Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
blood_n	bread_n	sign_n	wine_n	12,780	5	7.9042	4	false

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79489	A Christian plea for infants baptisme. Or a confutation of some things written by A.R. in his treatise, entitutled, The second part of the vanitie and childishnesse of infants baptisme. In the answer whereof, the lawfulnesse of infants baptisme is defended, and the arguments against it disproved, by sufficient grounds and forcible reasons, drawn from the sweet fountains of holy Scripture. S.C.	Chidley, Samuel.	1644 (1644)	Wing C3836A; Thomason E32_2; ESTC R11383	164,121	171

Gen. 17.14 according to Gods appointment were the true seed in covenant with God and so were made free when Apostates though circumcised were bond-servants to sinne and were not to be admitted as they stood in that state of Apostacie to be members of the Church of the Jewes as you most fainedly would father upon Christ You fain as if Christ should say that Abrahams nature could produce no other but servants of sinne c. But I know not what you meane hereby I know Abraham was a sinner in the loynes of Adam yet Adams sinne was not imputed unto him to condemnation no more was it visibly to Abrahams seed but as they degenerated from Abrahams steps for the sinne of Abraham which he had actually and originally was forgiven him in Christ And thinke not that he was destitute of the new covenant for though the new covenant was before the manifestation of the old covenant in Mount Sinai yet it was new in respect of perpetuitie though old in respect of antiquitie is set forth in Rev. 4. by the similitude of a Rainbow in sight like an Emerauld round about the throne of God And the Infants of Abraham were never out of the Church-state till they apostated degenerated from the steps of Abraham If the promises had been made to seeds as of many then there had been some ground â—o beleeve that visible wicked persons or persons meerly naturall destitute of the spirit were fit matter for the constitution of that Church and that the seed of Apostates might be circumcised as well as others But the promises were made onely to one seed * Gal. 3.16 namely Christ that is to say Christs body which consisteth or ought to consist visibly of none but sonnes of God by faith in Christ And seeing the promise made to Abraham and his seed was not made through the Law namely the old Law and that this old Law could not disanull the promise therefore the old covenant could be removed and yet the promise continue still to all those subjects to whom it was made See A. R. Pag. 24. li. 1 2. Mat. 1. Luk 3. Isa 11. But further you would faine that the flesh spoken of in Gen. 17.13 was Christ who was to come of their flesh But you should know that Christ came of the Tribe of Judah by liniall descent and not of the rest of the Tribes nor of the father Proselytes and yet they being circumcised that covenant of circumcision was in their flesh Moreover Christ himselfe was circumcised in his infancie * Luk. 2.21 where was that covenant if he were the flesh spoken of The covenant was in his flesh as well as in the flesh of his brethren Now by flesh wee may and ought to understand that place from whence the superfluitie of their foreskinne was cut off Gen. 17.10 Ver. 14. My covenant sayth he shall be in your flesh and the uncircumcised man-childe whose flesh of his foreskin is not cut off the same person shall be cut off c. Againe If by the flesh was onely meant Christs naturall body and by the covenant onely the circumcision which Christ was to receive and did receive in his flesh Then circumcision was abolished or at an end when Christ was circumcised and none were to be circumcised after him Yea and if he were that flesh which was to be circumcised then it will follow that though none other had been circumcised before or after they had not broken the covenant But God did declare what the circumcision was and where it was to be administred and upon whom First It was a cutting off of the superfluous fore-skinne Secondly That it was to be in their flesh and not in the flesh of others in stead of them Thirdly That it was to be administred upon Jewes and Gentiles that were in the covenant Gen. 17. Exod. 12.48 And so such persons were by vertue of Gods covenant circumcised not onely before Christ was circumcised but also after and therefore you have not done well to interpret Gen. 17.13 after such a manner you have done evill in faining it as if it were the speech of Christ when no such things ever entered into his thoughts Whereas you think circumcision was a covenant properly you should know that though circumcision had the denomination of Gods covenant a Gen. 14.10 yet it was but a signe of it b Ver. 11. The names of things signified in the Scripture are given to the signes which signifie them So the Lambe was called Gods Passeover c Exod. 12.11 the Rock Christ d 1 Cor. 10.4 the bread and wine in the Lords Supper Christs body and bloud c. e Mat. 26.26 And in this sense is circumcision called Gods covenant that is to say a token or signe thereof as God termeth it himselfe in Gen. 17. ver 11. As for those which say that the promise covenant election and faith belongeth tâ— all beleevers children which supposed case you put to shut up all * Seâ— A. R. Pag. 25. at lin 8. your matter I tell you that if by all they mean the godly children of godly parents then they say true But that the wicked children of godly parents have these excellent things belonging unto them is no article of my faith When the Apostle Peter sayth to the Jewes Act. 2.39 The promise is unto you and to your children and to all that are a far off even as many as the Lord our God shall call In including the children heer with the parents his meaning is not to include all beleevers children but onely those holy ones who abide in their parents righteous steps which thing holy Infants doe as before hath been proved at large * See pag. 3. they do not degenerate from the righteous steps of their holy parents And therefore such may be lawfully baptized for no more in effect is required to Baptisme then was to circumcision of old this is as that was and these are as those were Holy infants were to be circumcised then and therefore such may be lawfully baptized now Next you * See A. R. Pag. 25. li. 19. charge the great Clerkes of our times with confounding the two Covenants of the Law and Gospel together And to this I say if by these great clerkes you mean those who thinke Infants Baptisme to be a meer tradition Indeed then your accusation may prove true upon them for such as they doe put no difference between the new covenant made with Abraham and his seed and the old covenant and law which came long after it but they thinke this new covenant and the old covenant to be both one and doe not rightly understand the nature of them and therefore the hodge-podge in their teachings and writings which you mention * Lin. 29. is their owne as well as any ones else as also the intermixture of grace and workes truth and errour as also

But they were all baptized sayth Paul therefore I conclude that seeing they had the Administration it was not without an Administrator Ob. 3. Did they want the Element Ans They had water enough in the cloud and if that had been too little there was more in the sea and if the Angel of Gods presence their present companion had seen it good they should have been dipped and should have had as great a quantitie of the Element in Baptisme as the Aegyptians had without it Ob. 4. Did they want subjects Ans They were the subjects themselves and right subjects wee may say for they were such who were in Gods covenant of which Circumcision the seale * Rom. 4.11 of the righteousnesse of faith was a signe * Gen. 17.11 This being rightly minded it may refute your former opinion to wit that the Baptisme of infants cannot be of God but of man a vaine and lying tradition * Pag. 7. lin 18. 19. 22. thrust upon the world under colour foysted in like Antichristian devices Now sure if it were not of God but of man you will tell us what man invented it Seeing you have presumed to be so bold to goe thus far I pray you if you can goe a little further and tell us who invented it you cited divers humane Authors * Pag. 7.8 9. which were since Christ but sure they were not the inventers thereof for heer you may see it was administred long before they were borne many hundreds of yeares and so your new account commeth too short to prove the Baptisme of infants to be invented since Christ for as much as this of Moses undermineth that your sandie conception Who invented it then I pray you tell me for sure you can tell at least you thinke so otherwise you would not have termed it as you doe Moses did not invent it he was faithfull over his Masters house as a servant bringing nothing into the worship and service of God but what was appointed by God neither would he or God suffer such a thing to be acted and to goe unreproved except it were according to Gods appointment Neither would the Apostle have called it Baptisme as he doth in 1 Cor. 10.1 2. had it been an invention of man and not an institution or an action of Gods But you your selfe have granted it to be a priviledge unto them then sure you must by this confesse it was no invention of man but the Lords doings though it be marvellous in your eyes and therefore seeing that the children of Israel in the cloud and in the sea had baptisme conferred upon them by divine right it was not a humane invention nor diabolicall institution according to your former affirmation but an Evangelicall Administration Next you take upon you to give the sense of the place but you varie from it you tell us that no enjoyning of any outward priviledge as Baptisme or the Lords Supper will now save us without true faith accompanied with obedience and I tell you that I also affirme the same But when you should declare that our Baptisme cannot save us without faith no more then their Baptisme could save them you varie from the poynt in particular and speake in generall of their many outward priviledges and when you come to particulars you mind their bringing through the sea for one their defence and guidance in the Wildernesse by the cloud for another but you omit their Baptisme the maine thing which you should keepe to at this time and so you run on and would turne Pauls particular testimonie into a generall whereas Paul doth speake in particular and telleth us that they were baptized And at length you come to Peter and take upon you to tell us the manner of his speech how he compareth the Baptisme of the Arke with the Baptisme now and sayth the like figure Baptisme doth now also save us and so you tell us that these being onely figures and allusions can prove nothing to the poynt in hand Thus now you have cast off both the Baptismes of the New and Old Testament for the Apostle Peter speaketh of the Baptisme of Noah and of the Baptisme now and sayth this is a like figure to that and you tell us they are figures and allusions but I thinke you mean delusions for you say they serve not at all to prove the poynt in hand But as for this Answer of yours it is one and the same with that in the Anabaptists Dialog For there they tell us 1. That Moses did not at all wash them with water in the cloud and sea 2. That this of Moses is called Baptisme by comparison as Noahs Arke is called the figure of the Baptisme that saveth us for as the Arke saved those in it from drowning so the Israelites were all under the cloud and in the sea and therein baptized or safegarded from destruction of their enemies 3. That it pleased the Holy Ghost to say they were baptized in the sea and cloud because the sea and cloud was their safetie as Noahs Arke was And as Christ sayth they are baptized that suffer for his sake So there is as much warrant to enjoyne Infants to suffer persecution because it is called Baptisme as to baptisme them because the cloud and sea is called Baptisme To this Mr. Ainsworth sayth * In his booke called A censure upon the Anabaptists Dialog pa. 99. Let them consider Exod. 14.24.25 compared with Psal 77.16 17. c. And they may see there was water enough in the cloud and they will not say I thinke that there was no water in the sea All outward baptizing or washing must be with water or some other liquor If they were not baptized with water what other liquor were they baptized in Not with bloud as in the baptisme of suffering death for Christs sake which they impertinently mention Not with wine or strong drinke for they found none such in the Wildernesse If they can shew nothing but water to baptize them in lâ—t them deny no more for shame that they were baptized with water God spake to our fathers by the Prophets at sundry times or in * ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ ã€ˆâ—Šã€‰ sundry parts as it were by peice-meale as the Apostle teacheth Heb. 1.1 By Moses he shewed how the cloud removed from before Israel and stood behinde them as they passed through the Sea and gave them light but was darknesse to the Aegyptians and from the fiery cloudy pillar the Lord looking troubled the Aegyptians and took off their Chariot wheeles that they drave them heavily Exod. 14.19 20.24 25. This being briefly and obscurely told by Moses God after by Asaph another Prophet sheweth the manner of it how not onely the waters of the Sea saw the Lord when they fled and parted but the clouds also from above powred out water when they rained the skies sent out a sound by thunder c. Thus the ground being softned with the raine occasioned

the Chariot wheeles of the Aegyptians sticking in the mire to fall off and hinder their pursuit Psal 77.16 c. After this the Apostle taught by Gods Spirit manifesteth the mysterie which before was kept secret namely how this passage under the cloud which rained and through the sea was a baptisme to the Israelites even as Christian mens washings in rivers or vessels was a baptisme to them And as the Manna which Israel eat and water from the rock which they dranke was the same spirituall meat and drinke which wee have signified by bread and wine in the Lords Supper so their washing in the cloud and sea and our washing in vessels or rivers is spiritually the same baptisme from hence we gather the baptizing of our Infants by two Arguments 1. All our fathers sayth Paul were baptized in the cloud and sea therefore say wee Infants for seeing there was no other baptisme but that in the cloud and sea such of our fathers as then were Infants were at that time baptized or else many of our fathers even all the infants of many thousand families were never baptized which is contrary to the Apostles doctrine And if Infants had baptisme under Moses it cannot be denied them under Christ 2. In that the Apostle teacheth us that the extraordinary and temporary sacraments or seales of salvation which Israel had were the substance and truth which wee now have though Moses doth not so expresse It followeth upon like ground that their ordinary seales namely Circumcision and the Passeover were the same in truth and substance with baptisme and the Lords Supper which wee now have and being the same As Infants had Circumcision then so they are to have baptisme now Secondly Whereas they say that of Moses was called baptisme by comparison as if it were not properly baptisme they swarve from the right way it was as truly and properly baptisme to them as ours is to us though the manner of administration differ even as their Manna and water were as truly and properly the Sacrament of Christs body and bloud to them as bread and wine in the Lords Supper are to us Otherwise the Apostle should not say truly that they were the same 1 Cor. 10.3 4. Thirdly Noahs Arke is not called the figure of baptisme as these corrupters of Scripture tell us but baptisme sayth the Apostle is a like figure or antitype 1 Pet. 3.21 So that the saving by water of eight then in the Arke was a type or figure and the saving of a few now by water in baptisme is an antitype or like figure both of them figuring salvation by the death of Christ Fourthly Neither doe these men set downe the reason fully and rightly why they are sayd to be baptized namely because the cloud and sea was their safetie as Noahs Arke was for though it may in some sense be granted that these were their safetie as baptisme is our safetie for it is said to save us 1 Pet. 3.21 yet properly they are sayd to be baptized in the cloud and sea because they were in them sacramentally washed from their sinnes and planted together in the likenesse of his death buriall and resurrection as wee are now by baptisme Rom. 6.3 4 5. The cloud served them for three uses 1. To protect and keep them safe Isa 4.5.6 2. To guide them in the way that they should goe Numb 9.17 c. Exod. 14.21 And these two were ordinary 3. To baptize them by powring downe water and this was extraordinary and but one time in the red Sea for ought wee finde And in this respect Paul sayth they were baptized in it Fifthly Their last speech of injoyning infants to suffer persecution as well as to baptize them is spoken with a wry mouth for as we injoyne not Infants to be baptized though we baptize them so can wee not enjoyne them to suffer persecution But this wee say and know as Infants are baptized into Christ so oftentimes they suffer persecution for Christ being with their parents afflicted imprisoned banished c. yea and bereaved of life it selfe so that they have even the baptisme of bloud or martyrdome also Thus you may see that there hath been long agoe a large and sufficient Answer made unto this Answer of the Anabaptists of old which is even one and the same with yours Thus much for reply to your Answer to the third objection As touching the fourth fifth objection the charitable construction being set aside I except against them both but especially the fourth that the outward baptisme is not needful to him that hath the * Pag. 17. lin 8. other And so for the fifth objection * Lin. 19. which is that Baptisme is nothing though it may beare a charitable construction yet if any conceive Baptisme is nothing as it is an ordinance of God they erre Neither doe I know any one amongst all the Seperation that holdeth Baptisme to be nothing but they reverence it as an ordinance of God It is true as you have granted in answering hereof * Lin. 26. Christian Reader See Mr. Henry Barow one of the three Martyrs in Q Elizabeths time his discovery of the false Church for there he treateth on this particular poynt at large and reproveth the scholasticall partie who did labour to perswade the Queen that seeing her Majestie had the inward Baptisme and had done many works of mercy and pietâ—e that therfore shee might rest her selfe satisfied whether shee had the outward baptisme or no On the other hand the Romanistâ— said that shee must count the Church of Rome a true Church or else denie her Baptisme But these were deceived and did not consider how that Gods ordinance is his ordinance though in the depth of Apostacie See the Ans to your fiâ—st Treatise That in some sence Baptisme is nothing even no more was Circumcision in former time yet as it was Gods holy ordinance it was to be regarded as a thing of great concernment and was not worne out then though in the middest of Antichristianisme or Apostasie So Baptisme now being no lesse durable though more generall then Circumcision was nor lesse honourable it ought not to be rejected but regarded and the reverent receivers of it respected and the contemners of it reproved and condemned Take notice heer how that in pursuing after these scattering Objections * In Pag. 14 15. 17. you have strangely varied from the poynt concerning Infants and so have shot at rovers Therefore I would have you for order sake to observe what hath been set downe by me to prove the lawfulnesse of the Baptisme of holy Infants against all your objections which you have set downe unto this period all which I leave to the consideration of you and the observation others and so proceed to answer the next which followeth BVt say you * Pag. 18. at lin 2. their fifth and maine Argument is yet behinde from the Covenant which God made with

Selected quad for the lemma: blood_n

Text snippets containing the quad