Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
spirit_n holy_a son_n word_n 14,353 5 4.5058 3 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A67377 A defense of infant-baptism in answer to a letter (here recited) from an anti-pædo-Baptist / by John Wallis ... Wallis, John, 1616-1703. 1697 (1697) Wing W568; ESTC R21035 12,184 30

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

properly As Infants in the latter were Circumcised so spiritual Infants or Babes in Christ that are become like one of these little Ones shall be Baptized Therefore that Argument from the Circumstance of Age being but a meer Conjecture proves nothing The Argument which is taken from the Action of Christ's blessing Infants does not prove to me that it is the Will of God that Infants are to be Baptized but rather the contrary in as much as we cannot learn but that Christ dismissed them without Baptism As for that saying of Christ Except a man be born again c. it does no more infer a necessity of Infant 's Baptism than that other of his Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man c. does infer a necessity of their partaking at the Lord's Table The Gospel speaks to Persons of Years and Discretion and it is they whom it ties to Baptism for their Salvation and the Baptism which saves them is the answer of a good Conscience towards God in their Obedience to the Gospel-requirings which Infants are uncapable to discharge And for the Salvation of Infants God is able still to bestow saving Mercies upon Infants now immediately as he did before the Institution either of Circumcision or Baptism Even as it is in the case of Faith He that believeth not shall be damned Now because Children are no more able to give assent to the Gospel than to dissent therefrom shall we from thence infer their Damnation And if the want of Faith does not Damn them till they are capable of Faith then much more the want of Baptism will not Damn them till then and may therefore be rationally deferr'd till then As to the Promise of the Holy Ghost to the Iews and their Children I cannot understand it but Conditionally viz. To them if they should Repent and be Baptized according to Peter's Exhortation to them and also to their Sons and Daughters of the same Capacity to receive the Holy Spirit 's Effects on their Natural Faculties upon their Repentance and Obedience of Faith For as the word Children in Scripture does not always mean Infants else it would follow that there were no Adult Persons in all Israel so I see no necessity to take it here of Infants As for the Holiness of the Children of a Believer spoken of 1 Cor. 7. 14. whatever that Holiness be it does no more necessarily prove that Infants of Believers are for that reason to be Baptized than the Holiness of the Unbelieving Parent there spoken of will prove that such an Infidel is for that reason to be Baptized For that Holiness of the Children is derived to them from their Believing Parent as it is to the Unbelieving Parent and not from the Gift of the Holy Ghost And whereas for an Apostolical Precedent there is one pretended from Baptizing of Stephanas's Houshold it is but a bare Conjecture first that there were little Babes in the Family and secondly that they were Baptized It is said of the Ruler at Capernaum that He believed and all his House but it does not thence follow that there were Infants in his House and that they believed as well as he One seems just as probable as the other Now Good SIR seeing I can find no Certainty or Domonstration and I may say no Probability in these Arguments that are usually brought from Scripture for Infant-Baptism if you can produce any Arguments that carry more Weight and Demonstration in them for that which you believe to be the Truth and against that which you believe to be an Errour and I at present a Truth I do earnestly and humbly entreat you for my Soul's sake and as you are in Christian Duty and Conscience bound to God to be so Good as to impart them to me for to save my Soul from such an Errour And as your so doing may make much not only for my Spiritual but also for my Temporal Benefit so you will thereby greatly Oblige Reverend SIR London Feb. 25. 1696. Your very Humble And Affectionate Servant C. C .......... Pray Sir will you be pleased to favour me with some Lines and to direct your Letter for me to be left with Mr. at the in St. Paul's Church-yard and there I will call for it Three Weeks hence and pay for it Vale. To the Reverend John Wallis D. D. and Professor of Geometry in the University of Oxford AN ANSWER To the Fore-going LETTER SIR Oxford Feb. 28. 1695 6 I Received last Night from I know not whom a Letter concerning Infant-Baptism Dated Feb. 25. and Signed C. C .......... Whether this be a true Name or but a feigned one I am not certain But guess it to be the latter because I do not remember that I have ever heard of any Man of that Name And as I do not know from whom so neither do I know how qualify'd Whether with a modest Desire to be informed or a captious Humour to quarel or cavil at a received Truth as being prepossessed with a Prejudice to the contrary If the latter I might answer as the Apostle doth in a like Case If any man list to be Contentious we have no such custome nor the Churches of God And the Scripture seems to me to be written in such a stile not as to gratify the nicely Captious but to give a reasonable Satisfaction to such as are modestly willing to be taught If any man will do his Will he shall know of the Doctrine whether it be of God And The meek he will teach his way And I do not find that Christ thought fit to comply with those who would be curiously inquisitive for a Sign from Heaven when and in what manner they pleased to confirm his Doctrine Or with the Rich Glutton who would have one sent from the Dead to warn his Brethren But would take his own time and his own way to satisfy those who were willing to be taught And in Matters of Fact we must content our selves with a Moral Certainty though we have not always a Mathematical Demonstration And if then any doubt remain as to Matter of Fact we must content our selves with such reasonable Satisfaction as God thinks fit to give us what is most likely to be true But I am willing to understand the Writer in the other Sense as content without cavilling with a reasonable Satisfaction And then as to this Question concerning Matter of Fact Whether Christ and his Apostles or the Church in their time did Baptize Infants 'T is clear on the one hand that we cannot be certain that they did not there being no intimation to that purpose and it is much more reasonable to think they did and to practise accordingly I shall parallel this with another Question of like Nature Whether Women did then and ought now to partake of the other Sacrament If it be objected that Christ at first did celebrate it with Men only the Twelve Apostles and the Apostle directs Let a Man not