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	mean_v	6,969	5	6.7481	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B04710	A short brotherly examination of a sermon. At first preached by Mr Salomon Saffery, and after published in print; intituled, Part of a discourse, tending only to invite those that believe in Christ, to be conformable to him by baptisme. But intending to disswade from infant-baptisme. / By Robert Pittillok, a Scottish man.	Pittilloh, Robert, 1621?-1698.	1652 (1652)	Wing P2312A; ESTC R187082	15,814	21

an act of the minde contemning and not a simple omission For the case may fall out that some part of the Gospel fall in the hands of an unbeliever in India which by the working of the Spirit may become effectuall for his conversion wherein there is no mention of Baptisme or mention being made he may not understand what it means Such an omitter is no more weary of God then the Disciples spoken of Acts 19.1 2. were in not seeking for the Holy Ghost as the Apostle there speaks having never heard whether there were any Holy Ghost or not So though it were a duty for Believers to be baptized when they become sensible of practick holinesse and able to confesse with their mouth and should not have been administrate to them sooner which we dare not yet believe it is not in them a wearinesse of God till it be discovered to them to be their duty but should be in them a wearinesse of him to take it up being a sin against conscience and whatsoever is not of faith is sin Rom. 14 23. And as for proving the conclusion intended to wit that notwithstanding persons have been baptized in their Infancie so we speak because we reckon it Baptisme though we conceive the Author wil say Dipping of Infants in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost is no Baptism at all when they become able to give a confession of their faith and sensible of practick Holinesse they are then to be baptized None of the Scriptures cited in the 5. Page prove the point not the first Acts 11.17 compared with 10.46 47 48. For neither Cornelius though a devout man nor any of his house were ever formerly Disciples of the New Testament and baptized Neither the second Luke 7.30 Nor the third Math. 3.7 8 9 10. Because both relate to persons which formerly were never baptized Neither the universality of it spoken of in the 6. and 7. pages which we grant in a larger sense then our dissenting Brethren will admit to wit to Infants of Believers in Church-Fellowship who are visible Disciples and Believers to Charities up-taking though not acting their Faith more then their reason and yet are reasonable creatures when they come from the womb But it follows not from any thing there spoken that either Children should not be baptized or are not Disciples or being baptized they should again take up that Ordinance when they become sensible of Practick Holinesse and able to confesse with their mouth Neither the Spirituality of it to keep the Authors own words except it be what is said anent the Spirituality of the Subject to wit that confession of the month is essentiall to Baptism and actuall Repentance from dead Works and bringing forth of fruit wherein his purpose is discovered and if as well proven as asserted we should lay our hands upon our mouths and take up that Ordinance with the first conveniencie But he must give me leave to say in sobriety and Truth what Galen profanely said of a worthy Pen-man of sacred Scripture Multa asserit sed nihil probat The strength of all the Arguments in that Section which treats of the Spirituality of the Subject as they relate to proving the intended conclusion foresaid may be reduced to this whatsoever is necessarily required of Persons said to be baptized in the places cited is necessarily in like manner to be required of all persons who are to be baptized But Confession actuall holinesse actuall repentance good fruits c. is required in all those Therefore it is required in all that are to be baptized Ans 1. All the places cited do not necessarily prove the second Proposition as John 4.2 Because some may be made and are Disciples who cannot actually believe and confesse Acts 15.10 compared with 1. and 5. shews Infants may be Disciples Neither doth the other Text Heb. 6.1 brought to fortifie prove that none can be Disciples but such as have actual repentance c. It will appear to the meanest impartiall Logician to be a bad consequence because the foundation of Repentance from dead works and of Faith towards God are the first principles of the Doctrine of Christ therefore there is nothing of them known till they turn in actuall and elicite acts Take the like for clearing in naturall things Preservation of naturall being is the first principle whereinto men naturally incline and whereupon all other naturall actions follow Therefore there is nothing of it taught before there be an actuall explicite knowledge and a faculty to confesse wherein it doth consist or love to father and mother naturall is the first principle of the fifth Comand whereupon others as branches follow therefore while they are children they have no love to them We hope none will deny but God is as free in the School of Grace as Nature But especially we answer unto the first Proposition That none of the Texts cited prove whatsoever is mentioned in them is required of all to be baptized And if the reasons of our denyal clear thus all the places cited are either instances or Scriptures alleadged to speak generally And neither prove the point not the first because the persons spoken of Math. 3.8 c. and John 4.2 were all in the Authors judgement persons come to age and the Eunuch Acts 1.37 was without all controversy of the same condition and instances of all particulars by-gone being able to afforde but a proportionall argument for the time to come can prove onely concerning persons of that same condition It is as if we should argue thus All men come to age must give their promise to be faithfull to the Liberty of a City before they can be admitted Free-men Therefore Children cannot be admitted Free-men I believe many of the Citizens of London and Edinburgh would much murmure if the Parliament should take such Logick for demonstrations The strength of the proof of the generall Scriptures consists to take up all together in the universal Particles in the 10. to the Ro. 9. If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth v. 10. With the heart man believeth v. 11. Whosoever believeth Math. 10.32 Whosoever shall confesse v. 33. Whosoever shall deny me c. where by the way we cannot but admire a man of such Learning and Piety as the Author is said to be should make deniall and not confessing to be the same thing or equivalent seeing Paul Acts 23.6 though accused before a judge keeps up many particulars in christianity though for this he was accused in Christian Prudence mentioning but one the hope and resurrection of the dead common to him and the Pharisees his Adversaties because he found neither calling nor the glory of God at that time did require a further publishing We hope the Author after second thoughts wil acknowledge it is never lawfull to deny Christ but many times lawfull not to confesse lest casting Holy things to dogs they turn again all torent us The third universal particle