A47535:470
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.
Erasmus saith likewise,1 Infants born of such Parents as one being a Christian, the other not, are holy legitimately; for the Conversion of either Wife or Husband doth not dissolve the Marriage which was made when both were Unbelievers.
- 1Erasmus.
What Reason now had Dr. Featly and others to contemn this Exposition of the Text, considering what we and so many Learned Men have declared as touching this matter? for a ⟨p. 141⟩more fuller Answer read Mr. Danvers, p. 166, 167, 168, 169.
But after all, should it be allowed that the Holiness in this Text is indeed to be taken for a Federal or Covenant-Holiness, yet we cannot therefore grant that this is a sufficient Proof for Infant-Baptism; for let the Holiness be what it will, whether Moral, Federal, or Matrimonial, neither of these is any where assigned to be a ground of baptizing Infants; the Institution,1 Commission, and Practice of the Apostolical Church being that alone that can warrant the same: 'Tis God's Word only, not Mens Reason, conceited Grounds and Inferences, that can justify a Practice, or make a Gospel-Ordinance; if all therefore was granted which you affirm of the Covenant made with Abraham of Circumcision and Federal-Holiness, yet Infant-Baptism is gone, unless you can prove God hath from this ground commanded you to baptize your Children, or that they were for this Reason admitted to Baptism in the Apostles Time (for all your Arguments from thence prove as strongly, that your Infants may partake of the Lord's-Supper, &c.) But that any thing less than a Profession of Faith and Repentance is or can be a sufficient ground for baptizing any Person, young or old, we do deny, sith the New Testament is the only Rule or perfect Copy, by the Authority of which we ought to act and perform all Duties of instituted Worship, and administer Sacraments, &c. which are mre positive Precepts, and depend only upon the Will and Pleasure of the Law-maker. So much to this pretended Proof of Infant-Baptism.