Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	believe_v	faith_n	lord_n	1,391	5	3.9699	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47399	[The ax laid to the root, or, One blow more at the foundation of infant baptism and church-membership containing an exposition of that metaphorical text of Holy Scripture, Mat. 3, 10].	Keach, Benjamin, 1640-1704.	1693 (1693)	Wing K48_pt2; ESTC R20690	57,342	56

the Remission of ●ins and bringing forth Fruits worthy of amendment of Life see our la●●●●notators on the place They tell you in that lay their great Sin and th●●● not submitting to Baptism as a Testimony of such a Repentance 〈◊〉 say they the Baptism of Iohn in Scripture signifieth his whole Administration or the Doctrine he Preached as well as the Ordinance of 〈◊〉 by him Administred and so must be interpreted where our Saviour ask'd the Pharisees whether the Baptism of John was from Heaven or of Men and they durst not say from Heaven lest Christ should have ask'd them why then do ye believe him not they were not baptized of him is the same thing with they would be none of his Disciples they did then like as some ungodly Persons do now reject the Counsel of God against themselves in not partaking of the Ordinance of the Lord's Supper yet their bare rejection of that is not so much their Sin and Guilt as their not believing repenting or imbracing of Jesus Christ or obtaining those previous and antecedent Qualifications required of all such who ought to come to that Sacred Ordinance Obj. It is said the People ask'd him What shall we do and whether were it some for all or every individual who can tell And if the Adult did speak and the Children could not were not the Parents to take care that they might have the means to flye from Wrath to come as well as themselves and to be taught to take God's Way as well as themselves it being after Baptism and was there any question to be made but they would take Care about this if they were truly awakened And especially when the Children's Names were as expresly in John's Commession as the Parents And if they did not take Care about them was it not their Sin and their grievous Sin too against the express declared Will of God concerning them Luke 1.17 Mal. 4.6 If he that provideth not for the Bodies of his Children hath denyed the Faith and is worse than an Infidel wh●● notorious Monsters had these People been if when they were awakened to see the Wrath of God in the fire of Hell coming in upon them should not take Care th●● it might be prevented from their Children as well as from themselves pag. 50. Answ. Such Blindness is enough to afflict the Soul of any enlightned Person 't is evident this Man concludes the External Rite of Baptism o● a bare Subjection to that Ordinance was the very means to escape the Wrath of God and eternal Burning in Hell and not only for Infants but the Adult likewise whereas I find no sound and understanding Protestant of his Judgment nor doth he produce either Scripture or solid Reason for what he asserts could he prove that to baptize Childre● or the Adult would save their Souls from God's Wrath or Hell-fire ce●●tainly all would be notorious Monsters that would not endeavour to pe●●swade all Heathens Turks and Pagans in the World to be baptized or n●● take care to baptize their Infants but alas we know that for 〈◊〉 Person to be baptized who is not regenerated it will avail him nothing 〈◊〉 no more than Simon Magus his Baptism did him 'T is not Circumcision av●●●ed nor Uncircumcision but a new Creature Answ. 2. But before he had gone so far as to assert the great Profit of I●●fant-Baptism and the dreadful Danger and Sin of Parents in not baptiz●● them he should have proved that God doth Enjoin or command 〈◊〉 thing of Parents viz. to see their Children baptized for where there 〈◊〉 Law there is no Trransgression Another Man may argue that the Ordidinance of the Sacred Supper of our Lord is a means or way for our Children to escape the Wrath of God and so charge Parents to bring them to that Sacrament as well as to that of Baptism Sir The Fault and Sin of Parents lies not where you place it but in that when they are grown up they neglect to teach them their Duty of looking out for a changed Heart or to get Faith and Repentance or to obtain an Interest in Jesus Christ for there is no other way to escape the Wrath of God for our selves nor our Children when grown up but by Christ alone as he is received through Faith and whosoever do not so take Care of their Childrens Souls are greatly guilty before God but to baptize them since there is no Warrant for it no Command from God no President or Example in all the Sacred Scripture that would but bring great Guilt upon their own Heads add thou not to his words lest he prove thee and thou art found a Liar Answ. 3. You abuse that Holy Text Mal. 4.6 Luke 1.17 Iohn had no Infants in his Commission tho' he was to turn the Hearts of the Fathers to the Children and the Hearts of the Children to the Fathers yet Children there doth not mean Infants for it must be such Children whose Hearts were turned from their Parents and who were capable to hear and and understand Iohn's Doctrine and so to be convinced of their Evil in having their Hearts set against their Parents the meaning is that Iohn was to Preach both to Young and Old who were arrived to Understanding and to turn them to the Lord and one to another Obj. If their Confession was a Confession of true Penitents then this Repentance was wrought in them before the Holy Ghost was poured upon them or before they were baptized with the Holy Ghost by Christ and how could that be pag. 51. Answ. 1. Doth this Man think that there was no true Conversion wrought by the Preaching of Iohn Baptist nor by Christ himself or his Apostles until the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit were given which was not till after the Resurrection and Assension of our Blessed Saviour he that will heed such a Writer let him for by this Argument the Holy Apostles were not true Penitents until they were baptised with the Holy Ghost and yet did not Christ tell them they were clean tho' not all Ioh. 13.10 and that they who then believed in him had Everlasting Life Ioh. 5. According to this Man's Notion Christ had no Disciples indeed or no true Penitent and sincere Disciples until after his Ascension Answ. 2. 'T is evident that the Baptism of the Holy Ghost did not re●ferr to the saving Graces of the Spirit which are in all Believers but to those visible miraculous and extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghost which were only given to some Persons in the Primative Time to confirm the Gospel and to discover the Glory of Jesus Christ upon his Ascension into Heaven The Baptism of the Spirit signifies that great Effusion of the Holy Ghost like that at Pentecost Act. 21.2 3. Casaubon speaking of that Text Act. 1.45 Ye shall be baptized wit●●● Holy Spirit c shews that the Greek Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to dip or pl●●● as it were to die Colours in which Sence saith he the Apostles ●●● be truly said to have been baptized for the House in which this ●●● done was filled with the Holy Ghost so that the Apostles might ●●● to have been plunged into it as in a large Fish-Pond all were not ●●● the Apostles days baptized with the Holy Spirit let this Author shew ●●● he can that the Word Baptizo signifies to sprinkle with the Spirit or pro●●● that the weakest Christian in Grace can be said to be baptized with th●●● Holy Spirit Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days henc● c. is not applicable to every particular Believer but to the Apostles t● whom principally our Saviour spoke those Words and to some others ●●● whom those extraordinary Gifts should be given afterward Obj. But this would argue that then those that John baptized were ●●● Penitents which is contrary to Christ's own Words Mat. 11 2.7.1● to 25. Answ. There appears in those Texts he cites no such thing that he affirm● but he takes a Liberty to say any thing so far as I can see no doubt ●●● Iohn took great Care to baptize only such who were True Penitents sin●● he required so severely Fruits meet for Repentance of such that came to ●●● Baptism tho' no doubt he might be mistaken in some of them as P●●● was in Simon Act. 8. tho' he sent some of his Disciples to Jesus to be f●●●ther Confirmed in the certain Belief that he was the true Messias that ●●● to come Nor doth Christ's Words imply as this Man signifies in p. 53. that Ioh●● Disciples had bad ends in going out into the Wilderness to see and he●● him tho' some of the Multitude might probably go out of Curiosity ●● for other ends c. How Mr. Exell or any other Man can rationally deny a Confession ●●● necessary or doubt whether such a Confession was required before Baptism viz. of that Faith and Repentance they then had I see not for he ●●●poseth that Iohn baptized them tho' ungodly and without Faith or the ●●● thereof appearing telling them they should afterwards believe in ●●● that was to come whereas 't is evident he required Faith and Repentance immediately of them as antecedent to Baptism but I shall proceed no further O! when shall this Controversie cease doubtless none have just Cause ●● blame us to defend that which we believe to be a precious Truth of Chri●● when so many still appear to deny it and write against it The Lo●● open their Eyes and send Love and Union amongst all t●● Lord's People Amen FINIS * I am forced to repeat this Answer again also you have is at large in Rector Rectified in Answer to Mr. Burket Pag. 108 109 110.

Mr. Cary as if it was impossible for the Saints to be under the Covenant of Works under the former Dispensation and yet in the Covenant of Grace for I would know Whether or not they were not at that time under the Ministration of that Covenant but what tho' no sooner did they believe in Christ the Promised Seed but they were delivered from the Curse of the Law Nor is this any strange Thing For are not all now in these Days under the Dispensation of the Gospel yet untill Men and Women believe in Christ they abide still under the Curse of the Law of the First Covenant for Christ is not the end of the Law to all the World so as some erroneously assert i. e. all are justified in God's sight from the Curse of the Law but he is only the end of the Law touching Righteousness to every one that beleiveth to them and to no other Adult Person Therefore Men might be under the outward Dispensation of the Law of Works and yet through Faith be Justified and also others may be and are now under the Dispensation of the Gospel and yet for not believing in Christ be Condemned and under the Curse of the Law For the Gospel is not the Cause of our Sickness but our Cure none believing is the refusal of the Medicine So that there 's no Reason for him to say because we assert this That the Godly under that Dispensation hung mid-way betwixt Life and Death Justification and Condemnation and after Death mid-way betwixt Heaven and Hell p. 180. Therefore as all that lived under the Dispensation of the Law or Covenant of Works were saved by Faith in the Promise of Christ or by the Covenant of Grace Abraham saith our Saviour saw my Day and was glad so without Faith or Interest in Christ such that live under the Dispensation of the Gospel cannot be saved nor are they delivered from the Curse of the Law or Covenant of Works Therefore to conclude with this 't is evident the Covenant of Works though but one as to the substance of it yet there was several Ministrations of it as it was given also upon different Ends and Designs by the Lord And therefore because the said Covenant of Works was first given to Adam by vertue of which he was accepted and justified in his Innocency Could not God give forth a Second Addition Ministration or Transcript of his Righteousness and Holy Law requiring perfect Obedience though not to Justification yet to aggravate their Sin and so to their just Condemnation And doth not the Apostle assert the same Thing Rom. 3.19 20. compared with Rom. 7.13 Gal. 3.19 But saith Bishop Usher Quest. Doth not God wrong to Men to require of him that he is not able to perform Answ. He Answers No for God made Man so that he might have performed it but he by Sin spoiled himself and Posterity of those Gifts Therefore To proceed I do affirm That always generally when the Apostle speaks of the Old Covenant or Covenant of Works he passes by in silence the Covenant made with Adam and more immediately and directly applies it unto the Sinai Covenant and to that of Circumcision as all careful Readers who read the Epistles to the Romans Galatians and to the Hebrews may clearly find And farther to evince the Truth we contend for 't is evident That although there is and ever was but one Covenant of Grace yet nothing is more plain then that there were several distinct Additions of it altho' we say the Promise or Gospel Covenant was one and the same in all Ages in respect of the Things promised with the Nature and Quality thereof which is a free and absolute Covenant without Works or Conditions of foreseen Acts of Obedience or Righteousness done by the Creature whatsoever Rom. 4.5 The Substance and Essential Part of this Gospel Covenant as to the Promises of it is Christ Faith a New Heart Regeneration Remission of Sins Sanctification Perseverance and everlasting Life Yet this Evangelical Covenant had divers Forms Additions or Transcripts of it which signified those Things and the various Sanctions by which it was given forth and confirmed To Adam the Promise of it was under the Name Of the Seed of the Woman bruising the Head of the Serpent To Enoch Noah c. in other Terms To Abraham under the Name of His Seed in whom all the Nations of the Earth should be blessed To Moses by the Name of A great Prophet among his Brethren and it was signified also unto him under dark Shadows and Sacrifices Unto David under the Name of A Successour in his Kingdom To other Prophets more clearer still made known Unto as a Child is born a Woman shall compass a Man a New Covenant I will make c In the New Testament in plain Words We all with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord 2 Cor. 3.18 But now because there were so many Additions or Ministrations of the Gospel or New Covenant Doth it follow there are so many New Covenants This being so Mr. Flavel hath done nothing to remove Mr. Cary's Arguments but they stand firm For he says not That the Sinai Ministration of the Covenant of Works was ordained to justifie Mankind nor was it possible it could after a Man had sinned and yet in its Nature an absolute Covenant of Works or do for Life or Perish The Man that doeth these Things shall live in them Obj. 9. Circumcision could not oblige the Iews in its own Nature to keep the whole Law because Paul Circumcised Timothy If in the very Nature of the Act it had bound Timothy to keep the Law for Iustification how could it have been Paul's Liberty so to do saith Mr. Flavel which he asserts it was Gal. 2.3 4. p. 226. Answ. 1. That Circumcision did oblige the Jews to keep the whole Law is evident Gal. 5.3 and as I hinted before our Learned Annotators on the said place speak the same Thing positively Take more largely their very Words They were obliged to one Part of the Law they must be obliged to all other Parts of it besides that Circumcision was an owning and professing Subjection to the whole Law c. Obj. But did not the Fathers then by being Circumcised acknowledge themselves Debtors to the Law he Answers Yes they did acknowledge themselves bound to the observation of it and to endure upon the breaking of it the Curse of it but they were discharged from that Obligation by believing in Christ who was made a Curse for them that he might redeem them from the Curse of the Law Thus Pool's Annotations 2. But as to Paul's Circumcising Timothy it was when he knew Circumcision was abolished and therefore it could not oblige him Paul well knew to keep the Law Sith no Law in its own Nature can oblige any Person according to the Nature and Quality of it when 't is abrogated and in no force tho' he saw

main Argument pag. 2 3. to prove the Minor thus he argues viz. 2. That Principle which makes the Covenant of Grace less beneficial and extensive than the Covenant of Works hinders the Propagation of the Christian Religion but the former Principle does so Ergo To prove the Minor of this Argument he adds another viz. That Principle which allows not as great Immunities Benefits and Privileges to the Covenant of Grace as to the Covenant of Works makes the Covenant of Grace less beneficial and extensive than the Covenant of Works but the Principle that denies Baptism to Infants does so Ergo. Answ. 1. This Gentleman calls these Rational Arguments but I have nothing but his own word for it but to proceed he should have shewed what those Immunities and Benefits were in the Covenant o● Works which we by denying Infants Baptism render the Privileges of the Covenant of Grace to be less than those were but do you not intimate hereby that Circumcision belonged to the Covenant of Works and if so in vain do you urge Circumcision as a Privilege and also since the Covenant of Works is abrogated what is there in your Arguments for the baptizing of Infants For all Iewish Rites and Privileges may be forced upon the Christian World by this Argument of yours or else we may say the Privileges of the Gospel are less than the Privileges of the Iews under the Covenant of Works which I have already answered 2. His mentioning that Passage of Calvin is remote to his purpose he speaks of the Covenant of Grace made with Abraham not of the Covenant of Works which we say is not curtail'd by Christ's coming but is every way as extensive now as it was from the beginning but we have proved that there was a Two-fold Covenant made with Abraham and that Circumcision did appertain to his Natural Seed as such and so part of the legal Covenant Obj But the Commission Mat. 28.19 you say is as full or rather more beneficial and extensive than the Covenant of Works and consequently that the baptizing of Infants is a Christian Duty for had there been as general a Commission given by Moses to Twelve Elders of Israel as the Blessed Iesus gave to his Disciples and it had been said to them Go teach all Nations Circumcising them this had been no Prohibition to Circumcise the Iewish Children c. Ans. 1. Is this that the Mountains have brought forth we were big in Expectation by your Title Page wondering what new Notion or Arguments you had found out from the Commission Mat. 28.19 20. or what your different Method should be to prove Infant Baptism But truly Sir the Log is still too heavy you cannot lift it up I see nothing new in your whole Tract nor any thing but what has been answered but this being the main Pin upon which all hangs I shall give a brief Reply to you 1. I thank you for your plain and just Concession I see you conclude and grant Circumcision did belong to the Covenants or Works I doubt not but you are right so far and with that your Cause is gone and Calvin and all that came after him have said nothing in calling Circumcision a Gospel Covenant 2. But Sir suppose the People of Israel had never been commanded by the Lord to Circumcise their Children till Moses came and Moses had given such a Commission that you mention viz. to teach all Nations Circumcising them do you think they would have had ground from thence to have circumcised their Infants whereas his Circumcision required the teaching of all Nations first before they were circumcised of which Infants were not capable 3. 'T is evident that our Saviour in his Great Commission enjoineth no more to be baptized but such who are first taught or made Disciples and this agrees with his own Practice Joh. 4.1 he made and baptized more Disciples than John he first made them Disciples and then baptized them nor were there any baptized in the New Testament but such who first professed Faith in the Lord Jesus See our Answer to Mr. Burkit which I sent you Also our Answer to the Athenian Society this is there fully spoken unto 4. If the Commission be so extensive as you intimate Why do you not go or stir up some Ministers to go into all Heathen and Pagan Nations and Baptise them and their Children and so that way make them all Christians You may teach them the Christian Doctrine i. e. Faith and Repentance afterwards as you do your Children but the Truth is there is no need to teach them afterwards the way of Faith and Regeneration if your Doctrine be true because the chief Thing they received in Baptism you say is divine Grace viz. Regeneration Adoption and a Title to the Inheritance of eternal Life p. 20. Sure those divine Habits can never be lost Reader take what this Man says farther on this Respect Obj. But you say we neither regard nor consider the chief Thing in Baptism viz. The Testification or Witness of the divine Benevolence taking them into Covenant Protection and Patronage and conferring and bestowing Grace upon them for in Baptism the chief Thing is divine Grace which consists and stands in the remission pardon and forgiveness of Sins in Adoption or Sonship and in a Right and Title to the Inheritance of Eternal Life of which Grace Infants stand in need and are as capable as the Adult c. p. 20. Answ. This is such Doctrine that few Paedo-Baptists besides your self do assert or believe but What Proof do you give us to confirm it from God's Word You say right we do not regard it indeed Doth Baptism do all this 'T is wonderful How conferr Grace and give Pardon and Eternal Life You Ministers of the Church of England if this be so can do as strange things as the Popish Priests in Transubstantiation you can by sprinkling a little Water on the Face of a Babe it appears change the evil and vitious Habits form Christ in the Soul raise the Dead to Life and of a Child of Wrath make a Child of God It grieves me to think a Man called a Minister of the Gospel should teach such corrupt Doctrine and deceive the Ignorant For as it is without Scripture-Evidence nay contrary to it for God's Word that tells us Baptism washes not away the Filth of the Flesh that is the Corruption of depraved Nature so 't is contrary to Reason and without any rational Demonstration as Reverend Stephen Charnock tho' a Paedo-Baptist shews Many Men saith he take Baptism for Regeneration The Ancients usually give it this Term one calls our Saviour's Baptism his Regeneration This conferrs not Grace but engageth to it outward Water cannot convey inward Life How can Water an external Thing work upon the Soul in a Physical manner neither can it be proved That ever the Spirit of God is tyed by any Promise to apply himself to the Soul in gracious Opperations when