A47591:341
Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the ancient…Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the antient…
Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the ancient Britons [sic] being an answer to a book, intituled [sic] Children's baptism from Heaven, published in the Welsh tongue by Mr. James Owen / by Benjamin Keach.Light broke forth in Wales, expelling darkness, or, The Englishman's love to the antient Britains [sic] being an answer to a book, iutituled [sic] Children's baptism from Heaven, published in the Welsh tongue by Mr. James Owen / by Benjamin Keach.
London: printed by William Marshall, 1696
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.
1. That Sprinkling, which doth not, cannot answer or represent those Gospel-Mysteries, should not be rejected.
2. That Infants should be once deemed the proper Subjects of Baptism, since nothing of a Death to Sin, nor rising again to walk in Newness of Life, can appear in them. For, as the Learned observe, Baptism is a Symbol of present, not future Regeneration: 'Tis an outward Sign of that inward Death unto Sin, which the Party baptized passed under then, or ought to have done, when (or before) he is baptized. They then professed themselves to be dead to Sin, i. e. even when they were buried with Christ in their Baptism; for the Argument of the Apostle lies in that respect: How shall we that are dead unto Sin, live any longer […]? Knowing that so many of […] who have been baptized into Christ, were baptized into his Death, both in Sign and Signification: And therefore, as Dr. Sherlock says, rising out of that watery Grave a new born Creature, denotes not only what they should be hereafter, but what they were actually at that time. So that as this Text, and Arguments drawn therefrom, utterly condemn Sprinkling as not being Christ's Baptism, so it excludes Infants from being ⟨p. 41⟩the Subjects thereof, because in them appears no such Death to Sin, nor can they be said to come out of that watery Grave as new born Creatures. To these Testimonies I shall only add one or two more.
2. That Infants should be once deem'd the proper Subjects of Baptism, since nothing of a Death to Sin, nor rising again to walk in Newness of Life, can appear in them. For, as the Learned observe, Baptism is a Symbol of present, not future Regeneration: 'Tis an outward Sign of that inward Death unto Sin, which the Party baptized passed under then, or ought to have done, when (or before) he is baptized. They then professed themselves to be dead to Sin, i. e. even when they were buried with Christ in their Baptism; for the Argument of the Apostle lies in that respect: How shall we that are dead unto Sin, live any longer 〈…〉? Knowing that so many of who have been baptized into Christ, were baptized into his Death, both in Sign and Signification: And therefore, as Dr. Sherlock says, rising out of that watery Grave a new born Creature, denotes not only what they should be hereafter, but what they were actually at that time. So that as this Text, and Arguments drawn therefrom, utterly condemn Sprinkling as not being Christ's Baptism, so it excludes Infants from being