A47535:430
Gold refined, or, Baptism in its primitive purity proving baptism in water an holy…Gold refin'd, or, Baptism in its primitive purity proving baptism in water an holy…
Gold refined, or, Baptism in its primitive purity proving baptism in water an holy institution of Jesus Christ ... : wherein it is clearly evinced that baptism ... is immersion, or dipping the whole body, &c : also that believers are only the true subjects (and not infants) of that holy sacrament : likewise Mr. Smithies arguments for infant-baptism in his late book entitled, The non-communicant ... fully answered / by Benj. Keach ...Gold refin'd, or, Baptism in its primitive purity proving baptism in water an holy institution of Jesus Christ ... : wherein it is clearly evinced that baptism ... is immersion, or dipping the whole body, &c : also that believers are only the true subjects (and not infants) of that holy sacrament : likewise Mr. Smythies arguments for infant-baptism in his late book entitled, The non-communicant ... fully answered / by Benj. Keach ...
London : Printed for the author, and are to be sold by Nathaniel Crouch ..., 1689
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Chapter 11: Wherein many other pretended Scripture-Poofs and Arguments for the baptizing of Infants…
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
From the Action of Christ's blessing Infants, saith he, to infer that they were baptized, proves nothing so much, as there is a want of better Arguments: for the Conclusion would with more probability be derived thus, i. e. Christ blessed Children and so dismissed them, but baptized them not, therefore Infants are not to be baptized. But let this be as weak as its Enemy, yet that Christ did not baptize them, is an Argument sufficient, that he hath other ways of bringing them ⟨p. 127⟩to Heaven than by Baptism; he passed an Act of Grace upon them by Benediction and Imposition of Hands. And therefore although neither Infants, nor any Man, in paris naturalibus, can attain to a Supernatural End without the addition of some Instrument, or Means of God's appointing, ordinarily and regularly; yet where God hath not appointed a Rule nor an Order, as in the case of Infants we contend he hath not, the Argument is invalid.
From the Action of Christ's blessing Infants, saith he, to infer that they were baptized, proves nothing so much, as there is a want of better Arguments: for the Conclusion would with more probability be derived thus, i. e. Christ blessed Children and so dismissed them, but baptized them not, therefore Infants are not to be baptized. But let this be as weak as its Enemy, yet that Christ did not baptize them, is an Argument sufficient, that he hath other ways of bringing them ⟨p. 127⟩to Heaven than by Baptism; he passed an Act of Grace upon them by Benediction and Imposition of Hands. And therefore although neither Infants, nor any Man, in p•ris naturalibus, can attain to a Supernatural End without the addition of some Instrument, or Means of God's appointing, ordinarily and regularly; yet where God hath not appointed a Rule nor an Order, as in the case of Infants we contend he hath not, the Argument is invalid.
And as we are sure God hath not commanded Infants to be baptized; so we are sure God will do them no Injustice, nor damn them for what they cannot help, viz. if the Parents baptize them not. Many thousand ways there are, by which God can bring any reasonable Soul to him; but nothing is more unreasonable than because he hath tied all Men of Years and Discretion to this way, therefore we of our own Heads shall carry Infants to him that way, without his directions: the Conceit is poor and low, and the Action consequent to it is bold and venturous; let him do what he please with Infants, we must not. Thus far the Doctor.