Selected quad for the lemma: water_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
water_n believe_v sign_n untrue_a 80 3 16.5066 5 false
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
A19033 The plea for infants and elder people, concerning their baptisme, or, A processe of the passages between M. Iohn Smyth and Richard Clyfton wherein, first is proved, that the baptising of infants of beleevers, is an ordinance of God, secondly, that the rebaptising of such, as have been formerly baptised in the apostate churches of Christians, is utterly unlawful, also, the reasons and objects to the contrarie, answered : divided into two principal heads, I. Of the first position, concerning the baptising of infants, II. Of the second position, concerning the rebaptising of elder people. Clyfton, Richard, d. 1616. 1610 (1610) STC 5450; ESTC S1572 214,939 244

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

sayd to be coinheritors with them and of the ●ame body see also Ephes 2. 12. 13. 14. Add hereunto that the Iewes were called the * Mat. 8 12. children of the kingdome and of of the “ Act. 3. 25. covenant and unto whom the † Act. ● 32. promise was made And now it being proved that this spirituall covenant apperteyned to the Israelites and the conditions therof required at their hands I hope you will grant as much to the faythfull and their seed under the Gospel or els shew vs where and when the hand of Gods grace was shortened but that I am sure you cannot prove God to be lesse bountiful now then he was to the Iewes and therefore as the chidren of Abraham Isaac and Iacob were holy and had right to the covenant and were sealed with circumcision so are the children now that descends from beleeving parents * 1 Cor. 7. 14. holy and have right to the covenant “ Mat. 19 14. and kingdome of God and consequently to baptisme the seal thereof But you say Infants wanting actuall faith cannot truely be sayd the children of Abraham I answer that actuall faith is required of such of Abrahams children as Here no● that actua● faith in al● this treatis● is put for t● actual us● faith are grown to yeares And therfore you must proove that infants wanting actuall faith cannot be the children of Abraham and then must you prove that they are not Christs for if they be Christs they are Abrahams seed Gal. 3. 29. But are that they are in secret to the Lord whatsoever they are Christ hath sayd playnely “ Mar. ● 14. that of such is the Kingdome of God And the promise is * Act. 2. 3. made to the beleevers and their seede And you leave them in secrete to the Lord thus shutting your eies against the cleare light of the truth The Scriptures following viz Gal. 3. 13. 4. 8. 9. compared with Gē 17. 7. Rom. 11. 15. 17. 20. which serve most playnly to prove that the covenant that we have is the same that was made to Abraham you leave vnanswered Next folow your reasons against poedobaptistrie the first wherof is this As it was with Abraham the father of the faithful so must it be with the children of Abraham Rom. 4. 11. But Abraham first beleeved actually and being sealed with the spirit of promise afterward received the signe of circumcision Ergo the childrē of Abraham the beleeving Gentiles must first beleeve actually and be sealed with the spirit of promise and then receive the baptisme of water This Argument which you alledge against Paedobaptistrie the very 〈◊〉 serves to confirm it for thus we reason for it observing your termes As it was with Abraham the father of the faythful so must it be with th● children of Abraham But Abraham first beleeved and being sealed with the spirit of promise afterward received the signe of circumcision he and his children Ergo the children of Abraham the beleeving Gentiles must first beleeve● and be sealed with the spirit of promise and then receive baptisme of water they and their children Here let the reader consider yf you by this your owne Argument have not yeelded the cause for this is that which we stand for viz that As it was with Abraham the father of the faithful so must it be with his children the beleeving Gentiles Now Abraham beleeved that God would be his God and the God of his seed Gen. 17. 7. received circumcision the † seale thereof he himself and all his males yea Isaac of eight dayes old ●om 4. 3 ● Gen. 17. ● 14. ● 27. ● 21. 4. Ergo the children of Abraham the beleeving Gentiles must first beleeeve and then receive the seale thereof which is Baptisme themselves and their children But if your meaning be this that as Abraham beleeved first after was circumcised so every one of Abrahams seed must first actually beleeve and then be baptised then I must intreat you to shew me when and where this difference was put between the seed of Abrahā which descended from him by the course of nature his seed that are of the Gentiles that the former being infants might notwithstāding first receive the seal before they did actually beleeve And that the other viz the infants of the Gentiles must first beleeve and after receive the signe surely before the comming of Christ the Lord put no such difference but that such of the Gentiles as did turne to the faith “ their infants were circumcised as well as ●xod 12. the infants of the Iewes After Christs comming the Apostle witnesseth that there is no difference between the Gentiles and the Iewes for he sayth Ephe. 3. 6 * the Gentiles are coinheritors also meaning with the Iewes and of the same body and partakers of his promise in Christ by the Gospel And therefore the Apostle did not doubt to “ baptise the households with the beleeving parents Act. 16. ● 33. Act. 10. ● I wil answer you therefore with the words of the Angel unto Peter * The things that God hath cleansed pollute thou not God hath purifyed the Gentiles and our seed in accepting us into the same covenant with Abraham therfore yt is an iniury offered to pollute that is to reject from the cove●ant our children whom the Lord hath received Your second ●s this As in the old testament the carnal children were carnally circumcised and so admit●d into the Church of the old testament so in the new testament the spirituall children ●ust be spiritually circumcised and then be admitted by baptisme into the Church ●f the new testament But the first was signified by the type Ergo the second is ●rified in the truth First If this Argument should hold proportion then it would folow that as circumcision was a seale of the covenant so should baptisme be a ●eale likewise for it is brought in here to answer circumcision as the dore into the Church But you deny * Chara● pag. 9 Baptisme to be a seale of the covenant 2. I answere that the carnall children of the Israelites were not admitted to be members of the Church of the old testament by circumcision for they were borne in the Church and so were of it before the eight day “ Gen. 17 the covenant apperteyned unto them and therfore were they circumcised for none might be circumcised to whom the covenant did not belong Also to the Majors consequent I answer that they which enter into the Lords covenant be they beleevers or their Infants we are to hold them † 1 Cor. 7. 14. Luk ● 15. Ier. 1. ● spiritually circumcised and therefore to be partakers of baptisme Concerning your assumption as * Mat. 3. 8. Act. ● 12. 37. repentance and profession of faith is required of them that are to be adjoyned to the Church of the new Testament so was it of “ Gen. 17 ●
sinnes c. it should not have been repeated So that to be members of a false church shal not hinder the efficacy of baptisme Againe if Antichrist intendeth in baptisme to set an indelible caracter to conferre grace ex opere operato to infants and therefore setteth upp his owne idoll as you say what say you to his baptising of the Indians which are of yeares For he intendeth the same thing And yet his so baptising of the elder sort c. you wil not have repeated So by your own opinion to set an indelible caracter to conferre grace ex oper● operato is no good reason to prove the ●●erating of childrens baptisme for then should it do so in the elder people confessing their sinnes c. As for the promise made by others for the partie baptised I place as a devise of man amongst the accidental corruptions of this sacrament Cōcerning persons cōfessing their sins fayth whō you make the onely subject of baptisme I hav āswered before And here tel you that the scripture mētioneth † 1 Cor. ● Act. 16. persōs that were baptised yet sayth not a word that they cōfessed their faith syns And you cā never prove that al in the familie of Stephanas Lidiah c. did confesse their sinnes and fayth but to al that you say here answer is given before IIII. Argument THose holy things which God by his merciful providence hath preserved for his people through the hands of prophane persons are not to be rejected for the authors sake Ezra 1 11 But the scriptures and baptisme hath God preserved in the popish assemblies for the benefit of his people Therfore not to be rejected for the Authors sake If it be objected against the Minor it is not true baptisme but false that is administred in the Assēblies of Antichrist I answer though it may be sayd to be false in regard of some humane devises used in the administration thereof yet is it true baptisme in respect of the matter forme and author thereof which causeth it to have a true being Mr Smyth I answer directly that if it could be proved that baptisme in the kingdome of Antichrist Answ is appointed by Christ and that water is the true matter of baptisme and the true forme is washing into the Trinitie I would yeeld unto you but this you have not proved c. but to deal something more fully c. ● water is not the matter of baptisme but onely the instrument c. R. Clyfton First I have proved that baptisme which is administred in the Antichristian Rep. churches is not to be iterated but that Christ appointed baptisme in the kingdome of Antichrist I do not affirm onely this I say that Christ ordeyned this sacrament for his church which becoming Apostate yet reteyning the same is notwithstanding baptisme because it is of God And so I affirme that Christ is the Author of baptisme which the Antichristians pollute by their administration thereof as God was the author of that circumcision observed in the apostate church of Israel And therefore as circumcision received of the Israelites in their Apostasie stood as the seal of Gods covenant to so many as repented So baptisme received in Babylon confirmeth the promise to al Gods people departing thence and returning to walk in the wayes of the Lord. But concerning the matter and forme of baptisme you charge me to have sayd in my answer to your second Argument That water is the matter and the forme washing with water into the Trinitie In calling water the matter if so it had pleased you you might have understood my meaning viz. that I understood thereby the outward signe or element whereof in Poperie was no change They used the same which Christ ordeyned And in calling it the matter I did not intend the subject or partie baptised which I know must be also one that beleeveth or the seed of such but considering what Christ ordeyned to be observed in this Ceremonie I found these water and the baptising therewith into the name of the father c. The former I called the matter or element wherewith the partie is baptised meaning that material outward signe that Christ ordeyned in this sacrament as in the other he hath done the like For it was not in my thought to intend that if the water be administred with this forme of words that it is baptisme without a fit subject to be baptised Nay I hold it an error in the Papists which baptise their bells and wil have bread consecrated as they speak to be a sacrament though it be never received but layed up in a box Concerning the subject of baptisme or matter as you terme it I wil not contend but in that you denye the Infants of beleevers to be fit matter of baptisme the contrarie I affirme and have proved before 2. I say that washing into the name of the father of the sonne of the Holy Ghost Ans is not the forme of baptisme for to wash a Turke Jew Foole madman or Infant into the Trinitie is not true baptisme c. I answer first I know that formes can not consist without their subjects Re. therefore I say the forme of baptising is reteyned in Poperie applied to infants though corruptly in that standing Secondly I stand not to defend that to baptise an unfit subject is true baptisme but this that the baptisme of Apostates is not to be iterated when they repent and turne to God no no more then the circumcisio of the Israelites in the like cause 2 Chro. 3● 6 -11 21. as before I have shewed 3. That infants are to be baptised I have already proved And to baptise a Iewe Turke Foole c. continuing in their infidelitie madnes c. we do not affirme it lawfull nor yet the baptisme of Apostats for all such abuse that holy ceremony being guilty thereof as they are of the body and bloud of Christ that receave it unworthely 1 Cor. 11. The true forme of baptisme consists in 3. things 1. washing with water 2. a new Ans creature 3. into the name of Christ or into the Trinitie This might also be graunted saving that by new creature you mind onely ●p such as are of yeares and so appere to vs new creatures by their profession excluding infants who also must be so accepted of vs inrespect of the covenant whereof they are partakers as wel as theire parents Also the children of the faithful may be estemed new creatures seing they are holy and are so to be accounted til they manyfest themselves otherwise which may be the case of old persons as of S. Magus c. And the Apostle in the place alledged speaketh of such as are of yeares and by the speach of a new creature implyeth a special vse and fruite of the thing signified by the outward signe and so is not a part of the external forme of baptisme † as by
his wife and as a wife in one respect so an heire in an other as here the Apostle calls that church And surely she could not be called an heire if she had not title to an inheritance and this then must be by covenant Besides the church of Israel was able and did covenant with the Lord You labour to chayn up the Lords grace and to bynde him that he cannot promise good to the children of the faythful or save them in Christ except they do actually by voyce and words of their own speaking stipulate or cōtract with the Lord the contrarie † Deu. 2● 10. 15. A● 2. 39. is witnessed by the holy Ghost 3. The Lord did never appoint that baptisme should seal up his new Tectament Rep. to infants Of this I have spoken before throughout the first treatise Ans And for your selves you hold that baptism sealeth up the covenant neither to yong nor old and therefore you might wel have spared this particular As for that which followes or that infants should by his baptisme be admitted in to the body of Antichrist c. I grant not into the body of Antichrist for Antichrist hath no right to any of the ordinances of God but the questiō is not what he hath right unto but whether the Lords ordinance is to be rejected together with the pollution thereof The Lord did not appoint that Belsha●her his princes wyves and concubines should drink in the vessels of the Temple or them to be caried into Babylō but * Dan. 5. 2 3. 4. they being there prophaned yet were “ Ezr. 1. 8. 11 caried out thence served for the use of the Temple And so do we hold of baptisme of the scriptures rejecting the corruptions that did cleave unto them in Poperie and applying them with their right use to our selves But the end of Christs baptisme is to manifest visibly that the partie confessing his Rep. sinne is sealed by the spirit unto the day of redemption that he hath visibly put on Christ that he is mortified crucified risen againe c. Rom. 6. 1. 6. Col. 2. 12. Gal. 3. 27. These ends of baptisme I deny not but we must not deprive infants of this grace neither exclude that Ans● special end of baptisme to wit the sealing up unto us the pomise of God which is the thing you can not away with I know the true beleevers ar sealed with the spirit a seal invisible so were the godly under the old Test al that are the Lords are in Christ have his spirit dwelling in them els could they not be his And it is true also that the promise of the spirit hinders not the outward meanes which God hath sanctified for the begetting and increasing of our fayth for he worketh together with them Seeing therefore the matter forme and end of baptisme in the false church is from man even from Antichrist therefore the Lord is not the Author of this baptisme but the baptisme is Antichrists wholly And although he useth the words In nomine patris filij spiritus sancti Amen as the Papists do in sprinkling holy water in baptising of their belles as coniurers do in their charmes yet this can not make true baptisme c. How untrue that is which you speak of Baptisme in Poperie as being ●●s from Antichrist and not from Iesus Christ for the matter c. I have shewed before The Papists when they baptise children do intend to administer baptisme and do baptise them into the name of Christ and not into the name of the Pope And though they do in the use of this holy ordinance adde a number of superstitious ceremonies and observations withal yet keep they the forme * set downe by Christ without devising a new And Mat. 2● therefore it is not true to say that baptisme is Antichrists wholly The abusing of the name of God by papists or conjurers in their baptising of bells and conjurations c. is their sinne which we leave unto them selves the ordinance of God we retayn which we know their abuse cannot annihilate And though you except these words In nomine patris c. have been prophaned by the Papists As much may be sayd of the scriptures And if prophanation be a cause sufficient to reject baptisme then by lyke reason may the scriptures be cast away And this also you are in a reasonable forewardnes for no translated scriptures must come in your worship yet for some uses you are contented to receive the scriptures though they have been prophaned but baptisme for no use at all because say you it is essentially corrupted in matter and forme and use yet not another matter forme and use your self hath confessed † That if Antichrist had baptised persons confessing ●haracter ●g 53. their sinnes and fayth into the Trinitie it should not have been repeated So that all this florish that you make about the essential corruption in matter forme and use stands in this that you hold that infants are not capable of baptisme which is proved already against you Againe these corruptions in or about the matter and forme of baptisme are accidental and not the changing of the matter forme and end as before is shewed Furthermore whereas I sayd that the Israelites in their Apostasie were a false church you answer If so you understand a false church Rep● viz. meetings or companies of men assembled together in a wrong place to a wrong worship to a wrong Priesthood I yeeld Israel to be a false church but I deny that to be the true definition of a false church c. By a false church I understand a church apostate neither do I describe Answ a false or an apostate Church as in the first place you set downe but such a church I hold to be in apostasie that hath † 2 The. ● 1 Tim. 4. fallen from the fayth and waye of Christ * Hos 2. broken covenant with God and “ 2 Chr. 12. 11. forsaken him † 2 Chro. 9. 1 Kin. 28. 33. 14. 9. that erects a new fellowship amongst themselves of their own invention and worship God by the hands of false Ministers with false worship c. This was the state of Israel which came to be without the “ 2 Chr. 1● 3. true God c. and therefore she was a church in apostasie and not the true * Hos 2. ● wi●e of the Lord. That false is contrarie to true I graunt but in that sense I never intended to cal Israel a false church as having nothing that belonged to the true church in it no more is Antichrists such a one Yet the having of some of Gods holy things in them in a corrupt manner cannot make them true churches ches Here you indeavour to prove Israel a false church c. A true church is discerned in the true causes essential and so a false church by