A47535:495
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 12: Containing an Answer to several other Arguments brought for Infant-Baptism.
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.
Answ. Must he needs baptize them because he took them up in his Arms? and because he blessed them, must he receive them into his Church? We have proved that they are not capable Subjects of Gospel-Church-membership, neither did our Saviour baptize any with his own Hands, Joh. 4. 1, 2. therefore not those Children he took up into his Arms; nor is this any proof in the least, i. e. that Christ must allow them an Ordinance, because he showed them the favour to take them up into his Arms. 'Tis said he looked upon the young Man, and loved him; must he therefore make him a Member of his Church, whether he was fitly qualified for it or no? Christ showed many great Favours unto divers Persons, that we do not read he admitted into his Church. He may show one Favour to you, and yet deny you another which you may not be capable of receiving.
Answ. Must he needs baptize them because he took them up in his Arms? and because he blessed them, must he receive them into his Church? We have proved that they are not capable Subjects of Gospel-Church-membership, neither did our Saviour baptize any with his own Hands, Joh. 4. 1, 2. therefore not those Children he took up into his Arms; nor is this any proof in the least, i. e. that Christ must allow them an Ordinance, because he shewed them the favour to take them up into his Arms. 'Tis said he look'd upon the young Man, and loved him; must he therefore make him a Member of his Church, whether he was sitly qualified for it or no? Christ shewed many great Favours unto divers Persons, that we do not read he admitted into his Church. He may shew one Favour to you, and yet deny you another which you may not be capable of receiving.
Young Children,1 saith Luther, hear not, nor understand the Word of God, out of which ⟨p. 151⟩Faith cometh; and therefore if the Commandment be followed, Children ought not to be baptized.