brought into the like stars of Salvation shall they all be saved also Through his Faith the external Priviledges of the Covenant that your Brethren talk of that is something but I know not what by virtue of their Parents Faith it is not however that which you plead for you tell us when Cornelius heard words whereby he came to be saved all his Family through his Faith were saved also if you do not this I profess I know not what you mean by what you have written but if this be your meaning I hope no Body will believe you because all know it is utterly false 3. But the greater wonder comes at last viz. it appears Cornelius and his Houshold because a Gentile had right to Baptism by the Covenant and Commandment of God to Noah not by virtue of Abraham's Covenant the Truth is one is as good an Argument for Baptism as the other but was the Covenant God made with Noah the Covenant of Grace if it was all the
tho we grant that many Doctrinal Truths may be drawn or inferred by Consequences from many Texts of Scripture See Reverend Mr. Greenhil on Ezek. chap. 11. Vol. 2. p. 412. VVhat is clearly held out unto us in the Gospel saith he let us consent in and walk answerably in what is dark and doubtful let us forbear each other and stay till God reveals more If we cannot unite in all let us unite in what is clear Things Fundamental are clearest laid down in the word they are expresly commanded or held forth in Scripture whether they are Matters of Faith or Practice they are not drawn out by remote Consequences and strength of Men's Parts but immediately from or in the VVord Thus Mr. Greenhill Now we all agree that Baptism tho it be not a Fundamental of Salvation yet 't is a Fundamental of Church-Constitution there can be no true right orderly Gospel-Church without Baptism Therefore it is necessary that this should be laid down plainly in the Word of God and so it is We must first be made Disciples and then be baptized Mat. 28. 19 20. John 4. 1. first believe and then be baptized Mark 16. 16. Repent and be baptized Acts 2. 37. If thou believest thou mayest Acts 8. 37. Can any Man forbid Water that these should not be baptized Acts 10. 47. When they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the Kingdom of Grd and the Name of Jesus Christ they were baptized both Men and Women Acts 8. 12. So Acts 16. 30 31. Acts 18. 8. Rom. 6. 3 4. And as touching those Consequences that Mr. Owen and others draw from some Scriptures to prove Infants Baptism you will find in the ensuing Answer those Consequences do not arise naturally from those Texts but are only his own ungrounded Suppositions and mistaken Apprehensions Mr. Owen in his Epistle to the Courteous Welshmen saith The greatest part of the true Church judg that the Children of the Faithful have a right to Baptism because they are in the Covenant of God This Opinion is agreeable to the Scriptures as it appears saith he in this Book Reply What Covenant is it he means Our Children as such are in I know not they are not in the Covenant of Grace for if all the Children of the Faithful were in the Covenant of Grace they must be all saved This I have in this Treatise fully proved there is none can fall finally away that are in this Covenant Besides if they were in the Covenant of Grace why must they have Baptism administred to them from this foot of Account and not the Lord's Supper and all other Privileges of the Church 2. They are not in the Covenant of Peculiarity God made with Abraham's Natural Seed as such or with the whole House of Israel for that was a Typical Covenant and is taken away Mr. Owen saith they are in the outward Dispensation of the Covenant of Grace Rep. Let him prove if he can that the Children of Believers have more Privileges by the outward Dispensation of the Gospel than the Children of Unbelievers have where the Gospel is preach'd Those who lived under the outward Dispensation of the Law who believed in Christ to come or were elected were in the Covenant of Grace and none but they only and so 't is now none but the Elect and such that believe are in the Covenant of Grace Will Mr. Owen seal all New Covenant-Blessings to all his Natural Seed whether elected or not elected since the inward and Spiritual Blessings of the said Covenant by his own words belong only to the Elect Mr. Owen bids you to seek for a meek and humble and self-denying Spirit Reply This Counsel is good therefore be not too confident you are in the Right your Teachers are but Men and God may for some Reasons best known to himself hide Believers Baptism at present from them He bids you also to beware of a distemper'd Zeal that is not after Knowledg it is saith he a Wild-Fire that wasteth Churches and Countries c. Reply Such I fear hath been that Zeal he and others have shewed for Infant-Baptism For it will appear I hope in this Treatise that his Zeal is not according to the knowledg of God's Word Despise not saith Mr. Owen thy Faithful Teachers obey them and submit to them for they watch for thy Soul Reply As you ought not to despise your Teachers but to submit to them in the Lord so you ought not to Idolize them nor follow them any farther than they follow Christ For you must know that Men tho Ministers are not your Rule of Faith and Practice but God's Word Moreover know that you must give an account of your selves to God others will not be suffered to speak for you at the Great Day He bids you look upon little Children as part of their Natural Parents and comprehended in the Promise made unto good Parents 1. Reply This he hath also asserted elsewhere in his Book which you will find answered in this 2. Strange Are Children part of their Parents so that when the Parents believe the Children believe and when the Parents obey God's Command the Children obey it also and when the Parents have a Promise of Pardon and Peace the Children have right to the same Promise What strange Doctrine in this Are not we and our Children distinct Persons Shall not a whole Believer be saved I profess I cannot well see that it can be so if any of our Children who are a part of us do perish for ever And doth it follow because in the Covenant of Peculiarity God made with the whole House of Israel the Parents and Children were comprehended therefore they must be all comprehended in the Covenant of Grace also and made Members of the Gospel-Church He cites Deut. 4. 37 40. And because be loved thy Fathers therefore he chose their Seed after them VVhat of this Mr. Owen can never prove that God hath chosen any one Nation both Parents and Children since that time to be a peculiar People in a Covenant-Relation with himself as he chose the Natural Seed of Abraham it was a Typical Church and figured forth the true Spiritual Seed or true Israel of God Therefore that Church-State ceased at the Death of Christ when the Partition-wall was broken down And the extent of the Promise now and Gospel 〈◊〉 ●…es only runs to Believers and to their Children 〈…〉 or who do believe whether Jews or Gentiles 〈…〉 and to no more Unde● 〈…〉 Mr. Owen the extent of God's Cove●…●…ople his Covenant is with them and their 〈…〉 was the Covenant of Grace which God made 〈…〉 Gen. 3. 15. and 4. 25. And the Covenant 〈…〉 ●ade with Noah Gen. 9. 9. with Abraham Gen. 17. 7. 〈◊〉 Isaac Gen. 28. 4. and with Jacob Gen. 35. 12. And in the same manner was his Covenant with David and his Seed 2 Sam. 7. 12. and 22. 51. in this Eternal Covenant he rejoiced on his Death-Bed 2 Sam. 23. 5.
But they that despise and slight the Baptism of Infants despise neither the Baptism of John nor Christ because neither John nor our blessed Saviour commanded Infants to be baptized nor did they ever baptize one Child as we read of if you can prove they did do it we will say no more but will soon baptize our Children Thus I have done with all I thought necessary to remark or take notice of that is contained in your second Chapter CHAP. III. Shewing Baptizing is Dipping not sprinkling nor pouring a little Water SIR AS to what is contain'd in the second Chapter of your Book concerning the Continuation of Christ's Baptism of Water in the Church I shall say no more to that in that we agree and are one but we differ about what Baptism of Water is you would have it to be Sprinkling which indeed is not Baptism but Rantism for that you know is the Greek Word for Sprinkling 2. As also we differ about the true and proper Subjects of it according to our Saviour's Institution and since you begin with that you call the Manner or external Form of Administration of Baptism I shall follow you herein and shall first repeat your Words and then reply Thus you begin viz. Some judg that the whole Body ought to be dipped in Water and all other ways to be unlawful Others judg say you the sprinkling of Water on the Face of him that is baptiz'd to be sufficient especially in these cold Climates for even as in the other Sacrament of the Lord's Supper there is one Mo●sel of Bread and one Spoonful of Wine sufficient for to signify the Spiritual Food that is had in Christ even so in the Sacrament of Baptism the sprinkling of a little Water on him that is baptized signifies the Virtue of the Blood of Christ as effectually as Rivers of Water I answer Certainly you cannot be ignorant of what many learned Pedo-baptists have said in Opposition to what you here speak for tho both the holy Sacraments are very significant of Christ's Sufferings and of those spiritual Benefits we receive from him yet they are of different Signification First The Sacrament of the Lord's-Supper holds forth in a lively Figure the breaking of Christ's Body and the pouring forth of his precious Blood and this indeed may as well he represented by a small quantity of Bread and Wine as by much yet a little Water will not serve in Baptism 1. Because ' ●is positively said that John was baptizing in Enon near Salim John 3. 23. because there was much Water there Certainly the Holy Ghost would not have given this as the Reason why John baptized near Enon viz. because there was much Water in that place if a little Water namely a Spoonful or two would have been sufficient or two or three Quarts It seems plainly deducible from this Text it cannot be administred with a little Water but contrariwise it doth require much Water Secondly Pray consider that as the Sacrament of the Lord's-Supper holds forth or represents symbolically the breaking of the Body of Christ and the shedding of his Blood and to that purpose it was in part instituted even so the Sacrament of Baptism holds forth in as lively Figure that our blessed Lord was dead buried and rose again and to this end this holy Ordinance was also instituted as also to shew forth our Death unto Sin and Vivification to Newness of Life as by and by shall be abundantly proved both from the holy Scriptures and a multitude of learned Men that hold Infant-Baptism therefore since a little Water cannot in this Ordinance represent Christ's Burial and Resurrection it follows directly that a little Water will not serve to baptize Persons in but that it must be administred in Rivers Ponds or places where there is much Water i. e. so much Water as that the Body may be buried or covered all over therein But to proceed you say Neither is dipping or sprinkling essential unto this Ordinance but washing with Water or putting Water on the Body for the word Baptism signifies in the Greek washing with Water as we cited say you from Heb. 9. 10. Answ I answer now you have given away your Cause at once or I am mistaken for if neither dipping nor sprinkling be essential unto this Ordinance but washing what is become of your Baptism Sir all dipping in Water is washing tho all washing is not dipping in that you hurt us not but your sprinkling is not washing If a Woman should sprinkle her foul Linen with a few drops of Water would that be deem'd a washing of them Again if Sprinkling be not essential to Baptism you have no Baptism at all take away the Body of a Tree and there is no Tree That thing can't be where the essential part of it is wanting And now that the Greek Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signify dipping and such a washing as is by dipping we shall plainly shew evince and demonstrate and confirm it by such Arguments and Authors that no unprejudiced sober Person can any longer well remain doubtful about this matter and then we will examine your Objections I shall prove baptizing or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not sprinkling nor pouring of Water upon the Body but dipping or plunging the Body all over in Water and that 1st From the proper literal and direct Signification of the Greek Word Baptizo and the Testimonies of Learned Men. 2dly From the Practice of Primitive Times 3dly From the Consideration of what is signified and represented in Baptism 4thly From those Typical Baptisms spoken of in the Scriptures 5thly From the nature of those Metaphorical Baptisms mentioned viz. the Baptism of the Spirit and that of Afflictions To proceed to prove the first Scapula and Stephens two as great Masters of the Greek Tongue as most we have do tell you in their Lexicons that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 baptizo from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bapto signifies mergo immergo item tingo quod fit immergendo inficere imbuere viz. to dip plunge overwhelm put under cover over to dye in Colour which is done by plunging Grotius says it signifies to dip over Head and Ears Pasor an Immersion dipping or Submersion Vossius says it implies a washing the whole Body Mincaeus in his Dictionary saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in the Latin Baptismus in Dutch Doopsit or Doopen Baptismus or Baptism to dive or duck in Water and the same with the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tabal which the Septuagint or Seventy Interpreters render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 baptizo to dip This Casa●bon saith was the right of way Baptizing that Persons were plunged into the Water which the very word Baptizo sufficiently demonstrates which as it does not extend so far as to sink down to the bottom to the hurt of the Person so it is not to swim upon the Superficies of the Water Baptism ought to be
do not the thing you rantise and baptize none unless you dip them into the Water Chamier also faith the antient use of Baptism was to dip the whole Body into the Element therefore did John baptize in a River Dr. Hammond in his Annotations upon John 13. 10. saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies an Immersion or washing the whole Body and which answereth to the Hebrew Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used for dipping in the Old Testament and therefore tells us upon Mat. 3. that John baptized in a River viz. in Jordan Mark 1. 5. in a Confluence of Water John 3. 23. because 't is said there was much Water which the Greeks called the Lakes where they used to wash Also saith he the Antients called their Baptisterions or the Vessels containing their Baptismal Water Columbethras viz. swimming or diving places being very large with Partitions for Men and Women The Learned Mr. Pool or those Learned and Reverend Divines concerned in perfecting his most excellent Annotations on the holy Bible says a great part of those who went out to hear John were baptized that is dipped in Jordan on John 3. 6. and on Mat. 28. 20. say they the first Baptism of which we read in Holy Writ was dipping the Person baptized The Dutch Translation according to their Language reads it dipping Mat. 3. 16. Ende Jesus Gedoopt zijn de is terstont Opgeklomen vit hit w●er And when Jesus was dipp'd he came out of the Water And Ver. 6. Ende wierden van hemge doopt in de Jordan And were dipped of him in Jordan Hence they called John the Baptist John the Dipper In Verse 1. Ende in die dayen quam Jonnes de dooper predikenn in de woeffijue van Judea In English thus In those days came John the Dipper preaching in the Wilderness of Judea Had our Translators translated the Greek word into our English Tongue as the Dutch have done it into theirs it would have been read in our Bible John the Dipper and for baptizing them in the Name of the Father c. it would have been read dipping them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost and then the People would not have been deceived but they have not translated the Greek word at all but left it in its Original Language What difference is there between Baptism and the Greek word Baptisma Mr. Ball in his Catechism doth not only say Faith was required of such who did desire Baptism but also that the Party baptized was washed by dipping c. But to close with this I argue thus viz. Since our Saviour sent his Disciples to teach and baptize or dip in the Name c. into all Nations viz. into cold Countries as well as hot and seeing Infants tender Bodies cannot bear dipping without palpable danger of their Lives it follows clearly that they are none of the Subjects Christ commanded to be dipp'd in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost To conclude with this take one Argument viz. If the proper literal and genuine Signification of the Greek word baptizo is dipping or to dip then sprinkling is not baptizing But the proper literal and genuine Signification of the Greek word baptizo is dipping or to dip Ergo Sprinkling is not Baptizing CHAP. IV. Proving Baptism is Dipping by the Practice of John Baptist Christ and his Apostles 2dly FRom the Practice of the Primitive Times I have already shewed that John Baptist baptized in the River Jordan who was the first that received Commission to baptize And Diodate on Mat. 3. says he plunged them in Water Piscator also saith the antient manner of baptizing was that the whole Body was dipp'd into the Water So saith the Assembly in their Annotations Nav say I it had been a vain and needless thing for them to go to Rivers to baptize if it had been only to sprinkle a little Water on the Face for a Quart of Water might have served to have rantized a great number And had Sprinkling or Rantizing been the Ordinance there is no Reason left to conceive why they should go to Rivers nor would the Spirit of God have given that as the Reason why John baptized in Enon near Salim viz. because there was much Water John 3. 23. But some strive to contradict the Holy Ghost by making People believe there was not much Water in that place Because the Original reads not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 much Water but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 many Waters that is say they many S●…ms or Rivolets Answer What difference is there between much VVater and many Waters If they were Streams and Rivolets tho not deep yet if they were but a little while stopped with a Dam they would soon rise to be deep enough to swim in as Experience shews But 't is enough there he baptized saith the Holy Spirit for there was much Water or many Waters there for or because intimating plainly that the Ordinance could not be administred with a little Water but that it required many Waters or much Water a great deal more than a Bason could hold or you hold in your Hand 2. But 't is objected Sandy's Travels tell us that they were so shallow as not to reach above the Ankles Answ 1. Must we believe God's Word or a lying Traveller the Scripture saith there was much Water or many Waters and he says there was but a little 2. In some shallow Rivolets we daily see that in some places the Water is deep and might it not be so in that and this Traveller might not so curiously search or examine the matter 3. Or might there not be a great Confluence of Water then as Dr. Hammond words it and yet but little or shallow Water now or when Sandys was there Time alters Rivers as well as other things But if any seek after this manner to contradict the sacred Text to defend their Childish Practice of Rantism they deserve greatly to be blamed Take this Argument If the Holy Ghost gives it as the Reason why John baptized in Enon near Salim viz. because there was much Water then a little Water will not serve to baptize in But the Holy Ghost gives this as the Reason why John baptized in Enon near Salim viz. because there was much Water Ergo a little Water will not serve to baptize in 2dly But to proceed Mark 1. 9. 't is said Jesus was baptized of John in Jordan Now saith a Learned Man on the place It had been Nonsense for St. Mark to say that Jesus was baptized in Jordan if he had been sprinkled because the Greek reads it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into Jordan Could Jesus be said to be sprinkled into the River Jordan 't is proper to say he was dipped into Jordan and that is and was the Act and nothing else besure 3dly They went down both into the Water both Philip and the Eunuch Acts 8. What need had there been
of which Jonas after a Burial of three days was set at liberty and the Cloud and the Red Sea in which the People of Israel are said to have been baptized i. e. not washed mark but buried for they were all Types of the same thing as Baptism viz. not the washing away of Sin but of the Death and Resurrection of Christ and our own to which the Apostles the Fathers the Scholasticks mark and all Interpreters agree The thing saith he is so apparent as not to need any Testimonies but because there are not a few who do not vulgarly teach this Doctrine it will not be superfluous to produce some of those innumerable Testimonies that I may saith he not seem to speak without Book And First Let us begin with St. Paul Rom. 6. 3. Know ye not that so many of you that have been baptized into Christ were baptized into his Death Therefore we are buried with him in Baptism into his Death c. Else what shall they do that are baptized for the Dead if the Dead rise not As if he had said If there be no Resurrection why are we baptized In vain does the Church use the Symbol of Baptism if there be no Resurrection The like Testimonies frequently occur among the Fathers saith he Ignatius saith That believing in his Death we may be made Partakers of his Resurrection by Baptism Baptism was given in Memory of the Death of our Lord we perform the Symbols of his Death mark not of pouring forth his Blood or holy Spirit or sprinkling the Spirit on us or the Blood of Christ No no this that Author says is not signified in Baptism but the Burial and Resurrection of Christ which sprinkling no manner of ways can represent Justin Martyr saith We know but one saving Baptism in regard there is but one Resurrection from the dead of which Baptism is an Image And from hence say I we know not Infants Rantism or Sprinkling for this is none of Christ's true Baptism Christ's Baptism is but one and 't is that of Believers and 't is not sprinkling but dipping to signify Christ's Burial and Resurrection He goes on and cites other Authors Hear Paul exclaiming They past through the Sea and were all baptized in the Cloud and in the Sea He calls Baptism the Passage of the Sea for it was a flight of Death caused by Water To be baptized and so plunged and to return up and rise out of the Water is a Symbol of the Descent into the Grave and returning from thence Baptism is a Pledg and Representation of the Resurrection Baptism is an Earnest of the Resurrection Immersion is a Representation of Death and Burial Innumerable are the Testimonies saith Sir Norton which might be added but these I think sufficient to prove that Baptism is an Image of the Death and Resurrection of Christ from whence we acknowledg the Mystery of our Religion saith he Christ's Deity and Humanity and of the Faithful who are baptized in his Faith from Death in Sin to Newness of Life which if they lead in this World they have a most assured Hope that being dead they shall hereafter rise to Glory with Christ Thus Sir Norton Knatchbul a worthy Knight Mr. Perkins saith The dipping of the Body signifies Mortification or Fellowship with Christ in his Death the staying under the Water signifies the Burial of Sin and coming out of the Water the Resurrection from Sin to Newness of Life In another Treatise of his he saith the antient Custom of baptizing was to dip as it were to dive all the Body of the baptized in Water Rom. 6. Council of Laodicea and Neocesarea And here let me add what Reverend Dr. Sharp the present Archbishop of York hath lately delivered in a Sermon preached before the Queen's Majesty on Easter-day March the 27th 1692. And this in antient Times was taught every Christian saith he in and by his Baptism Whenever a Person was baptized he was not only to profess his Faith in Christ's Death and Resurrection but he was also to look upon himself as obliged in Correspondence therewith to mortify his former carnal Affections and to enter upon a new State of Life And the very form of Baptism saith he did lively represent this Obligation to them For what did their being plung'd under Water signify but their undertaking in Imitation of Christ's Death and Burial to forsake all their former evil Courses as their ascending out of the Water did their Engagement to lead a holy spiritual Life This our Apostle doth more than once declare to us thus Rom. 6. 3 4. We are buried saith he with Christ by Baptism unto Death that like as Christ was raised up by the Glory of the Father so we should walk in Newness of Life Thus far Dr. Sharp his Sermon on Phil. 3. 10. pag. 9. Dr. Fowler now Lord Bishop of Glocester on Rom. 6. 3 4. saith Christians being plunged into the Water signifies their undertaking and obliging themselves in a spiritual Sense to be buried with Jesus Christ in an utter renouncing and forsaking all their Sins that so answering to his Resurrection they may live a holy and a godly Life Design of Christianity p. 90. Also Dr. Sherlock Dean of St. Paul's on Rom. 6. 3 4. saith Our Conformity to the Death and Resurrection of our Saviour consists in dying to Sin and walking in Newness of Life Which saith he St. Paul tells us is represented by the external Ceremony of Baptism and rising out of his watery Grave a new born Creature Charity without Usury p. 1. And unto these let me add what the Pious and Reverend Dr. Tillotson late Archbishop of Canterbury hath wrote speaking of the same Text Rom. 6. 3 4. Antiently saith he those who were baptized put off their Garments which signified their putting off the Body of Sin and were immersed and buried in the Water to represent the Death of Sin and then did rise up again out of the Water to signify their Entrance upon a new Life And to these Customs the Apostle alludes when he says How shall we that are dead to Sin live any longer therein Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his Death c. 1. 'T is a hard case you neither will believe the holy Scripture the Antient Fathers and Modern Divines nor other learned Prelates of the Church of England who are yet living but contrary to the nature and tendency of holy Baptism plead for Sprinkling and condemn Dipping and cast Reproach upon it and say also that the Thing signified thereby is the pouring forth of Christ's Blood or the sprinkling and pouring out of the holy Spirit notwithstanding we prove from the Scripture and with the Testimony of all these great Men that Baptism signifies the Death Burial and Resurrection of Jesus Christ and not any of those things you affirm as your own Conceit without the Testimony of any learned or approved
ear of the Passover must our Children and all in our House eat of the Eucharist or Supper of the Lord But saith the Doctor In this very Instance of this Argument suppose a Correspondency of the Analogy between Circumcision and Baptism yet there is no Correspondency of Identity for tho it be granted both of them did consign the Covenant of Faith yet there is nothing in the Circumstances of Children being circumcised that so concerns that Mystery but that it might well be given to Men of Reason because Circumcision left a Character in the Flesh which being imprinted upon the Infants did its Work to them when they came to Age and such a Character was necessary because there was no word added to the Sign But Baptism imprints nothing that remains on the Body and if it leaves any Character at all it is upon the Soul to which the word is added which is as much a part of the Sacrament as the Sign it self for both which Reasons it is requisite that the Party baptized should be capable of Reason that he may be capable both of the Word and of the Sacrament and the Impress upon the Spirit Since therefore the Reason of the Parity does wholly fail there is nothing left to infer a necessity of complying in the Circumstance of Age any more than in the other Annexes of Types The Infant must also precisely be baptized upon the eighth day and Females must not be baptized at all because not circumcised But it were more proper if we would understand it aright to prosecute the Analogy from the Type to the Antitype by the way of Letter and Spirit and Signification and as Circumcision figures Baptism so also the Adjuncts of the circumcised shall signify something spiritual in the Adherents of Baptism and therefore as Infants were circumcised so spiritual Infants should be baptized which is spiritual Circumcision for therefore Babes had the Ministry of the Type to signify that we must when we give our Names to Christ become Children in Malice and then the Type is made compleat Thus as I have formerly said the worthy Doctor hath given you a full Answer to all you have said concerning your Arguments for Baptism coming in the room of or being a Figure of Circumcision But to proceed 5. If Baptism and Circumcision were both in full force together for some time then Baptism is not the Antitype of nor came in the room of Circumcision But Baptism and Circumcision were both in full force together for some time therefore Baptism is no Antitype of nor came in the room of Circumcision The Minor is undeniable Was not Baptism in full force from the time that John received it from Heaven and administred it on the People And did not Christ by his Disciples baptize many Persons nay more Disciples than John as it is said John 4. 1 2. and was not Circumcision then in full force too and so abode till Christ took it away by nailing it with all other Jewish Rites to his Cross And as to the Sequel of the Major that cannot be denied for if one thing cannot come in the room and place of another till the other is actually and legally removed and took out of the way which is plain then since these two Rites had a Being together the Major is undeniable A Type can abide no longer than till the Antitype is come therefore Baptism is not the Antitype of Circumcision or came not in the room and place thereof the Antitype of which or that which came in the room of the Circumcision of the Flesh is the Circumcision of the Heart not in the Flesh but in the Spirit whose Praise is not of Men but of God 6. And indeed how one thing that was a Figure or Shadow should come in the room or be the Antitype of another thing which is a Figure or Shadow no wise Man can see Reason to believe And thus your great Text Col. 2. 11 12. is plainly and honestly opened according to the scope and main drift of the Spirit of God therein and your great Pillar for your Scriptureless Practice of Babes Baptism razed and utterly overthrown I have met with an Answer given to the like pretended Proof for Pedo-baptism written by a most Learned and Reverend Author The Argument and Answer I have been at the pains to transcribe which take here as followeth The Argument runs thus viz. To them to whom Circumcision did agree to them Baptism doth agree but Circumcision did agree to Infants therefore also Baptism c. The Major he endeavours thus to prove i. e. If the Baptism of Christ succeeds in the room and place of Circumcision then Baptism belongs to them that Circumcision belonged to but the Antecedent is true therefore the Consequent The Minor he says is proved from Col. 2. 12. 't is said the Colossians were circumcised because baptized Answ This Argument supposeth Baptism to succeed in the room of Circumcision which may be understood many ways 1. So as that the sense be that those Persons may be baptized which heretofore by God's Appointment were to be circumcised and in this sense the Argument must proceed if it conclude to the purpose but in this sense it is false for Females were not circumcised which yet were baptized as Acts 8. 12 13 14. 16. 14 15. and Believers out of Abraham's House as Lot Melchisedec Joh were not to be circumcised but believing Gentiles are universally to be baptized 2. It may be so understood as if the Rite of Baptism then began when the Rite of Circumcision did or was to end but this is not to be said for John Baptist and Christ's Disciples baptized Joh. 4. 1 2. before Circumcision of right ceased 3. It may be understood as if Baptism did succeed in the place of Circumcision in respect of its Signification which is true in some things but not in others First both might signify the Sanctification of the Heart and this is all may be concluded out of that place alledged Col. 2. 11 12. to which I think meet to add that if that Text be looked into the Apostle speaks not of Circumcision but of Christ because in him we are compleat and by whose Circumcision we are said to put off the Body of the Sins of the Flesh nor doth the Text say we are circumcised because we are baptized but that we are compleat in Christ because we are circumcised in him and buried with him in Baptism in which or in whom ye are also risen together through the Faith of the Operation of God that raised him from the Dead In some things Baptism doth not succeed in the place of Circumcision in respect of Signification For 1. Circumcision did signify Christ to come of Isaac according to the Flesh Gen. 10. 11. but Baptism doth not signify this but points at his Incarnation Death and Resurrection 2. Circumcision was a Sign that the Israelites were a People separated from all Nations
1. 〈◊〉 answer tho we cannot as the apostles could not certainly or in●… know who were truly regenerated or are true Believers yet they baptized none but such in whom they saw such Signs of Grace that made them in Charity to believe or hope they were Believers they made a 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 ession of their Faith but in little ●…bes there appear no Signs of Grace nor can they make any Confession of their Faith where there is no Knowledg there can be no F●… 2. And whereas you say they are Members of the visible Church under the Gospel it is false the Gospel-Church doth 〈◊〉 consist of whole Nations and Families as did the Jewish Church under the Law in a natural way The Gospel Church is a Spiritual House not consisting of Babes in a way of Generation 〈◊〉 of Spiritual Babes in a way of R●… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. 5 6. 3. Nor doth the Promise run to any but to them whom the ●ord shall cal Acts 2 39 even to Jews and their 〈◊〉 that are called and so to the 〈◊〉 that sometimes were a●ar off Ephes 2. 4. As touching Election 't is strange to me that you should affirm that that runneth in the Fleshly Line of Believers and their Seed as such and cite that Text to prove it Rom. 9. 4 5. in which St. Paul proves directly the contrary 〈◊〉 e. Not as tho the Word of God hath taken none Effect for they are not all Israel that are of Israel ver 6. Neither because they are the Seed of Abraham are they Children but in Isaac shall thy Seed be called ver 7. That is they which are the Children of the Flesh these are not the Children of God but the Children of the Promise are counted for the Seed ver 8. Sir tho the Covenants and Promises did belong to the Israelires yet you may see how the Apostle doth explain it even to none but to the Elect or only to such that God by his Spirit through the Power and Virtue of the Promise should regenerate and cell by his Grace Therefore in Opposition to what you say none were accounted Abraham's Seed and Children of the Promise but such that were in Christ Gal. 3. ●lt You say all the Children of the Faithful are under the Promise but God administreth the Grace of the Promises to the Elect only and to many of them in their Infancy But because we know not upon whom the Election falleth it is the Will of God that we should baptize all that are under the Promise Answ 1. If all the Children of the Faithful are under the Promise they are all elected because the Promise to whomsoever 't is made is sure to all the Seed see Rom. 4. 16. If it be the natural Seed as such 't is sure to all them and not one of the Seed of Believers shall perish but if it be meant only of the true spiritual Seed then 't is sure only to them for those to whom the promise is made 't is confirmed unto by the Word and Oath of God that so the Heirs of the Promise might have strong Consolation Heb. 6. 18. Therefore those to whom the Promise belongs the Grace therefore or Blessing of that Promise God will bestow upon or else his Promise is made void and of none Effect Prove that there are any who are under the Promise or are Children of the Promise and yet God doth not administer the Grace of the Promise unto them are any the Children of the Promise and not elected 2. But whereas you say the Grace of the Promise is given to some in Insancy we deny it except to such that die in Infancy and do you disprove us if you can But 3. The worst of all comes at last Sir where is it written what you so boldly affirm viz. Because you know not upon when the Election falleth it is the Will of God that you should baptize all that are under the Promise And you affirm that all the Children of Believers are under the Promise I argue thus If it be God's Will that all the Children of the Faithful should be baptized it is revealed in his Word but this is not revealed in his Word no nor that any one of them whilst Infants ought to be baptized therefore 't is not his Will they should 4. May not we by your Argument baptize Unbelievers in whom no Grace appears because we do not know how the Election runs they may be under the Promise and in the Election as far as we know What a preposterous way of arguing is this of yours But no more to your 10th Chapter and 7th Argument for your Childrens Baptism CHAP XIII In Answer to Mr. James Owen's 11th Chapter and 6th Argument concerning those Baptisms that were under the Law proving that Christ's Ordinance of Baptism is a pure Gospel-Institution and that it was not in being tell he appointed it in the Gospel-days 〈◊〉 what you have said in your 11th Chapter which contains your 8th Argument tho it may seem new to some I shall shew it is nothing at all to the purpose You say the Form of Baptism was before the Law and under the Law and from thence infer that Children ought to be baptized under the Gospel Answ 1. You may infer from the same Ground and Argument that Clothes Pots Tables and Vessels ought to be baptized under the Gospel as an Ordinance of Christ because they were dipped washed or baptized before and under the Law 2. Moreover you may infer as well that Unbelievers yea the worst of Men and Cattle also ought to be baptized under the Gospel because Noah and his Children were baptized in the Ark among which was cursed Chan you intimate that Cham was baptized upon his Father's Faith so that it appears the Father's Faith will not only save the Infant-Seed of Believers but save them when they are Adult Persons also But were not the Beasts and the Fowls baptized and saved by the Ark as well as Noah and his Children and his Son Cham But as touching that Text 1 Pet. 3. 10. how the Ark of Noah might be a Figure of Baptism I shall speak to that more fully by and by 3. Because all sorts of Washings or Dippings are in the Greek Tongue Baptizing doth it therefore follow that all sorts of Baptisms Dippings or Washings are formally Christ's Ordinance of Baptism Mr. Burkitt a great Pedo-baptist and all other learned Men assert that to the true Form and Requisites of Gospel-Baptism these several things are necessary 1. The Person baptizing or the Administrator ought to be a lawful Minister one authorized and commissionated by Christ so to do 2. The Party baptized must be a Subject fitly qualified for Baptism 3. The Element in which the Party is baptized must be Water 4. True Gospel-Baptism must be administred in the Name or into the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Now Sir was there any Person either young or old
untill we become Adult Persons and do believe in him he hath left us an Example how we should follow his steps Mr. Owen brings in his Fifth Objection against his Doctrine and practice of Infant Baptism viz. If Infant Baptism belongs to Infants why do not you give them the Lords Supper Take his answer Because saith he the Apostle Commands those that receive the Lords Supper to examine themselves and to discern the Body of the Lord which little Children cannot do Answ I answer And as the Apostle Commands all that receive the Lords Supper to examine themselves and to discern the Lords Body so likewise John Baptist the Lord Jesus and his Apostles too Commanded all that received baptism to believe and repent and to bring forth Fruits meet for Repentance which little Babes cannot do Repent and be Baptized every one of you Acts 2. 37. If thou believest with all thy Heart thou mayest Acts 8. 37. that is be baptized 2. You say Baptism is the Sacrament of our Regeneration and of our Admission into the Church of God the Lord's Supper is a Sacrament of our Growth and Spiritual Food 1. I answer this quite overthrows your Infant Baptism unless you Presbyterians do believe as the Church of England doth or at leastwise what they affirm viz. that Baptism doth regenerate the Child is Baptism an Ordinance or Sacrament of Regeneration i. e. to regenerate Persons or to hold forth that regeneration or the New Birth is wrought in such that are baptized why then do you baptize Infants who are not the Subjects of Regeneration Can they die to Sin and are they raised up out of the Water new Born Creatures to walk in newness of Life 2. If your Infants are new born or born again by Baptism no doubt the Food of the new Creature viz. the Lord's Supper ought to be given to them The first Sacrament holds forth 't is clear a Person born again or a Babe of Grace the other is Food fit and proper for that New born or Regenerated Person that he may grow thereby therefore they belong both to one and the same Subjects and neither of them it appears from hence do belong to Infants but 3. Are all the Infants that you baptize let in as Members of your Church are they absolutely Members of your Congregations as having the Ordinance of Admission is the Door of God's House opened to them How can you then say I deny them the priviledge of true and lawful Members shall your little Members your Lambs in Christ's Fold being New Born be starved what shall the regenerated Babe not be fed with the Food of their Fathers House 4. But if thus what number of Members have you in your Churches that have not their Names in your Church-book nor perhaps never looked after when grown up nor cast out though prophane and Wicked for do you cast out or exclude all such Children you baptized when grown up if not what polluted Churches are yours Infant Baptism was doubtless contrived to encrease National Churches or to make national Churches and it doth tend indeed to increase and continue that Christian Religion that is in Name only and not in Power you have its true in England by meer necessity lost your National Constitution and are become Congregational whether you will or no but Infant Baptism will not accord with a congregation Constitution nor do such Churches so constituted that are for Infant Baptism own their Babes to be proper and true Members of their Churches so far as I can learn what then signifies your Sacrament of Admission if they are not in truth admitted and owned as Members and allowed the Food and Priviledges of such 3. You say it was formerly though Circumcision belonged to Infants yet the Paschal Lamb belonged not but to the Adult Answ I answer this is denyed prove if you can that the little Children in the Jewish Church were not admitted to eat of the Passover it is positively said Exod. 12. 34. That the whole House were to eat thereof even a Lamb for an House and I find a great Writer asserting the same thing that little Children did eat thereof they were to bring their Children once or twice a Year before the Lord and I see no ground you have to say that none but Adult Persons did eat thereof 2. But let that be as it will that which was or might be the right of Jewish Church-Members or not their right is no rule for us in the Gospel Church as I have sufficiently prov'd and besure all baptized Persons who are regular Members of a Gospel Church cannot be denyed the Lord's Supper without Sin So much to your Answers to our Objections you might might have brought twice as many more CHAP. XX. In Answer to Mr. James Owen's 17 Chapter wherein the Antipedo Baptists are cleared of those foul Charges he hath cast upon them and 't is proved that to deny Infant Baptism is no Sin nor are those guilty of Murther nor Adultery that baptize or dip Men and Women in Water in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit as Mr. Owen charges them but contrariwise it is proved that to Baptize or Rantize Infants is an unlawful Practise and very Sinful YOU say you shall demonstrate in this Chapter how great the Sin is of those that are tempted to deny the Baptism which they receive in their Infancy and that suffer themselves to be baptized again there are many People that know not the nature of their first Baptism and are perverted to renounce it thinking that they do please God in so doing but they fall into Temptation and the Snares of the Devil who is the Author of Errors and Father of falshood Answ I hope by this time the Reader may discern how great an error 't is to call Rantism or Sprinkling Baptizing and that Infant Baptism is also an error being a meer human innovation this I have prov'd and theresore 't is so far from being a Sin to disown it and cast it away that it is every good Christians Duty so to do that would in all things walk by the rule of God's Word And for Mr. Owen to charge our People after this manner as if we were perverted and insnared by the Devil in denying our Infants Baptism is just as the Papists used to charge the Protestants that disowned the human Traditions and the vain Fopperies of their rotten Church and thunder'd out their Bulls against them 1 You say they are guilty of great Sin insomuch that they neglect to make a right use of their first Baptism Infant Baptism putteth them under continual Vow to the Lord and they are bound to renew their Vows to take the Lord to be a God unto them as soon as they come to age Answ 'T is true you brought them under an Obligation or a Vow to take the Lord to be their God in their Infancy but why did you do it unless you had any Warrant or
dying in Infancy are certainly saved it makes say you that Ordinance a Channel of Grace c. 1. Answ This is like to the rest But Sir by what Authority do you assert all these things You know what wonderful Vertue the Papists say is in many of their Popish Rites Ceremonies and Reliques i. e. in their crossing of themselves and in their Holy-water especially in their Agnns Dei But how do they prove it Even as well as you do what you speak here upon this account and we have the same reason to believe them as to believe you in what you speak without Proof or Authority from God's word 2. Pious Parents But alas how few are there of that sort but what hope have the Impious Prophane and ungodly Parent of the Salvation of his dying Children But Sir I thought all the Pious and Believing or Godly Parents Children were born in Covenant with God that their Parents Faith would have secured them whether Baptized or not were not the Jews Female Children saved they were not Circumcised And were not their Male Infants saved who dyed before the Eighth Day 3. From what Scripture is it these Pious though Ignorant and deceiv'd Parents may have hope that their Children that dye in their Infancy shall be saved and none but theirs that are Baptized or rather Rantised 4. Will Pedo-Baptists make Baptism their Saviour Can Baptism save them And is it so indeed Is it in the power of Parents to save or damn their Children And how came Baptism to have such power in it or who made that a Channel of Grace to dying Infants Do you not place that Virtue in an external Rite that only belongs to the Blood of Christ and sanctifying Grace of God's Spirit Mr. Perkins saith That Baptism indeed saveth but saith he that is not the Baptism of Water but the stipulation of a good Conscience by the Resurrection Again he saith the outward Baptism without the inward is no mark of God's Child but the mark of a Fool that makes a Vow and afterwards breaks it 5. May not this Doctrine of theirs clearly tend to scare and affright poor Parents with fear that all their Babes that dye in their Mothers Womb or before baptized are damned And Oh in what a sad Condition are all the Children of the ungodly and impious Persons whose little Babes you dare not cannot Baptise if you are true to your own Principles But that Text may give us better ground of Hopes a Thousand times concerning the well being of our dying Infants where our Saviour saith for of such are the Kingdom of Heaven and that also which you mention I shall go to him he shall not return to me together with the infinite Mercy of God through the virtue of Christ's Blood who can convey help and healing to dying Infants and Ideots in ways we know not of nor are we to trouble our Selves about such secret things that are not revealed 6. Mr. Burkitt saith the practice of Infant Baptism appears most beneficial because it prevents such shameful and scandalous neglects of Baptism to the blemish of Christianity Ans Is it then a shameful scandal to neglect a Tradition of Man For so I have proved Infant Baptism to be Where is the shame that ought to be in Christians that Christs Laws and Precepts are neglected and his precious Ordinance of Baptism exposed to Contempt and Shame as it is by you and Thousands more whilst the Statutes of Omri are zealously kept and observed as the Prophet of old complained I mean humane Rites and Traditions or Statutes like those of Omri instituted by him and Jeroboam which the Wisdom of your Church and many corrupt Churches have been zealous for to this day and thus I have run through and examined Mr. Burkitts Six particulars which he brought to prove the usefulness of Infant Baptism above the baptism of Believers which our Blessed Saviour Instituted and now shall shew you further that Infant Baptism is so far from being more useful then that of the Adult that it is a palpable error and therefore of no use at all but the contrary viz. a very sinful thing Reader can that be useful or any ways beneficial which Christ never Commanded or required to be done in his Name but is unrighteously Fathered upon him to the utter making void his own Ordinance of baptizing Believers 2. Can that have any usefulness in it that brings guilt upon the Parents in doing it making them guilty of Will Worship or of a humane Tradition 3. Can that be useful that brings Babes into such a Covenant which Christ never Ordained them to enter into and to which they directly nor indirectly consented nor approved of and which they are utterly unable to keep and which giveth them no strength to perform nor is there one promise of God made to assist or help them to do it and yet for not keeping of it they are charged with Perjury with self Murder nay with Hell and Damnation 4. Can that be of use to Infants that may basely beguile and deceive them causing them when grown up to think they were thereby made Christians and become the Children of God Members of Christ and Inhabitants of the Kingdom of Heaven nay Regenerated and from hence never look after any other work of Grace nor Regeneration but conclude all is well with them 5. Can that be an usual thing which the doing of it is a palpable alteration of the words of Christ's Commission and so inverts that Holy Order left by him for baptizing who requires none to be baptized before they be first Taught and made Disciples 6. Can that be of any use to an Infant which you nor no Man else can prove from Gods Word to have any use and Blessing in it to them 7. Can an humane Rite or Tradition think you save poor Children or a little Water sprinkled on the Face wash away Original Sin Or will God bless a Tradition of Man 8. Can Water beget Children to Christ or can that be useful to them which they have only the bare sign of and not the thing signified viz. the Sign of Regeneration but not Regeneration it self a sign of Grace but not Grace it self you give them the Shell but no Kernel the name of a Christian but no nature of a Christian making that you call Christ's Baptism as Dr. Taylorsaith a sign without effect and like the Fig-tree in the Gospel full of Leaves but no Fruit. 9. Can that be useful that tends to make the Gospel Church National and confounds the Church and the World together which ought to be Congregational a holy and separate People like a Garden enclosed 10. Can Baptism be more useful to Infants then adult Believers notwithstanding the Scripture saith that the Person baptized doth not only believe but call upon the name of the Lord Acts 22. 16. Can Infants do that 11. Can Infant Baptism be more useful then that of Believers and
the Seal of the Covenant of Grace for hath the Covenant of Grace any other Seal that Seals to us all the Blessings of that Covenant save the Holy Spirit only the Spirit of God is called a Seal Eph. 1. 13 14. Chap. 4. 30. but so is not baptism called any where 2. If all your Children have the Seal of the Covenant of Grace or all the blessings thereof sealed up to them shall they not be all saved all know a Seal confirms and gives an assurance of all the Priviledges Blessings and Profits that are contained in that Covenant to which it is prefix'd 3. You falsly also apply that Text in Ezek. 16. 5 6 7. that is not applicable to our Infants as such but to God's Israel or Believers who were once like that wretched Infant cast out in its Blood but God entered into Covenant with us and washed us c. But are all believers Children washed in the Blood of Christ no doubt they are in the Covenant of Grace that go to Heaven that die in Infancy but the rest remain polluted in their Original and actual pollution until they believe in Christ Jesus and are negenerated by Divine Grace tho' they are baptized for that washeth them not 4. Set time a part say you for earnest praying praying to the Lord for to forgive the Sins of your Child to Sanctifie his Nature and bless the Ordinance of Baptism unto him c. Answ Prayer is good and a great Duty 't is to pray for our Children but take heed how you pray their baptism may be blessed since Christ did not appoint any Baptism for them in Infancy hath he promised any blessing to that or will he bless an Invention of Men 5. When the Minister doth baptize thy Child do thou act Faith in God's Covenant for thy self and thy Child c. Ans How can you act Faith in doing that which God hath made no promise unto you or to your Children believers that are baptized may act Faith indeed 1. Because Christ commandeth them to be baptized Mat. 28. 19 20. Acts 2. 37. 2. Because he hath promised unto them great blessings in Baptism Mark 16. 16. Acts 2. 37 38. but there is neither a precept for nor promise made unto Infants Baptized 1. Speedily do it stay not as Moses did to Circumcise his Child Exod. 4. 24. the which had like to cost him his life it is true God bindeth us not at this time to the Eighth day as he did the Jews yet we ought not to delay Vid. Cypr. Fidem Ep. 59. Answ Make not more speedy hast then good speed or more hast then God directeth you why not delay since God no where saith on the Eighth Day nor at a year Old nor three years Old but when they believe then they ought to rise indeed and not tarry and be baptized but since you have no Scripture for this advise you Quote Cyprian who would not have the Adult delay if he speaks it of Infants he is no rule for us the Ordinance was corrupted in his time where is it written in Gods Word Moses had a command to Circumcise his Son on the Eighth Day therefore he ought not to delay longer but what is this to your case 2. Cheerfully as one Marrieth his Child with the Lord Jesus Christ Answ Cheerfully do it no do it not at all on your peril For 't is as Mr. Baxter saith a strange Marriage where there is nothing of consent 3. Publickly say you before the Congregation Answ And yet not ashamed shew your authority first Your other advice seems tolerable good save what you speak concerning your Infant Baptism in Teaching your Children the knowledge of the Holy Scriptures and giving them good examples and in putting them into godly Families in doing thus you may expect a blessing from God but none of these things will add any vertue to their Infant Baptism to make that any ways effectual to them so much only shall suffice as toy our 18th Chapter CHAP. XXIII In answer to Mr. James Owens 19th Chapter wherein he gives advice to Children with an answer to his Queries that he would have the Antipedobaptists to reply unto CHildren bless the Lord for the priviledges of your Baptism God hath taken you into Covenant say you with your Parents he hath prevented you with the blessings of goodness and made you nigh who being by Nature a far off ye are no more Strangers and Foreigners but fellow Citizens with the Saints and the Houshold of God Eph. 2. 19. 1. Answ Must they bless God that their Parents deceived them with false hopes of priviledges which neither they nor your selves know what they are or for putting a cheat upon them to make them think their State is better thereby and yet cannot prove it from Gods Word so to be How doth God prevent them with blessings of Goodness by your Rantizing them doth your pretended baptism insuse grace or gracious habits unto them or what to 〈◊〉 or is ●t the blessings of that Vow you brought them under voluntarily without any authority from God 2. Are you not afraid to affirm that Children by their baptism are by the Lord made neer unto him and made thereby Children of God who were by Nature Children of Wrath and no more Strangers and Foreigners c. If this was so shall they not be all Saved Can any thing bring Children near to God and make them fellow-Heirs and Citizens with the Saints but a Sacred Work of God's Spirit upon their Souls and doth your Baptism do this 2. Can such that are no more Strangers to God c. ever perish Is there a possibility of Final falling from a State of true Grace and if it be thus ought not your Children to have all the priviledges of the Houshold of God the Lords Supper c. 3. Will you attribute those High and Sublime Priviledges that belong to believers who are only born of the Spirit to your poor Babes that yet remain Children of Wrath and unrenewed by the Grace of God is not this a ready way to blind the Eyes of your Children and ruine their Souls if they should believe you herein You are under that Gracious Providence say you which watcheth over the Church c. 1. Answ You must first prove them Members of the Church and not only Members but all of them elected Persons for they are such Members that the special Providence of God is over 2. You say they have a share in the daily prayers that are put up for the Church of God Psalm 72. 15. Prayers shall be made for him and daily shall he be praised Psalm 51. 13. Do good in thy good pleasure to Zion and build the Walls of Jerusalem Gal. 6. 16. As many as walk according to this rule peace on them and mercy on the Israel of God If you had been without baptism you should have been without and so without any share in these prayers Answ I
and vivification to a New Life but in the Rantizing or Sprinkling of an Infant there is not cannot be a lively Representation of Christ's Death Burial and Resurrection c. Arg. 26. That pretended Baptism that pretends to frustrate the glorious end and design of Christ in his Instituting of Gospel Baptism or cannot answer it is none of Christ's Baptism but the pretended baptism of Infants tends to frustrate the glorious end and design of Christ in Instituting of Gospel Baptism Ergo. The Major will not be denied As to the Minor all generally confess the end and design of Christ in Instituting the Ordinance of Baptism was in a lively Figure to represent his Death Burial and Resurrecton with the Persons Death unto Sin and his rising again to walk in newness of Life that is baptized as the Sacrament of the Supper was ordained to represent his Body was broke and his blood was shed But that a lively Figure of Christs Death Burial and Resurrection appears in Sprinkling a little Water on the Face I see not and as done to an Infant there can no Death to sin and rising again to walk in Newness of Life be signified and therefore Christs design and end therein is frustrated Arg. 27. If Baptism be Immersion as to the proper and genuine Signification of the word Baptizo as also of those Typical and Metaphorical Baptisms and the Spiritual Signification thereof then Sprinkling cannot be Christs true Baptism But Immersion is the proper and genuine signification of the word Baptizo and also of those Typical and Metaphorical Baptisms spoken of and the spiritual signification thereof Ergo Sprinkling is not Christ's true Baptism 1. That the proper and genuine signification of the word Baptizo is Immersion or to Dip c. We have fully proved which is also confessed by all Learned in that Language 2. That the Typical Baptism viz. that of the Red Sea wherein the Fathers were buried as it were unto Moses in the Sea and under the Cloud appears from Pools Annotations 1 Cor. 10. 2. Others saith he more probably think that the Apostle useth this Term in regard of the great Analogy betwix● Baptism as it was then used the Persons going down into the Waters and being Dipp●d and the Israelites going down into the Sea the great receptacle of water tho' the water at that time was gathered on heaps on either side of them yet they seemed buried in the water as Persons in that Age were when they were baptized c. The second was that of Noahs Ark See Sir Norton Knatchbul who I before Quoted and shall here again recite his words The Ark of Noah and Baptism saith he were both a Type and Figure of the Resurrection not the Sign of the washing away of Sin tho' so taken Metonymically but a particular signal of the Resurrection of Christ Of this Baptism is a Lively and Emphatical Figure as also was the Ark of Noah out of which he returned as from a Sepulchre to a New Life 3. Metaphorical Baptism is that of the Spirit and of affliction The first signifies not a Sprinkling of the Spirit but the great Effusion of the Spirit like that at Pentecost Acts 1. 4 5. Shall be Baptized c On which words Causabon speaks thus See Dr. Du Veil on Acts 2. The Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to Dip or Plung● as it were to die Colours in which sense saith he the the Apostles might be truly said to have been baptized for the House in which this was done was filled with the Holy Ghost so that the Apostles might seem to have been plunged into it as into a large Fish-Pond Also Decumentus on Acts 2. saith A wind filled the whole House that it seemed like a ●i●h-Pond because it was promised to the Apostles that they should be baptized with the Holy Ghost And the Baptism of afflictions are those great depths or overwhelmings of afflictions like that of our Saviours magnis componere parva no part free Mat. 20. 22. where you have the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and like that of David who saith God drew him out of deep waters 4. The spiritual signification thereof is the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ and of our Death to sin and vivification to a New Life This being so it follows undeniably that Sprinkling cannot be Christs true baptism it must be Immersion and nothing else And in the last place finally to confirm that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to Dip both from the ●…teral and spiritual signification thereof as also from those Typical and Metaphorical Baptisms mentioned in the Scripture I might add further that this evidently appears from the practice of John Baptis● and the Apostles of Christ who baptized in Rivers and where there was much water and also because the Baptizer and Baptized are said to go down into the water not down to the water and came up out of the water John Baptist is said to baptize them into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●ordan as the Greek renders it which shews it Dipping and not Sprinkling Would it be proper to say he Sprinkled them into Jordan The Lord open the Eyes of those who see not to consider these things Sir I expect your answer to these Arguments particularly if you make any reply to what I have said in confutation of your Treatise and see you do your business better the next time for as yet you have not proved Infant Baptism to be from Heaven as I hope the unprejudiced Reader will conclude I shall say no more at present but leave all I have said to the blessing of God hoping in a little time he will vanquish by the light of his sacred word your Scripture less practice of Infant Baptism out of the World clear up the Truth of his own despised Ordinance That Wisdom may 〈…〉 of her Children and God may be Honoured to whom be Glory now and for ever more Amen FINIS † Worthy Britains see how Mr. Richard Baxter hath out down Infant Baptism with his own Sword can Infants shew their consent to be married to Christ or profess Faith in him ☞ * Read the Table of the Authors at the beginning of this Book Mr. Daniel Williams in his Book called the vanity of youth page 131. Mr. Williams Worthy of blame as well as Mr. Burkit The danger of Infants Baptismal Covenant layd open * Perkins on Gal. c. 3. p. 256.