Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	ghost_n	holy_a	john_n	17,081	5	6.2026	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85422	VVater-dipping no firm footing for Church-communion: or Considerations proving it not simply lawful, but necessary also (in point of duty) for persons baptized after the new mode of dipping, to continue communion with those churches, or imbodied societies of saints, of which they were members before the said dipping; and that to betray their trust or faith given unto Jesus Christ to serve him in the relation and capacity, whether of officers, or other members, in these churches (respectively) by deserting these churches, is a sin highly provoking in the sight of God. Together with a post-script touching the pretended Answer to the Forty queries about Church-communion, infant and after baptism. By John Goodwin, a servant of God in the Gospel of his dear Son.	Goodwin, John, 1594?-1665.	1653 (1653)	Wing G1213; Thomason E723_15; ESTC R202234	72,402	91

this I am certain of and so may any other person readily be that very much less it is A non-acting dothnot necessarily suppose an unwillingness to act but possibly a want of an opportunity only for acting and sometimes a want of power But a refusing to act always imports a want of will to act 3. Whereas he turns Querist and demands Will it follow that because these external rites Baptism and the like do not avail unto mens justification when they are observed that therefore they are not necessary unto Church-communion I answer affirmatively yes it will follow For if men may be justified without Baptism it follows that they may beleeve and be sanctified also andconsequently brought into the number of Saints without it Now that the will and pleasure of the Lord Christ is that all Saints without exception whether Baptized or unbaptized whether convinced of the necessity of Baptism orunconvinced should be perfected i. e. built up to the greatest meetness for their Inheritance in light that may be and consequently admitted into Church-communion where the best means of such an edification are to be found hath been sufficiently I trust proved in the preceding Considerations Concerning the rite of Circumcision how and with what limitations it was necessary to Church-communion amongst the Jews as likewise how different the Consideration of circumcision and Baptism is about the Regulation of Church-communion hath been argued at large already And whereas he demands How then can the Querist estimate the usefulnes and disusefulness of Baptism as to Church-communion by circumcision as he doth c. the Querist answereth That he is so far from doing that which he is here charged to do that as he even now intimated his since is that there is altogether a different consideration between Circumcision and Baptism in their respective relations to Church-communion Only herein he confesseth an agreement between them that as that is not circumcision which is outward in the flesh Rom. 2. 28. meaning not the circumcision which much commendeth any man unto God so neither is that Baptism which is externally administred and received the Baptism that much interesseth any person in his favour 4. Whereas he yet demands How the Apostles or others Christians in these times would have known or have been able upon good ground to have concluded that such persons had truly beleeved in Christ unto Justification and had been meet to be admitted to communion with them who should if any such had been have refused to obey Christ in submitting to Baptism c. I answer Whosoever refuseth i. e. professedly denyeth to obey Christ not only in submitting unto Baptism but in any other of his commands being made known to be his unto him cannot I suppose by any argument or testimony whatsoever be concluded to beleeve in Christ unto justification But this nothing hindereth but that in case any person be in the general course of his life conscientious and observant of the Laws of Christ as far as the knowledg hereof shall come to him he may be upon this account concluded a Beleever unto justification although being ignorant of or dissatisfied about any particular Law of Christ as suppose his Law concerning Baptism he should not exhibit obedience unto it Nor is a refusal to submit unto Baptism in these days of a like interpretation with such a refusal in the days of the Apostles Because then there could be no place for any question or doubt whether a submitting unto Baptism at least being required by the Apostles were an act of obedience unto Christ or no whereas now it is the sence of some worthy Christians I do not say it is mine that a submission unto Baptism is rather an act of will-worship then of obedience unto Christ and others are dissatisfied about the necessity of it Therefore although a refusing to be baptized then did argue a rejection of the Councel of God in the refusers yet supposing that God hath now layd Baptism aside which is the judgment of those lately mentioned a refusing to submit unto it rather argueth an accepting then a rejecting of the Councel of God As the Jews who refused to submit unto circumcision after the Gospel had been preached unto them did not herein reject the Councel of God concerning circumcision but imbrace and accept it however such a refusal before would have been a rejection of it 5. Neither doth the Querist estimate the Apostles judgment of Gospel Rites by what he speaks of circumcision but by what he opposeth both to circumcision and to uncircumcision and speaketh concerning them For whereas the Apostle expresseth himself thus In Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision but FAITH WHICH WORKETH BY LOVE And again Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing but THE KEEPING OF THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD He plainly declares and avoucheth that that which is opposite to such things which are nothing a vail nothing and consequently which is somewhat and which highly availeth is not Baptism nor any other external rite or ceremony but such a thing which is as contra-distinguishable against these as against circumcision or uncircumcision themselves viz. Faith which worketh by love and The keeping of the Commandments of God Nor doth an opposition made between Faith and Gospel Ordinances any whit more set them together by the ears then the Evangelist John sets Moses and Christ who were and are as good Friends as Faith and Gospel Rites together by the ears in making this opposition between them For the Law was given by MOSES but Grace and Truth came by Jesus CHRIST Joh. 1. 17. Or then John Baptist set his Baptism and the Baptism of Christ together by the ears by opposing them thus I indeed have baptized you with water But He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire Mar. 1. 9. He that saith Luther was of an active resolute and tearing spirit Melancthon of a gentle and soft doth not set these good Friends together by the ears but only shews wherein notwithstanding their agreement as dear Consorts and Friends they yet differed the one from the other There are no two things in the world but differ in something the one from the other and consequently may in respect hereof be opposed the one unto the other Yea though Baptism I mean a submitting unto Baptism be the keeping of a commandment of God yet may it regularly enough be opposed to the keeping of the Commandments of God as one man may be opposed unto many or the setting of a mans foot out of his door to the performance of a long journey But these things are I suppose a little out of my Anti-querist his Element 6. Whereas he demands Why doth the Querist make circumcision a Gospel rite which is indeed a rite abolished by the Gospel I may much more honestly demand why doth the Anti-querist lay to the Querist charge a thing which he knoweth not no nor yet the words