A47591:531
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.
CHAP. VII.
Proving Infant-Baptism is not lawful, because Circumcision under the Law belonged unto the Male-Infants of the Jews, containing an Answer to Mr. James Owen's first Chapter.
IF, say you, Circumcision under the Law belonged unto Infants, then Baptism under the Gospel belongeth unto them; for even as Circumcision was, so Baptism is the Seal of the same Covenant of Grace, and signifieth the same things.
Answ. 1. I answer; If Circumcision did not belong to Infants under the Law, any otherwise than by express and positive Command of God, which gave them right thereto; then if God hath not commanded Believers to baptize their Infants, it is not their Duty to baptize them, but their Sin if they do it. But I have proved it was the express Command of God only that gave Male-Infants proceeding from Abraham's Lo••s Authority to be circumcised; and God hath given no such Command to Believers to baptize their Infants; therefore Baptism doth not belong to the Infants of Believers, as such, under the Gospel, as Circumcision did belong to Male-Infants under the Law.