Selected quad for the lemma: conscience_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
conscience_n	draw_v	evil_a	sprinkle_v	1,134	5	10.3564	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A94166	A Christian, sober & plain exercitation on the two grand practicall controversies of these times; infant baptism and singing of psalms Wherein all the scriptures on both sides are recited, opened and argued, with brevity and tenderness: and whatever hath been largely discussed by others, briefly contracted in a special method for the edification of the saints. By Cuthbert Sidenham, teacher to a church of Christ in Newcastle upon Tine.	Sydenham, Cuthbert, 1622-1654.	1653 (1653)	Wing S6291; Thomason E1443_1; ESTC R209635	113,076	235

hurt though they plunge themselves into the water in frost and snow but it 's dangerous to tempt God out of his ordinary way of preservation when there is no absolute necessity for such a practice Besides this Ordinance would be a greater yoke and burthen then Circumcision if this rule of theirs should be so universally followed for there was no danger to the Child by that act though it seemed bloody and hard But if all persons for none are excluded by any weakness or indisposition should be thus baptized how eminent a danger would many be in And if it prove so hazardous to the bodies of many healthy ones that have in winter time but accidentally fallen into the water though they have not been under water that it hath cost them their lives the violence of cold so piercing their bodies and animal spirits of which we have many experiences how would it be for others who labour under daily weakness And there is no promise that the water shall have no power to hurt those which after this manner are baptized no more then others Flesh and blood is the same in all which is the immediate subject of such an act and God doth proportion his Ordinances to keep correspondency with his other rules of mercy and prescriptions for use of means In a word if this be the only way of baptizing happy are those that live in hot Countreys or have bodies of brass It 's said if it be an Ordinance God will preserve but that is the question and that which demonstrates it is not the only way if it be a way at all it is That it crosseth Gods rules for preservation of a mans self the practice of it at some times being a kind of a degree of self-murther and very unsutable to the laws of mercy and tenderness that command the very heart of Christ and such an absolute unqualified command doth not look like an Ordinance of the Gospel For if baptizing be immediatly to be practised after believing according to their principles then what should hinder water that they may not be baptized Suppose they be sick and weak suppose the season be unsutable and yet the soul desires to be baptized You must either go against all rules of nature to plunge that person or else find out some other way of baptizing or else a Gospel command must be neglected for there is nor precept nor president of delay of that Ordinance still to their own positions in all the New Testament and so both the baptizer and baptized must sin in performance of a duty for the one sins if he by any pretence destroys his own health and the other sins in being an instrument in it I wish men were considerate of the nature and effects of these things which if it were more commonly practised we should have heaps of instances to make good this consideration 2. It 's very much to be observed that Christ who hath bid us avoid all appearance of evil should ordain any Ordinance wherein there must needs be some such appearance fit for flesh and blood to act on I have so much modesty as only to present this how women take it in what habit you will can be baptized publickly where all may come with men and by men without appearance of evil And if the Apostle would have women to be vailed or covered in the Congregation because of the Angels take it either literally or tropically to shew the modesty of Church-Assemblies and to prevent any shadow of temptation how can we think that it 's sutable to Apostolical rule that women should appear in the open air out of their wonted habit in a garment next to nakedness and so be plunged into water But I am loth to enter into these secrets I only propound this Whether or no that this baptism by plunging be not rather a baptizing of mens cloaths and upper garments then of the body if the person baptized be not naked and if he or she be how odious a custome would that be I cannot but think that that part that is baptized ought to be naked that the water may immediatly fall on that place else something else must be baptized primarily and the flesh secondarily and by consequence This is the reason why we only pour water on the face because it 's the principallest part wherein the image of God most appears and the soul shines forth most eminently on which all the workings of mens humors and affections leave the visiblest impression and symptoms And it 's observable that the same word in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies both the face and the person because the whole person is represented by the face And thus we baptize the person in baptizing his face which we can look on and wash naked and not be ashamed Let these men that are so zealous for dipping and plunging the whole body consider from all this what warrant they have from Scripture for their so much rigid confidence CHAP. XVI An explication of that place Heb. 10.22 About washing the whole body with pure water the improper application of it to their manner of baptizing by plunging the whole body AFter all strainings and shifts of the Antipedo baptists this place in Heb. 10.22 is forced in to give evidence for that manner of baptizing formerly so much contended for Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water from hence they infer baptizing must be by dipping and plunging or washing the body throughout Let us review it with it 's context and we shall find they chew but upon a dry bone For First the scope of the Apostle in all this chapter is not in the least to discover the manner of baptizing but to open two things 1. The fulness of the satisfaction and merit of Christs offering himself and being a sacrifice for remission of sins in opposition to all Legal and shadowy offerings as appears from the 1. v. unto the 29. which was begun to be demonstrated in the former chapters especially the 9. chap. 2. To encourage souls in their approaches to God on such a glorious account now in the New Testament so in the 19. ver Having therefore boldness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or freedome to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus by a new and living way c. In this 22. v. he bids them draw nigh with a true heart and ful assurance of faith c. Secondly that his scope or intent is not to open the manner of baptizing is evident for he writes to those that were baptized already as these Hebrews were for you have no controversie in this Epistle about circumcision and baptism as in the Rom. Gall. Phil Colos but only concerning Christs priestly Office especially compared with the Levitical Aaronical Priesthood and the virtue of Legal-ceremonial sacrifices and the sacrifice

of Jesus Christ as High-priest as any one that runs may read now either they must say these were not baptized before or else must conclude that his design is not to inform them and that so transiently of the nature or manner of administring of that Ordinance Thirdly the Apostle here doth directly instruct the soul how to make confident addresses to God viz. from the sense of our justification and sanctification together for so by our hearts being sprinkled from an evil conscience is meant and can be meant no other then Christs blood sprinkled on our souls in the assurance of our absolution from sin and the washing with pure water no more but by this outward expression of the purity of our conventions as to sanctification that we may not come with scandal of external unholiness when we pretend to be justified by Christs blood Fourthly the usual word is here left out which expresseth that Ordinance and it is your bodies not baptized but washed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a clear allusion to that of Levit 16.4 from whence it seems to be excerpted when Aaron the high-Priest was to enter into the holy place and before he was to be attired for that work it is said He shall wash his flesh in water and so put them on the 70. translate the words thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He shall wash his whole bodie with water to signifie the holiness he should have in his person as from external publick pollutions the very same intent of the Apostle is here that if we would be confident before God when we approach unto God we must come with Christs blood on our consciences and no known pollution on out conversations and if we will follow their grounds from comparing these two places we may conclude that baptism was as much an Ordinance of the Old Testament as the New for washing the body was used in both Fifthly it is a usual phrase in Scripture to express the sanctification of our persons from inward outward defilements by the washing of water and washing the body yet not in the least to hint out the manner of baptizing by water as into the special administration of that Ordinance thus in Esa 1.16 when God saith to his backsliding people wash you make you clean must he needs mean go and be baptized but that outward expression is put for the reforming of their wayes and expounded by putting away the evil from their doings or works thus in Ioh. 13. Christ expresseth justification and sanctification by washing in general and then washing the feet he that is washed which is not baptized for Christ saith he must wash or else Peter could have no part in him and Christ did not baptize such a one need no more but to wash his feet that is walk holily so that here is washing and washing of the feet and yet neither meant of baptizing nor washing Thus likewise in the Corinthians it is said as to their sanctification Now you are washed now you are cleansed now you are justified he means not Now you are baptized but of the special purification of their hearts and lives from their former pollutions of flesh and spirit which though signified by baptism yet so remotely as no man can gather the constant method of external baptism from it Sixthly he saith your bodies washed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with clean or pure water now I hope as to baptizing none are so foolish as to stand on it whether they be baptized after a rain when the water is puddled or whether only in pure and crystal streams from an unpuddled spring or ocean and yet they must be tied to the one as the other if this Text be their president and we may as well question from this Text whether they be rightly baptized if there be any mud or slime or filth in the water as whether we baptized if all our bodies be not washed but now this expression to set forth holiness and sanctification is most apt and full of life our hearts and conversations in drawing nigh unto God should be as if externally they were washed with clean water transparent and spotless before him shining with an Evangelical brightness and spiritual purity for it will be very hard to draw nigh to God with a good conscience and a tainted and besmeared body or conversation with unholy acts whereby God is so much dishonoured especially to come as the Apostle saith in the former part of the verse with a true heart and full assurance of faith Seventhly if he had meant by this washing of the body baptizing he would not have made such a disproportion according to their own rule between the sign and thing signified for he speaks of the heart being only sprinkled and yet the body washed with clean water now if baptism doth not signifie and seal justification as well as sanctification it is not a seal of the Covenant of grace and if it do signifie it cannot go beyond the thing signified in expression and outward representation And if Christs blood in Heb. 12.24 be called the blood of sprinkling and it be one of the main things signified and sealed in baptism well may we answer it by an outward act without offence or sin Eighthly grant that by washing the body is meant baptizing here which you see cannot be extorted by violence or extracted by any chymical virtue yet it will not serve their turns For First the body is said to be washed when any one or more of the principal parts in sight or use are washed what is done to any eminent or commanding part it carries the denomination of the whole with it for Maries annointing and washing of Christs head and feet in Luke 7.44.45 is interpreted in Iohn 11.2 for the anointing of the Lord as much as if she had done it to all his body throughout though it is only exprest in the former place of the anointing and washing his head and feet This is most usual in Scripture Secondly if they will go to the strictness of the term of washing the body then First it must be washed naked or else it is not a a washnig of the body Secondly it must not be a bare dipping or plunging into water but some other act must be done with the body viz. a rinsing or rubbing as we do pots or cloaths which we wash which are not said to be washed because dipt under water but so rinsed as the filth and dirt is taken out I only urge this to shew the inevitable inconveniences these men will bring on themselves by such interpretations of Scripture Many other considerations might be added if this Tract would bear the weight of them CHAP. XVII A short summing up of the former principles and arguing them from the method of the Apostle Peter about those he baptized Acts 10.47 THat we may bring up all unto a full conclusion let that place be considered Acts 10.47 and the manner

Scripture nothing must be read but the very bare characters for to draw any deductions from it is to no purpose though never so direct and full for if they be not Scripture they cannot bind consciences and to what end is preaching but to open and apply Scripture 6. The searchings of the Scripture were the most useless undertaking that could be imagined for what need I search but read for no consequence by comparison of Scripture is of authority to satisfie my conscience if I draw a conclusion from a text and perceive the meaning of it to be thus if nothing without it be laid down in so many syllables how many such strange absurdities would follow the denying consequences from Scripture which are purely deducted and by this principle that where there are not so many letters put together in one sentence there is no command men would soon draw Religion into a very narrow compass 7. This would be as much against themselves For First They have no command in so many words Go and baptize actual or visible believers if they say such were baptized it 's answered that is not to the purpose for it 's a verball command required by them to give warrant to an ordinance Secondly That they must prove by consequence also believers were baptized Ergo there was a command Neither Thirdly Can they prove one act concerning their own form of baptizing by any command but by consequences When they say Infants are not to be baptized they draw it from consequence thus because there is no command in their sense When they affirm the Covenant is not made with believers now and their seed as with Abraham it 's drawn by consequence because say they Abraham is no natural father to us as to the Jews and because that covenant was a mixt Covenant c. When they come to prove baptizing to be by plunging they argue by consequence because the word signifies it because they went where much water was and went down into the water c. though they are mistaken in all their consequences as I shall hereafter shew yet this is full ad hominem and against themselves who deny consequences to warrant institutions and yet have nothing for to prove their own way but what is by consequence from Scripture 8. It 's common among the Apostles to argue in such a method and to deduce one thing from another to make out what they intended 2 Cor. 5.14 We thus judge if Christ died for all then all are dead if the first be true then the latter so 1 Cor. 15.13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20. and all that Chapter arguing out the resurrection by fit mediums so about the Ordinance of Baptism Acts 10.47 Can any man forbid water why these should not be baptized who have received the holy Ghost as well as we There was never any command to baptize these that had received the holy Ghost nor any example of any baptized on these terms but the Apostle argues from the equivalency of the mercy and the reason of the state they were in the same method he uses 1 Cor. 10.15 16 17 18. 1 Tim. 5.17 18. 9. There will be hardly found a definition of the most doctrinal and high mysteries of the Gospel but by comparing Scripture with Scripture and so making it forth by consequence what perfect definition of justification or of justifying faith in so many formall expressions in all the N. T. but what must be deducted by comparing Scriptures together to make one result where are women either by such a wordy expression commanded to receive the Lords Supper or any example if they say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies both sexes yet it 's still by consequence no command or example and why not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as fit to signifie Infant-Saints as grown Saints Infant-holiness as perfect holiness it's applyed to both if they will stick at a syllable we may stick with them on the same grounds 10. Deny consequences to have the strength of commands and you will leave very few duties to be practis'd or sins to be avoided in the Old or New Testament Expound the ten Commandments the sum of the Law without consequences and very few shall be found literal transgressors but most desperate debauched persons Mat. 5. Christ expounds the whole Law and by consequences from the inward meaning draws out new considerations of duties and since the Bible is but a short systeme of Religion every place is fitted to expound each other and this must be done by rational-spiritual comparisons and inferences but enough to the first consideration on this head of commands and consequences 2. Where we have a promise laid as the foundation of a duty that is equivalent to any express command for as commands in the Gospel do suppose promises to encourage us to act them and help us in them so promises made to persons do include commands especially when the duties commanded are annexed to the promises as all New Testament Ordinances are as well as Old 3. We have as much in the N. T. to prove Infant-baptism from the true principles of right to Ordinances as they have for these whom they baptize for they baptize grown persons on such and such considerations and we shall hereafter shew we baptize on as strong and equivalent grounds and that 's enough to warrant a command to demonstrate the same substantial grounds of the command to reach the same case 4. If we can find no positive command in so many words for their baptizing shewing the same fundamental grounds it 's requisite they should shew us some express command to the contrary and some authentique repeal seeing Infants so long enjoyed such a like Ordinance upon the same grounds Christ would not have taken away such an antient priviledge when his grace abounded and super-abounded but he would have left some characters of it in the Gospel and entred some formal discharge in his Word of such persons and given a warning of it to the Gentile believers to expect it but he hath both by his words and carriages left clear demonstrations that he is so far from repealing as he confirms it to Infants let the Scriptures opened hereafter speak to this The third Consideration premised is this as all that they urge as to examples of actual believers being baptized all along the New Testament especially the Acts and that if thou believest thou mayst c. we can freely grant without any damage to this truth For 1. We say as they professing believers grown men were first baptized and so they ought to be who are to be the first subjects of the administration of an Ordinance persons able to give an account of their own faith it was so with Abraham Gen. 17 24. he was 99 years old when he was circumcised and he must be first circumcised before he could convey a right to his seed now you may as well argue Abraham was first circumcised when so