Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	church_n	member_n	visible_a	6,329	5	9.5436	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A41786	The quæries examined, or, Fifty anti-queries seriously propounded to the people called Presbyterians Occasioned by the publication of Fifty queries, gathered out of the works of Mr. Rich. Baxter. By J. B. Wherein the principal allegations usually brought to support infant-baptism are discovered to be insufficient. By T. G.	Grantham, Thomas, 1634-1692.	1676 (1676)	Wing G1543A; ESTC R223637	27,933	56

Earth are con●●●n'd in it and then whether we do not sufficiently comprize the ●●ntiles therein But how can Abrahams Rites and C●remonie● be part of this blessing to the Gentiles which are abrogated long ago Presbyterian Query 21 Whether the second Commandment Exod. 20 5 6. doth not contain a standing Promise and discove●y of Gods Resolution concerning the children of all that love him whether Jews or Gentiles to whom this Commandment belongs whether God meaneth not that his Retribution to Parents that love or hate him shall extend to their children as such unless they interrupt it at Age by their own Acts and if to their children qua tales then whether not to Infants Baptist Ant. 21. Whoever doubted but that Infants are advantaged many ways in the blessings which God bestows on them that fear him and accordingly greatly disadvantaged by the wickednefs of their Pa●●nts even so as to bear their Fathers iniquities many times as is evident in the overthrow of the old world the Cities of Sodom and Samorrah c. yet whether the blessing or mercy of eternal life to ●nfants depend upon the Parents love to God And whether the ●amnation of Infants depend on the wickedness of their Parents ●nd whether the bless●ngs of the second Commandment belong 〈◊〉 to the Church as such or whether all men that follow the ●ules of Morality are not within the reach of these blessings also ●nd then how should Infant Church membership and Baptifm be 〈◊〉 blessings of the second Commandment seeing this Law concerns 〈◊〉 men as m●n being part of the Moral Law and is not proper to ●he Church only Presbyterian Query 22. VVhether any without the Church are secured of Gods mercy by P●omise And whether mercy be not Promised to the children of the F●ithsul as such See P●al 102. 28. and 103. 17. Prov. 20. 7. Isa 61. 8 9 and 65 23 c Baptist Antiqu. 22. Whether God hath not said that his ways are all equal And whether this do not secure Infants of Gods mercy though not baptized for otherwise we say Infants are of the Redeemed Church when God saith That the Son shall not bear the iniquity of the Father and every one shall bear his own iniquity whether this be not a promiss of mercy to Infant Children and that in respect of Etern●l Life And whether the Query be not near a kin to that position of the Papists when they say Out of the Church there is no Salva●ion Restraining that word Church to Visible or Actual Professors only And why must these five quotations be applied to Infants only sith the things spoken of these Children Seed or Off-spring are mostly such as are exclusive of Infants Presbyterian Query 23. Whether these Promises in the making of them were limited to a certain time when they were to cease Or whether they have been since revoked Baptist Suppose these Promises yet remain as we doubt not but they do sith they are not entail'd upon the Jewish Nation at least the three first Quotations How will this avail to the point in hand Are all the blessings of God to the Infant Off-spring of those that fear him c. bound up in your supposed Church-membership and Baptism Presbyterian Query 24. If it was on the Jews Rejection of Christ that they were broken off from being Gods People were those thousands of Jews that believed in Christ so broken off If not then whether were not the Children of all believing Jews Church-members in Infancy Or otherwise was it not somewhat else then Vnbelief that brake them off Baptist Antiqu. 24. Whether was those that cried His blood be upon us and our Children thereby rejecting the great Mess●nger of the Covenant ●ustly broken off And whether the renting of the Vail of the Temple did not shew the abrogation of the Covenant and the Legal Ministry whether was Saul broken off when he persecuted the Church causing many to blaspheme And how could the Jews lawfully be married to Christ if Moses was not now removed without being called an Adulteress And then whether those thousands of Jews which believed were not first broken off so as to plead no longer upon this issue We are Abrahams Children we are free-born c. And to look upon Circumcision and whatsoever was gain to them on a legal acco●nt to be loss for Christ or is there any other way to be graffed in to the Church of Christ but by faith Nowtherefore seeing the Jews were in no better case then th● Gentiles Circumcision being now nothing even as uncircumcision was nothing b●ta new creature then whether all the Infants of the Jews now ceas●● to be m●mbers of any visible Church seeing ●heir Parents had de jure lost their Memb●rship Presbyterian Query 25. Were not the Infants of the Christian Jews the day before their Conversion Members of the Jewish Church and of Gods universal Church of which the Jews were but a part and doth it not sound strengely that such Infants as were the day before Members of the Jewish Church and of Gods universal Church should be put out of the Jewish and the whole visible Church by the faith of their Parents or without unbelief Either it was a Mercy to be a Member of the Church or not If it was no mercy then will it not follow that the unbelieving Jews lost nothing by being broken off If it was a mercy how did the Christians Children forfeit it Baptist Antiqu. 25. Whether we have not sufficiently shewed that the Infants of the Jews were now no Members of the Jewish Church that being now abrogated and the Gospel Church state confirmed by the death of Christ and the pouring out of the Holy Ghost neither could two distinct Church states stand together de jure And then whether it be not a great mistake for the Q●aerist to suppose the Jews were a part of Gods universal Church when in truth they were no Church at all and therefore whether the wonder which he makes about the Jews Infants which believed be not groundless And yet whether the Infants of the believing Jews were not in a far better estate then when their Parents were unbelievers sith the Curse they then had imprecated was now removed Also whether it was not a mercy that both Parents and Infants were set free from Circumcision which whatever it was before now ceased to be a mercy to any man because it was an obligation to the yoke of bondage and rendred Christ unprofitable to such as should now receive it and consequently a Release from that Church-Membership according to the Law was a great mercy to Infants who still retain Membership in the invisible Church as they did before Circumcision was in being Presbyterian Query 26. Whether it be credible that he who came not to cast out Jews but to bring in Gentiles breaking down the Partition-wall and making of two one Church would have a Chureh of so different form and constitution that the Church at