Selected quad for the lemma: earth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
earth_n	church_n	invisible_a	visible_a	3,670	5	9.2967	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B20526	The font-guard routed, or, A brief answer to a book written by Thomas Hall superscribed with this title, The font guarded with 20 arguments therein endeavouring to prove the lawfulness of infant baptism wherein his arguments are examined and being weighed in the ballance of the sanctuary are found too light : the most considerble of Mr. Baxters arguments for infant-baptism being produced by Tho. Hall are here answered likewise / written by Tho. Collier ; to which is added A word of reply to Tho. Halls word to Collier and another to John Feriby's [ap]pendix called The pulpit-guard relieved ; with An answer to Richard Sanders's pretended Balm to heal religious wounds, in answer to The pulpit-guard routed : with an humble representation of some few proposals to the honorable committee appointed by the Parliament for propagation of the Gospel.	Collier, Thomas, fl. 1691.	1652 (1652)	Wing C5285; ESTC R5188	90,512	112

ingrafted and bears them up and makes fruitful Whereas you say That by ingraffing in is meant admission into visible communion I say it is not only that but first faith and then admission into visible communion And one word by the way what visible communion are Infants capable of if they may some of them be capable of invisible union and communion with Jesus Christ yet where is their capacity of visible communion with the Church which consists in communicating of experiences in Ordinances fellowship in breaking bread and prayers where is your visible communion of Infants Sir You seem to answer an objection p. 63. Paul speaks of an invisible Church For my part I own no such objection for I know no invisible Church here upon earth for a Church of Christ is a company of believers walking in the visible profession of truth and there should be none in that profession but such as are believers indeed and if any come into the outward without the inward grace they must be plucked up Therefore I own not that distinction of visible and invisible The invisible Church are those out of sight that are departed the visible are those living in the visible profession of truth and these are they which are graffed in Rom. 11. Those that are graffed in truly shall stand and thrive the root Christ bears them They that are but in shew shall fall the root will not bear them because not graffed in by the heavenly Father In all this here is no room for the natural seed I leave it to the Reader to judge The fifteenth Argument From 1 Cor. 7. 14. Else were your children unclean but now are they holy From hence you argue They that are holy with a Covenant-holiness may be baptized But Infants born of one believing Parent are holy with a Covenant-holiness Ergo Such Infants may be baptized Your Major hath been often denied for it s but the substance of what you have often said before and therefore in substance I must answer what I have answered before there is no such thing mentioned in all the New-Testament as a federal holiness viz. an external Covenant-holiness without an internal this being the substance of what you say pag. 65. you confess children only by nature that there is no difference between the childe of a Christian and the childe of an Infidel Yet consider him as believing so he and his are holy he is holy spiritually but are his Infants so too no you confess pag. 62. This caution must be remembred that the holiness you speak of is not personal inherent holiness for this cannot be transmitted to posterity but t is a federal external Covenant-holiness Pray Sir the next time let me know where in the New Testament this same external holiness without the internal is so much spoken of or commended The Lord loveth truth in the inward parts and condemns hypocrisie and hypocrites he condemns the form without the power he owns no Jew but the spiritual no seed but the spiritual the axe is now laid to the root of the Tree every Tree that bringeth not forth good fruit must be cut down Mat. 3. and yet you are all for an outward holiness without the inward which is indeed and truth an abomination unto the Lord. But to come to the Scripture you pretend to ground your Argument from You say The Anabaptists have invented an evasion to avoid the force of the Text that say they it s a matrimonial holiness that they are legitimate and no bastards c. Which I affirm is the truth of the Scripture and shall 1. give some brief answers to what you assert And Secondly set down my reasons for what I affirm 1. You pretend the many absurdities that will follow if it be meant of a civil holiness 1. Then the children of Turks and Pagans born in Matrimony should be holy Answ and why not upon a Matrimonial account more holy that is more lawfull then those born of fornication And whereas you say they are dogs that are without c. It is true that is comparatively to the true Church and Spiritual Seed so are not only Turks and Pagans but most of your Church-members who do the same if not worse works then they only you have perswaded them into an outward Covenant as you and they imagine but that helps not the business 2. It s sin to wicked men what ever they do yet their civil actions are better to them as eating drinking plowing Marriage lawfull procreation of children then the contrary evil actions the Apostle saith that marriage is honourable among all Heb. 13. 4. If among all then among Turks and their children are civilly holy lawfully begotten according to a civil institution though nothing be truly and spiritually holy but to those in Christ it s a Law God hath written in the hearts both of Turks and Indians that they are more conscientious in defiling of the Marriage estate then many of those you call Christians 2. You say The Apostles reason would have no weight with it for their children were legitimate before conversion so he should allow them no more priviledge then meer Infidels have c. The Query is not what they were before conversion but one being converted and the other not the doubt ariseth whether or no the Believer must put away the unbeliever if he or she must do so then the children must be gone too both before and after conversion and this was a Priviledge to the Believer not to be compelled to part with his children though unbelievers had the same in being yet it was not to them such a priviledge for mercy is mercy to a Believer indeed he sees every thing sanctified to him which the unbeliever doth not 3. You say Then all bastards are unholy and must be damned Here is a simple one indeed coming forth from so wise and deep a head as Thomas Hall's 1. Must all be damned of necessity without the holiness you are pleading for 2. Do we or the Scriptures say that Bastards must be damned do you know from whence you have drawn that conclusion your self that Bastards must be damned if that be not a federall holiness but a marriage holiness that their children are legitimate then bastards must be damned Is this your Logick I leave it with you 4. You say The word holy is never used in all the Scripture for legitimation but generally for a thing separated from common use to Gods service c. 1. Thomas Hall shall confute Thomas Hall by and by see pag. 67. he saith That the sanctification of the unbelieving husband to the believing wife is not in respect of his personal condition but in respect of his conjugalrelation though he continue unclean towards God yet to his believing wife in a way of marriage he is sanctified that is he is holy for so the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth and in essence it s the