Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	word_n	work_v	write_v	587	4	5.3914	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90872	A true and faithfull narrative (for substance) of a publique dispute between Mr. Tho. Porter, & Mr. Hen. Haggar; concerning infant-Baptism. In the parish church of Ellesmer in the county of Salop, on the 30 of April, 1656. / By one who was present at, and a diligent observer of, the debate.	Porter, Thomas, d. 1667.; Haggar, Henry.	1656 (1656)	Wing P2998F; Thomason E887_1; ESTC R207352	16,499	27

have Christ to be their Saviour Therefore Foundat p. 61. lin 12. The Minor Mr. Haggar acknowledgeth in his book forecited That some Infants are saved by him i. e. Christ all will grant And a little after They i. e. Infants dying in their Infancy are saved by vertue of Christs death And if he should deny it for he is off and on Scripture saith expressely Eph. 5. 23. That Christ is the Saviour of the body and sure that is a visible body where there is use of water and of the word as v. 26. Now is Christ a Saviour of any who is not of the visible body At this the people laughed Mr. Browne The invisible Church is larger then the visible Mr. Porter An absurd expression It 's well known and generally received that the invisible Church contains only the good but the visible both good and bad Mat. 13.47 48. Mr. Tallant Many be called there is the visible Church but few are chosen there is the invisible Mat. 20.16 2. Priviledge Mr. Porter They belong to the Covenant of Grace and the Covenant of Grace to them Whence I argue thus They who belong to the Covenant of Grace may be baptized for they to whom the thing signified belongs to them the initiall signe cannot be denied but some Infants belong to the Covenant of Grace therefore * Deut. 29.10 11 12 15. which was a Covenant of grace 30.6 with Rom. 10.6 7 8 9. some Infants may be baptized Mr. Haggar I do not understand what is meant by the sign and thing signified Mr. Browne We have nothing to do with Arguments you are to bring Scripture Mr. Porter I have affirmed nothing yet but what I have confirmed by Scripture Mr. Haggar Where was it to be read in Scripture that Infants are to be baptized Pure Socinianism I deny any thing to be Scripture but what is written in so many words and syllables in Scripture because Scripture is that which is written as the word signifies Mr. Porter I have shewed you divers Scriptures wherein if you wipe your eyes you may read that it is written Some Infants are to be baptized 2. Scripture is either explicite or implicite that is either expressed or implied as Jam. 4.5 * Many things are said to be written and read in Scripture which are but implyed as Mat. 26.24 Mar. 9.12 13. Luk. 24.46 47. Do ye think that the Scripture saith in vain The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envie The Apostle cals this Scripture but where is this proposition in so many terms or syllables written in Scripture Mr. Haggar It 's written there in that Text. Mr. Porter This is just like your answer to Mr. Baxter who alledgeth Christ proving the Resurrection of the dead by consequence Luk. 20.35 36 37. You answer † Foundat p. 47 48. That the dead are raised is written in Luke a weak and shifting answer Is the resurrection expressely written in Exod. 3.6 or implicitely only and so by consequence You your self cite * Page 20. some of our own Poets in allusion to Act. 17.28 For we are also his off-spring These words are to us Scripture now but were they Scripture when the Apostle spake those words and you cited them out of Aratus So Christ and James call that Scripture which is there by evident consequence and not in express words as those in Aratus But to reassume my argument They to whom the Covenant of Grace belongs may be baptized But to some Infants the Covenant of Grace doth belong as may be proved Act. 2. 38 39. Be baptized for the promise is to you and to your children Mr. Haggar Here Mr. Haggar made a large Exposition to darken the counsell of God by words without knowledge Job 38 2. The question was Men and brethren what shall we do vers 37. The Apostle answers 1. Laying down the duty vers 38. Repent and be baptized 2. The promise And ye shall receive the gift of the holy Ghost This is the promise made to them and only to so many of them as the Lord shall call Now Infants cannot repent nor believe both which are required to Baptism Mr. Porter The promise is the Covenant * Act. 3.25 Gal. 3. often interchangeably are the one put for the other because the Covenant runs upon promises 2. Whatsoever is meant by the promise surely the extraordinary gift of the holy Ghost cannot be meant as you insinuate because those gifts do not pertain to all whom the Lord shall call 3. Peters Sermon was very officacious on the hearts of the Jews his hearers vers 37. So that it is true they cryed out What shall we do Upon which Peter directs them to leave their Judaism and to imbrace Christian Religion and to be baptized To incourage them thereunto he tels them the promise is to them and their children So that that exposition which crosseth Peters intention is not to be admitted But Mr. Haggars exposition crosseth Peters intention Because it is a discouragement from and not an incouragement to what Peter did exhort them unto For they might say we shall be losers by the exchange for as we are Jewer we and our children are circumcised the Covenant and initiall signe thereof belong to us and ours but if we turne Christians we indeed shall be baptized as a signe of our being in Covenant but not our children what shall become of our poor little ones The Apostle answers The promise is to you and your children The Covenant else is contracted by Christs coming contrary to the whole tenor of Scripture Rom. 15. Mr. Haggar Sir If the Apostle had written all this you have said it were true but the Apostle saith The promise is to them and to as many of their children as God should call Mr. Porter The promise is tendered just in the same tenour as to Abraham Gen. 17.7 I am thy God and the God of thy seed These words whom the Lord our God shall call properly belong to the Gentiles when the Gospell is first preached to them For these Jews were for the present under the Call so were not the Gentiles at that time Therefore the first part of vers 39. is set down in the present tense The promise I S and the latter part in the future tense Whom the Lord our God SHALL call Now if this clause were to be referred to the first part would it not have been a grand discouragement to the Jewes for they might well say we indeed are under the Call of God but who knows whether ever our children shall be called Mr. Haggar Children are not capable of being called because they cannot hear nor understand nor can they believe Yet those words Mark 16.16 He that believeth not shall be damned are not to be understood of children 2 Thess 3.10 No more then those words He that worketh not shall not eat Mr. Porter Children are capable of an internall

these who magnified God these who heard the word vers 44. Can any man hinder that these should be baptized Mr. Porter Doe you baptize none but such as these The emphasis lies on these words Which have received the holy Ghost Mr. Haggar I deny that Infants receive the Spirit of Christ as well as the Apostles Mr. Porter They who receive the spirit of Regeneration receive the Spirit of Christ as well as the Apostles but some Infants receive the spirit of Regeneration Therefore some Infants receive the Spirit of Christ as well as the Apostles Mr. Haggar By the Spirit is meant the gift of tongues as appears vers 46. And children are not capable of Regeneration because they are not capable of hearing the word by which the children of God are begotten Jam. 1.18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth Mr. Porter Admit miraculous gifts were meant the Argument is not weakned but strengthned for if the gift of tongues entitle to Baptism much more the gift of Regeneration Besides those miraculous gifts are common to Hypocrites and others but Regeneration is proper to Gods elect 2. As for that in James you may as well exclude children from eating because they cannot work as children from Regeneration because they cannot hear the word the usuall instrument of Regeneration * 1 Pet. 1.23 The Spirit of Christ doth that in Infants saved without the word which he doth not usually in adult but by the word 3. It 's a Paradoxe that Infants are not capable of the Spirit of Regeneration for Rom. 8.9 If any man have not the Spirit of Christ hee is none of his Mr. Haggar Yea a Man not a Childe Mr. Porter The word † 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aliquis signifies any one Man Woman or Childe as Joh. 3.3 Except a man the same word be born again he cannot see the Kingdome of God And vers 5. Except a man the same word be born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God Mr. Browne Those in Rom. 8.9 doe not reach Infants for the Apostle did not write his Epistle to Infants Mr. Porter A weak reason Though the Apostle did not write to Infants Rom. 9.8 11 27. yet he did write of Infants Mr. Haggar A weak reason Sir you your self have bewrayed your weaknesse in proving nothing Good people Mr. Porter hath proved nothing only he hath used Tropes and Figures Mr. Porter You Mr. Haggar are a party and therefore not fit to be judge If you had not a brow of brasse you durst not say I have proved nothing Whether I have proved something or nothing I leave it to the judicious hearers before whose tribunall I am content to stand or fall Mr. Browne You have used but Sophistry Mr. Porter I leave that to your self who are most verst in it Mr. Browne was here mute I pray you shew me the Sophistry I have used in any Argument or Scripture and convince me before this great Congregation Mr. Tallants Shew it shew it if you can where doth the Sophistry lie Sir You have heard what Mr. Porter hath brought for the proose of Infant-Baptisme If you can prove that Infants ought not to be baptized produce your Scriptures and you shall be heard Mr. Haggar It 's hard to prove Negatives we came not to prove a Negative Mr. Tallants I think it fit therefore to break off this dispute and to conclude with Prayer * Which Mr. Tallant did but it was observed that though Mr. Haggar kept off his hat yet Mr. Brown put on his and kept it on his head all the while Mr. Tallants prayed especially considering that the Congregation or most in the Congregation have stood in the croud for the space of five hours 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 THE END

call by the Spirit how else are they saved dying in infancy though not of an externall call 2. What though they cannot hear the children of the Gentiles called are no more to be excluded from Baptism then the children of the Jews from circumcision who yet could not hear understand or performe that condition Gen. 17.1 Walke before me 3. Your illustration of Childrens not working added to Mark 16.16 doth cut the throat * Mr. Higgar starred at this word saying What a word is that M. Porter said the meaning is it did take away the life and strength of his Argument of your answer For if faith and repentance be not required to Salvation then not to Baptism a signe of Salvation Besides it is all one as if you should say as you have said Infants are not Church-members because they do not all the acts of Church-members 3. Priviledge Mr. Porter They are Saints holy by Covenant 1 Cor. 7. 14. Else are your children unclean but now are they holy Whence I argue thus Saints may be baptized some Infants are Saints Therefore some Infants may be baptized Mr. Haggar They are not visible Saints not Saints by calling Mr. Porter I have proved they are capable of an internall call and that they are visible Church-members Therefore they are Saints by calling and visible Saints But Sir Those whom Paul cals and judges to be holy are visible Saints but he here cals and judges Infants to be holy Therefore Mr. Haggar By this text you may as well prove unbelievers to be holy for he that is sanctified is a Saint or holy but the unbeliever is said here to be sanctified Therefore legitimation is only here meant Mr. Porter To be santified here and to be holy are two distinct phrases When the Apostle saith The unbeliever is sanctified he addes by the wife by the busband But when he saith Children are holy that is laid down simply without any such addition There is an inherent holynesse of which certainly some Infants are partakers and a relative or federall holinesse of which all children of believing Parents are without doubt partakers Now it 's apparent that legitimation is not meant That holynesse is here meant which is the proper and immediate result of faith in one of the Parents but legitimation is not the proper and immediate result of faith Therefore legitimation is not here meant Mr. Haggar Prove that legitimation is not the result of faith I say it is Mr. Porter That which is common to believers and unbelievers is not the result of faith but legitimation is common to believers and unbelievers For there is a true and lawfull mariage among the Hethens and their children born in Wedlock were not bastards but legitimate yet are no where nor in any propriety of speech can be called holy Besides the word here is opposed to unclean * Isa 52.1 Hag. 2.13 The constant meaning of holy in Scripture is 600 times taken for being separated to an holy use If I call Mr. Haggars children holy would any man imagine that I called them legitimate not bastards i.e. such who are unfit for Gospell ordinances Mr. Browne This holinesse is the result of an unbeliever Mr. Porter You contradict the Apostle quite and clean especially in his scope for when the Gospell was first Preached among the Heathens sometimes the wife and not the hustand did embrace the Gospell and so contrarily the husband and not the wife In processe of time the converted Corinthians sent a case of conscience to be resolved not whether their children were bastards they could resolve that themselves at home but whether they might conscientiously cohabit with their unconverted yoke-fellows The Apostle resolves the case plainly they might cohabit vers 12 13. And gives this reason vers 14. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by in or to the wife by the believing wife as Beza reads it and finds it so in some copies c. which is more then lawfull † 1 Tim. 4.5 A wicked man hath a lawfull use of the creature but not an holy use which he confirmes by this Else were your children unclean but now they are holy Is it not as clear as the sun that holynesse here is the result of faith of one Parent For what is an unbeliever but one that doth not embrace or professe the Gospell and then what is a believer but the contrary The infidelity of one unbelieving Parent rent cannot devest his children of Covenant holinesse if the other parent be believing Only to reassume my argument I pray you good people take notice that it is granted by Mr. Haggar Here they were nonplust again that Saints may be baptized and it 's proved by Scripture that Infants are Saints and yet Mr. Haggar will not assent to the Conclusion here as he denyed it elsewhere Mr. Tallant The people have indured the heat of the day and have stood long in the crowd I am afraid we shall be too injurious to them therefore go on if you think fit to another Priviledge 4. Priviledge Mr. Porter It 's written Act. 10.47 Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the holy Ghost as well as we Whence I argue thus They who receive the spirit of Christ may be baptized but some Infants receive the Spirit of Christ Therefore some Infants may be baptized Mr. Haggar You must put in As well as we Mr. Browne What did Infants receive the Spirit of Christ as well as the Apostles Mr. Porter What if I did say so it would not help you nor hurt me You have acknowledged your ignorance in the Originall it 's therefore to no purpose to tell you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 s●cut nos Beza that the words may be read even as we and so the phrase is rendred Act. 15.8 Even as he did to us And it cannot be denyed that some Infants receive the Spirit aeque though not aequaliter as well though not so much water in a spoon is water as well as that in a barrell Infants then may receive the Spirit as well for quality though not for quantity as the Apostles did And so the Apostle himselfe expounds it Chap. 11.17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did to us Marke 1. Pet. 1.1 Like pretious faith with us the like gift Else if you will needs understand it of the measure you will contradict your own practise for time past and overthrow it for time to come For you must never baptize any unlesse you are sure they have the same measure of the Spirit I shall therefore reassume my argument with that addition They who receive the Spirit of Christ as well as the Apostles may be baptized but some Infants receive the Spirit of Christ as well as the Apostles Therefore some Infants may be baptized Mr. Haggar Who are here to be baptized vers 46. These who spake with tongues

A True and Faithfull NARRATIVE for substance Of a Publique Dispute BETWEEN Mr. Tho. Porter Mr. Hen. Haggar CONCERNING INFANT-BAPTISM In the Parish Church of Ellesmer in the County of Salop on the 30 of April 1656. By one who was present at and a diligent observer of the Debate ROM 16.17 18. Now I beseech you brethren marke them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned and avoid them For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ but their own belly and By good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple Nemo est qui non videat Paedobaptismum nequaquam humanitus fabrefactum fuisse qui Tanta Scripturae approbatione fulciatur Nec satis speciose nugantur qui objiciunt nusquam reperiri vel unum Infantem per Apostolorum manus fuisse baptizatum Etsi enim id Nominatim ab Evangelistis non narratur quia tamen neque rursum excludantur i●…i quoties familiae alicujus baptizatae incidit mentio quis inde nisi Insanus raticcinetur non fuisse baptizatos Quod autem apud simplicem vulgum disseminant longam annorum seriem post Christi Resurrectionem praeteriisse quibus incognitus erat Paedobaptismus In co foedissime mentiuntur siquidem nullus scriptor tam vetustus qui non ejus Originem ad Apostolorum seculum Pro certo referat Calv. Instit Lib. 4. Cap. 16. Sect. 8. LONDON Printed for John Clark at the Entrance into Mercers-Chappel at the lower end of Cheapside 1656. An Advertisement to the Readers READERS WHether friends or foes staggering or setled I though it not only expedient but needfull having had perfect understanding of all things concerning the debate from the first to acquaint you with the occasion of this Contest and the rather that some things here may be hinted which could not be so conveniently set down in the body of the Narrative Mr. Porter being called to Preach the Gospel in Ellesmer on Feb. 13. 1655. did in his Sermon take occasion as he thought he was bound to vindicate himself with a spirit of meeknesse from some asperpersions which some of the rebaptized judgement that was his phrase had cast upon him Whereupon some best known for distinction by the name of Anabaptists did write a Letter to him desiring him to come the next monthly Lecture to make good what he had delivered and that then and there there should be some God willing to dispute with him about Infant-Baptism Mr. Porter came the day appointed Nath. Gillow Jo. Capper Jo. Edwards Ma. Edw. and proved four of the Anabaptists in Ellesme arrant LYARS though I cannot learn that they have taken shame to themselves for their sin of Lying nor given any satisfaction to Mr. Porter As if Lying were a natural ingredient into Anabaptism as Bullinger in answer to an Objector said nor can you shew me ONE MAN of them who is not blemished with some of the foresaid wickednesses I mean Lying Sedition Idlenesse c. At which time also it was agreed that on the last of April a Publique Dispute should be held in the Parish Church of Ellesmer aforesaid about Infant-Baptism N. G. and J. C. stating the question thus All Infant-Baptism is unlawfull and that either Hen. Haggar or James Brown or Richard Newton should enter the lists with Mr. Porter and that each side was left at liberty to bring a Moderator with them The day being come Mr. Tallants was desired to be Moderator for Mr. Porter and Mr. Brown was designed to be Moderator for Mr. Haggar Not long af●er the dispute was begun Mr. Haggar and Mr. Brown cryed hard for Scripture expresse Scripture to prove the lawfulnesse of Infant-Baptism Mr. Porter answered That if he must fight with them they must give him leave to choose his weapons prov●ded he brings them out of Gods Armory Beside he said his adversaries were unreasonable to press him to that task which he never undertook Mr. Brown said he had Mr. Porters Letter to shew for it Mr. Brown was desired to produce and read the Letter if he had any to such import in the presence and audience of that great Congregation but none was read Then Mr. Porter said he would make a short cut of the Debate offering to Mr. Haggar that if he would produce one expresse Stripture to prove Infant-Baptism unlawful for his part he would lay down the Wasters Mr. Haggar said He came not on that account disliking and disowning the stating of the question by his brethren but to make good the Baptizing of believers by clear Scriptures Then M. Porter also offered that if they would produce one express Scripture in their sense to prove the lawfulnesse of Baptizing actual believers or visible Saints he for his part would lay down the wasters Mr. Haggar said He came to hear what could be said out of Scripture in justification of Infant-Baptism So that though the Adversaries kept a great bawling for Express Scripture as to Infant-Baptism yet they could not prove their own way of Baptizing by any one express Scripture And is it not meet the same law should be taken and given It was observed that Mr. Brown for very indignation did gnash with his teeth as if he would have bitten and did knit his fist together as if he would have beaten Mr. Porter therewith so mighty was Truth and operative and it was very remarkable that when Mr. Porter propounded any argument Mr. Haggar could not be prevailed with though often pressed thereto to answer directly and briefly but used Circumlocuti●ns to inveigle the people a piece of his cunning craftiness whereby he lies in wait to deceive as the Apostle speaks Ephes 4. 14. But Mr. Porter told him that he hoped old birds would not be caught with chaffe Toward the close of the Dispute an ancient professor * R. L. desired to speak a few words v●z Mr. Haggar had Preached in that place pointing to the Pulpit about two years agoe that Infant-Baptism was Antichristian and that he with others came to hear a confirmation of that Doctrine by Scripture and though Mr. Haggar was desired yet not one Scripture was alledged To which Mr. Haggar replyed that perhaps he might then deliver that Infant-Baptism was not true Baptism or that the Baptism of Christ was not to be found in the Church of England To which Mr. Porter replyed It 's blasphemy being ready to make it out and added withall that he to his best observation could not find in the New Testament any of years Baptized but either they were Jewes or Heathens and if Mr. Haggar and his disciples would acknowledg themselves to be such much good do it them with their new way of Baptizing Then Mr. Haggar read out of the Bible Deut. 28.18 19 20. in the audience of the people and Mr. Porter read Isaiah 65.23 After which Mr. Tallant sweetly concluded with Prayer and so the Congregation was dismissed Judg. 19.30