Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	apostle_n	old_a	testament_n	2,813	5	8.0149	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A80622	The grounds and ends of the baptisme of the children of the faithfull. Opened in a familiar discourse by way of a dialogue, or brotherly conference. / By the learned and faithfull minister of Christ, John Cotton, teacher of the Church of Boston in New-England.	Cotton, John, 1584-1652.; Goodwin, Thomas, 1600-1680.	1646 (1646)	Wing C6436; Thomason E356_16; ESTC R201141	171,314	214

of it are said to be borne after the Spirit So the seed of the Covenant of the Law is rightly called seed as that which leaveth men that are begotten of it more carnall then they were before For it either puffeth them up to a carnall confidence of their owne strength and righteousnesse or else sinketh them into an horrible pit of diffidence and desperation And therefore they that are begotten of it are rightly and fitly said to be borne after the flesh And that is the very true meaning of the Apostles words Gal 4.29 As it was then so is it now He that was borne after the flesh persecuted him that was borne after the Spirit Where by such as are borne after the flesh the Apostle doth not mean as you understand him such as are born by an ordinary course of nature in a way of a naturall generation but such as are bred and begotten of the carnall seed of the Covenant of the law which as it begot in Ishmael a carnall confidence of his own strength or else he would never have sleighted and mocked the promised seed so it begot in Cain and Saul and Judas an utter despaire of grace and salvation Thus then you see I hope at the length a true and just answer unto your first argument against the Baptisme of Infants taken from the supposed want of command or example of the baptizing of Infants in all the New Testament By that which you have heard it appeareth to the contrary that the Baptisme of Infants hath not wanted a commandement from Christ in the institution of Baptisme Mat. 28. nor a commandement from the Apostle joyned with an example in the first solemne administration of Baptisme Acts 2. nor a commandement and example from the Lord God in the institution of a proportionall seale of the same Covenant in the dayes of Abraham Gen. 17. which though you seem to undervalue because it is fetched out of the Old Testament yet be not you deceived by the equivocation of the name For the Old and New Testament is sometimes put for the Covenants of the Law and of grace as Gal. 4.24 25. sometimes for the Books of the Old and New Testament as 2 Cor. 3.14 Now true it is that the institution of the Covenant of grace and of the seale of the Covenant of grace Gen. 17. is found indeed in the bookes of the Old Testament but the substance of the New Testament and the circumstances of that Ordinance which are changed in the books of the New Testament they are not changed by way of abrogation or diminution but by way of accomplishment and enlargement The Covenant is inlarged from the stock of Abraham to all Nations the seal of the Covenant Circumcision is translated to another more easie and acceptable the time is inlarged in respect of the day the Minister is inlarged in respect of his publike place the subject is inlarged in respect of the sex and surely not diminished nor straitned in respect of the age It is therefore a needlesse pretence to plead That surely the New Testament and the Order Government and Administration thereof are no way inferiour to the old Testament where all things are directed by expresse rule For a great part of the New Testament or Covenant is expresly delivered in the bookes of the Old Testament Paul professeth publickly he taught nothing but what Moses and the Prophets did say should come Acts 26.22 And the greatest part of the bookes of the Old Testament hold forth the Doctrine Worship Order and Government of the New Testament to such who have not a vaile laid over their hearts in the reading of the Old Testament 2 Cor. 3.14 Let us therefore proceed to your other arguments against the baptism of Infants and consider if there bee any greater weight on strength in them CHAP. V. Silvester I Have met with this as a second argument against the Baptisme of Infants That in the Baptisme of infants there is an high contempt and injury offered to Christ as hee is the husband of the Church his holy Spouse to force upon him a naturall wife himselfe being spirituall and desireth the like associate whereas such a Church is founded upon the natural by th namely Infants because commonly to one that is born of the spirit there is twenty born of the flesh Silvanus Christ did not take it as such an high contempt or injury offered to him by Abraham Isaac and Jacob and the whole house of Israel that the infants of his people and of the Proselytes that joyned to them were received into Covenant with him and admitted to the seale thereof when as yet himselfe was as spirituall then as now he is You doe herein apparently charge Christ himself with folly and with indignity offered to himselfe that he should so much forget himselfe that he being spirituall should take so many thousand Infants into the Covenant with him who for the most part are naturall and as you say for one that is born of the Spirit there were twenty born of the flesh But againe let me tell you that though Christ in taking a company to be a Church unto himselfe doth enter into marriage Covenant with them both in the Old Testament Jer. 31.32 and in the New 2 Cor. 11.2 yet not into a marriage Covenant with each member at first Christ entred into a marriage Covenant with the Congregation of Israel in the wildernesse Ezek. 16.8 yet the children of this Congregation he calleth them not his Spouses but his children v. 20 21. Furthermore you shall doe well to observe what Spirit breaths in such a speech when you say That such a Church as receiveth infants of beleeving parents into the fellowship of the Covenant and seale thereof that such a Church is founded upon the naturall birth For the Lord himselfe speaketh of such a Church of Israel as founded upon his Covenant Ezek. 16.8 And the Apostle saith We are built upon the same foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Jesus Christ himselfe being the chiefe corner stone Eph● 2.19 20 21. See what a vast difference there is betweene the Spirit of your language and the language of the Spirit of Christ CHAP. VI. 3. I Finde this for a third Argument Silvester against the Baptisme of Infants That this practise overthroweth and destroyeth the body of Christ the holy Temple of God For in time it will come to consist of naturall and so a Nation and so a Nationall Generation and carnall members Amongst whom if any Godly bee they will bee brought into bondage and become subjects of scorn and contempt and the power of Government rest in the hands of the wicked This Argument ●utteth a feare where no fear is Silvanus or at least a causelesse feare For suppose all the Children of the Church bee baptized it is an unwonted and unexpected enlargement in th●s● dayes for one Congregation to grow so populous as to become a Nation

time before the effect And therefore it cannot be but that the elect children of God are under grace before their effectuall calling and regeneration It is not our Doctrine therefore but yours that maketh void many heavenly and divine truths even the fundamentall truths of the free grace of Christ which your predecessors in this way did plainly discerne and therefore they thought it best not to contradict themselves as you doe To say that children are not under grace nor under a Covenant of grace till they be called by Christs heavenly voice and by his Spirit begotten from above and yet withall to grant election and regeneration to be of grace But they seeing plainly these could not stand together the utterly denyed election to bee of grace but of foreseen faith or works And they denyed also regeneration to bee of Gods free grace but of mans free will which whether it make void many heavenly and divine truths of grace let the word and Spirit of grace judge Well thus at large wee have examined the exceptions which you wil●● to be considered against some of those proofes from Scripture which were alledged to confirme that as in the Old Testament God made a Covenant with Abraham and his seed so now in the New Testament the faithfull inherit the same Covenant with us and our seed But you said above you had heard sundry exceptions against the rest of the proofes from Scripture which were alledged to the same purpose If you please then let us now consider of those other exceptions if there be any more weight in them then the former Silvester It is true I remember you alledged above that speech of Christ to Zacheus Luke 19.9 to prove that when Zacheus was converted his houshold was received unto a Covenant of grace and salvation Because Christ said This day is salvation to this house in as much as hee also is the son of Abraham you alledged also Rom. 11.27 28. to prove that the Jewes the posterity of Abraham shall be converted to the faith out of respect to the Covenant of their Fathers And likewise you alledged the Apostles speech in 1 Cor. 7.14 to prove that the faith of either Parent did bring their children under the holinesse of the Covenant And I said no more but truth that I have heard some exceptions against all these proofes Silvanus Let us hear and consider of them And first what have you heard alledged against that proofe from Luke 19.9 Silvester I cannot say that I have read the exception in any printed Book but in conference I have heard it interpreted thus This day is salvation come to this house that is Christ who is salvation came into Zach●us his house to dine with him because Zacheus was now become a penitent and faithfull child of Ahraham Silvanus This glosse if it had been printed had been never a whit the more authentique interpretation but onely the more notorious corruption of the Text. For 1. it is not said in the originall this day is salvation come to this house though it be so translated but this day salvation is to this house which argueth Christ spake not of his commi●g to dine in Zacheus his house but of his salvation resting upon the family 2. The reason which Christ giveth why salvation is to the house will not stand with the glosse for saith hee salvation is to this house inasmuch as he also is the son of Abraham Now if Zacheus his becomming the son of Abraham had been the reason of Christ his comming into his house to dinner it would have argued that unlesse hee had been a penitent convert Christ would not have come into his house to dine But the same evangelist telleth us the contrary That Christ went into the House of one of the Pharisees to dine with him whom yet hee sharply reproveth as one whose inside was full of ravening and wickednes Luke 11.37 38 39. But what exception have you heard or read against the conversion of the Jews out of respect to the Covenant of their Fathers according to Rom. 11.26 27 28 I have read that there be divers difficulties that will not bee granted about the Jews comming in Silvester I shall therefore let that stand by untill that time commeth or till it bee revealed from some Scripture how the same shall be The Books in which you read of divers difficulties about the Jews comming in they speake not without cause Silvanus there be difficulties indeed about the same And I may tell you more they are difficulties impossible to bee assoyled according to the Tenents and Principles of those Books For grant that for truth which the Apostle expressely teacheth for a Mystery That after the fulnesse of the Gentiles bee come in to wit come in from their Antichristian Apostasle that then all Israel shall bee saved upon whom in the meane time blindnesse lyeth Rom. 11.25 26. And grant this also for a truth which the Apostle likewise expressely addeth Verse 27 28. that this shall bee out of respect of Gods love Covenanted with their Fathers then this will prove a difficulty inexplicable how God in the New Testament shall convert the posterity of Abraham Isaac and Jacob out of his love to their Fathers and yet no man is partaker of grace by the Covenant of his Fathers till himselfe doth actually believe For can men actually believe till they be converted And is not conversion it selfe made a fruit and effect of Gods love his Covenanted love unto their Fathers and for the Fathers sake unto their seed Besides this will be another difficulty and as hard to be resolved as the former how the Apostle can call the Jewes the naturall branches of the good Olive tree and make their conversion much more kindly and as it were more easie and naturall then the conversion of the Gentiles was and yet hold as your Bookes doe that in the New Testament God hath not respect in his Covenant to the naturall seed or branches at all It is easily acknowledged and justly bewayled by the fall of our first Parents corruption of nature is alike in all men Conversion unto grace is as much above and against the corrupt nature of the Jews as of the Gentiles But yet presuppose a covenant of grace with the believing Ancestors of the Jews to continue in the dayes of the New Testament to their natural posterity And then it wil be easie to conceive how the Jewes though by corrupt nature they are as averse to be graffed into Christ as the Gentiles be yet by nature of the Covenant they are much more easily graffed in then the Gentiles More easily I say not in respect of their owne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the goodnesse of their owne nature or naturall disposition and propension to grace for they are naturally as stiffenecked as any people but in respect of the nature and kinde of the Covenant of grace given to their

Ancestors and to their seed According to which God is more readily inclined to poure out the Spirit of his grace upon the seed and off-spring of his covenanted people then upon strangers and aliens But take away the Covenant of grace from believing parents to their children and truly this difficulty of the more easie conversion of naturall branches will prove as the former did inexplicable Moreover there will yet bee another difficulty and as hard as both the former how to make good sense of the Apostles Argument whereby he proveth the conversion and holinesse of the Jewes in future ages from the holinesse of their godly Ancestors in times past and yet deny as your Bookes doe the continuance of the Covenant of grace from believing Parents to their naturall children now in the dayes of the New Testament The Apostle in Rom. 11.11 and so forward declaring the ends of the rejection of the Jewes hee made this to be one the reconciliation and salvation of the Gentiles to be a meanes to provoke the Jewes to emulation that at length they also might come on to salvation by the example of the Gentiles which he further declareth will bee a great advantage to the Gentiles And that he proveth verse 15. by an argument from the lesse to the greater if the cas●ing away of the Jewes was the reconciling of the world what saith he shall the receiving of them bee but life from the dead And that there shall be such a receiving of them he proveth from the holinesse which by the institution of God is derived from the first fruits to the whole lumpe and by the Covenant of God from the root to the branches ver 16. For saith hee if the first fruits be holy so is the whole lumpe and if the root be holy so are the branches The force of this Argument dependeth upon the force of the Covenant of grace and the continuance thereof from parents to their naturall children even now in the dayes of the New Testament as well as of the Old For by the tenor of the Covenant God is a God to holy Fathers and to their seed after them And if God be a God to their seed it reacheth forth a twofold blessing to their seed that all their seed are holy by Gods adoption Rom. 9.4 and so by their appropriation and relation unto God till themselves doe reject him Secondly that some or other of them God will ever reserve to wit all the elect seed to be called effectually to the fellowship of his holinesse and to the holinesse of their holy Ancestors And these blessings being presupposed and granted by Covenant the Apostles argument is plaine and strong That if the Patriarchs Abraham Isaac and Jacob be holy who were the first fruits and the root of the house of Israel then as all the house of Israel were an holy people till they obstinately rejected the Lord Jesus So will God reserve an elect seed of them to be called and received to the fellowship of his holinesse and the holinesse of their Ancestors in his due time But if you abrogate the continuance of the Covenant of grace from holy Parents to their naturall children now in the dayes of the New Testament it will bee a difficulty in my weake judgement past all resolution how the Apostles Argument can be of any force to prove the conversion of the Jews unto holinesse from the holinesse of their Ancestors seeing their Ancestors are no first fruits and root unto them till they come to bee converted and being converted doe believe as well as their Ancestors And whether ever they will come to bee converted or no is as uncertain for all their relation to their holy Ancestors and for all their Ancestors Covenant with God as is the conversion of any other Infidels The Gospel holdeth forth Abraham for a root of Jews and Gentiles Silvester and that is onely in respect of his faith and faithfulnesse and so is hee the patterne and Father of the faithfull that resemble him in the same So that Jews and Gentiles are Abrahams branches onely as they spring out of the same root by faith which declares them to be his true naturall branches so farre onely as they appeare to bee of the same faith as hee was But now for the Jews that they were broken off it was onely for want of their actuall believing the Gospel as Rom. 11. and opposing the same Acts 13.46 And so were the Gentiles received in onely upon their actuall believing and receiving the same For as the Word condemneth none but with respect to actuall sinne no more doth the Word justifie any Jewes or Gentiles but with respect to actuall Faith And as every one 's own faith inrighteth to life so everyones own faith inrighteth to the priviledges of life Silvanus It is true the Gospel holdeth forth Abraham for a Father and so for a root both to Jews and Gentiles that believe Rom. 4.11 12. But in Rom. 11.16 the Apostle holdeth forth Abraham as the root of the Jews who were his naturall branches not by faith as you would have it but by naturall generation through grace borne under his Covenant in opposition to the Gentiles yea to the believing Gentiles For he maketh the rejection of the Jews a meanes of the conversion of the Gentiles and the conversion of the Gentiles a meanes of the conversion of the Jewes at last and the conversion of the Jewes a meanes of awakening and reviving of the Gentiles verse 15. And this he proveth from the holinesse of their root Abraham and thereupon inferreth the calling on of the Jews unto holinesse verse 16. And though for the present the Jews be as branches broken off through their infidelity and the Gentiles by faith received into their place verse 17. yet he exhorteth them not to boast against the Jews verse 18. nor to be high minded in themselves verse 20. For if the Gentiles which had been branches of the olive tree wilde by nature were contrary to nature graffed into the good olive tree then much more shall the Jewes which are the naturall branches be graffed into their owne Olive tree verse 24. which argueth evidently that he speaketh of the Jewes as the naturall branches of Abraham and that not by faith for then why were they broken off as it is said God spared not the naturall branches verse 21. but by naturall generation borne through grace both of the Ioynes and Covenant of Abraham and so their conversion is inferred to proceed more kindly and naturally then did the conversion of the Romans and other Gentiles For they were not cut off from the wilde olive as the Gentiles were but onely broken off from the good olive for a season that they might much more readily and freely bee graffed into their owne olive againe to wit with much more liberty and free passage of grace in the channell of the Covenant Again it is not true that you say that