Selected quad for the lemma: faith_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
faith_n	abraham_n	righteousness_n	seal_n	9,017	5	9.6941	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79488	A Christian plea for Christians baptisme: raised from the grave of apostasie. or, a short treatise, being a reproof of some things written by A. R. in his treatise, intituled, The vanitie of childish baptisme. In the answer whereof, the lawfulnesse of infants baptisme is defended, the sufficiency of our baptisme received in the state of apostasie, shewed: and the deficiencie of the arguments brought against it manifested, by sufficient grounds and reasons drawn from the sweet fountains of holy Scripture. / [by] S.C.	Chidley, Samuel.	1643 (1643)	Wing C3836; Thomason E104_2; ESTC R12174	34,699	39

you conceive you have brought them to such an issue that you say * Pa. 26. you shall now proceed no further therein yet I say except you can make void the covenant of Abraham so much that it doth not appertain to the infants of beleeving parents as well as to the parents themselves and that the application of the Gospel appertaineth not to them also and that the generall commission of Christ includeth not infants which you can never do while the world stands seeing the Scripture in this point is so clear against you I must still say that the baptisme of such infants is lawfull and warrantable yea for as much as it was acted by God a 1. Cor. 10 2 and instituted by Christ b Mat. 28.19 M rk 16.16 it ought to be practised by his Saints perpetually to the end of the world c Mat. 28.20 and the further you go on in gain-saying this truth the greater is your sin For all unbaptised persons to whom the application of the Gospel doth appertain are expresly commanded by Christ to be baptised But the application of the Gospel appertaineth to the infants of beleeving parents Therefore all such infants if they be not alreadie baptised are expresly commanded by Christ to be baptised The first part of this argument is proved from Mar. 16.16 The second namely that the application of the Gospel appertaineth to these infants is proved 1. By the covenant of Abraham which was a covenant of life Gen. 17.7 generally made with Gods visible Church both young and old Secondly by the testimony of Christ that they are part of the furniture of his Fathers kingdome d Mar. 10.13.14 and these vessels though they be but of small quantitie e Isa 22.24 yet they are spiritually holy and therefore have a right to baptisme the signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith as really as the infants of the beleeving Hebrews had right to circumcision the signe and seal of the same righteousnesse of faith Therefore this administring or baptisme upon such holy infants doth not prevent the administring of baptisme upon disciples or beleevers as you falsly speak * Pa. 27. For seeing the infants of beleevers are not placed among dogs and whoremongers without they are within the new Jerusalem and have right to the holy Citie and the priviledges thereof f Rev. 22.14.15 For Jesus Christ who is yesterday to day and the same for ever Hebr. 13 8. never gave them such a dismissi n that they should not be members of his visible Church as heretofore they have been Exod. 12.48 but rather he hath confirmed them therein Jer. 30.20 for all the promises of God are yea and Amen in Christ 2 Cor. 1 20. Therefo●e I desire rather to magnifie the mighty power of God by which the infants of Israel were baptised g 1 Cor. 10 1 2. in the dayes of Moses before the Law was given on mount Sinai h Joh. 7.22 then deny them baptism now in the dayes of the M ssias or call the baptism of such infan●s a device of mans braine and no baptisme of Christ as you have here presumptuously or at least ignorantly done * Pa 28. you plead i Pa. 28 li. 15 16. against the baptising of infants destitute of faith But those infants are the infants of idolatrous parents whom we are not to name among the living in Je●usalem k ●sa 4● till either one or both of their parents repe●t or till they renounce their parents sinne according to that in Ez k 18 14.17 And the baptising of those infants I do not allow of but would have them to be put by but some of them being baptised though not aright shall we say that that baptisme is no baptisme or that it is another baptisme then the baptisme of beleevers no surely there is no more externall baptismes of water then there were externall circumcisions Now if you can prove that there were appointed by God divers externall circumcisions both in respect of the nature end and use therof one circumcision for infants another for elder persons and that the circumcision of infants prevented the circumcision of Beleevers then you may with more colour of truth say that the baptisme of infants preventeth the baptisme of beleevers and make the baptisme of infants a different thing from it which thing you can never do But peradventure you will say by infants here you meane the infants of wicked and idolatrous parents and not the infants of the faithfull To which I answer that then you should have so expressed But I would have you to mind that though the act of baptising idolaters be different from the baptising of true Christians in respect of the manner effect and application thereof yet the baptisme is one and the same even as the circumcising of the apostate Jews and of those that were not Apostates did not argue but that the circumcision was one and the same but differed in the manner of administration and in the application thereof Pa. 28. lin 19. to lin 28. Whereas you say that the baptisme of infants as it is by authoritie ordained in this kingdome doth thus farre prevent the baptising of beleevers that hereby no native can be baptised upon faith seeing all are to be baptised in their infancie when they are destitute of faith wherefore if all other Kingdoms and Nations did the same then the commandment of Christ for the baptisme of disciples or beleevers would be quite prevented and destroyed out of the whole world as well as it is out of this Kingdome I answer that though the natives infants in the Church of England be not baptised upon their faith because Idolaters have no faith * Rev. 22.15 yet if any do return out of that Apostasie they are not to be baptised again no more then the penitent apostate Israelites were circumcised again because God having purged the evill of the manner of administring his ordinance the ordinance is really accounted with God and ought so to be esteemed of his Saints as done upon a right subject a Christiā Reader see Mr. Henry Barrow a Martyr in Queen Elizabeths time his discovery pa. 114. and so forth to the end of the discourse concerning this matter where he handleth this particular point at large And though we had no right to baptisme as we stood in that estate but wickedly usurped the same yet being come out of Babel that which is Gods we have a right unto although we received the same before we separated from Babel Even so the Apostates of Israel in their apostasie had no right to the circumcision a Psal 50.16 Hos ● 2 3 4. Jer. 9.25 26. they received in that apostasie but when any of them returned to Judah b 1. Chron 30.13 they were not commanded to be circumcised againe because they then had a right to that circumcision which they had

you conclude that because their power and authority is not of Christ therefore the baptisme is not from Christ * Pa. 13. lin 1.2 To which I answer That I grant they have no enrighting power to administer any of the holy things of God no more then the Apostate Israelites yet as that Antichristian power by which they did administer destroyed not circumcision but that it remained true circumcision so baptisme being as dureable as circumcision it cannot be worne out by these Apostates no more then circumcision was by the other And what right had the Philistines to the Arke or what authority had the Babylonians to steal the vessels of the Lord or what power had Idolaters to lay sacralegious hands upon any of his holy institutions Surely they had no such commission either from God or Christ so to do yet I hope you will not say that the Arke was no Arke the vessels no vessels the institutions as in themselves nothing at all for then you would openly contradict the Scripture * 1. Sam. 4. 5. Dan 5.3.23 Ezra 6.5 Ezek. 43.8 Rev. 11.2 The like may be said concerning Gods institutions under the defection of Antichrist the marriage is marriage though the manner be not performed lawfully the Word is the Word of God and baptisme his own though in apostasie And whereas you say * Pa. 13. at li. 25 that as the Lord Jesus Christ hath no where in his Word ordained or appointed any women to administer his baptisme Nor no more hath he any where in his Word authorised any men by any false power to administer his baptisme I answer The like may be said concerning circumcision We read not that any woman had authoritie from God to circumcise * And yet Mr Spilsbery in his Treat se of Bap p. 33. lin 47.48 saith he seeth not but that in case of nec●ssity a woman might lawfully circumcise she being no where prohibited But by the same rule of his a woman may lawfully baptise yet the act being done by Ziporah a woman it was not false circumcision and God who is the God of order never gave wicked men any order to circumcise or any one by any false power to administer his signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith and yet though it were administred in that Apostate estate of Israel by apostates and upon Apostates yet it made no anullitie of the ordinance but was the signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith to those that returned out of the grave of that Apostasie Therefore the ground which you draw by similitude from the civill ●ates applying the same comparatively to the spirituall will not serve your turne For the Kings Proclamations are his though proclaimed by any which thing you would have to be nothing * Pa. 13. p. 14. for in speaking of the ordinances of the common-wealth you include them all and so you would inferre that what an Antichristian ministry doth if it be done by a false power the action whether it be baptisme or any other thing it is false but this your ground will not hold For the Kings lawfull acts are reall and substantiall though the dispensation of the same in respect of the party dispensing be contrary to his mind and will As if the King command that none in his Realme shall marrie persons together but the Christian Magistrates But if the Priests do the same contrary to the Kings command shall we say the Parties are not married and that the marriage is false and counterfeit this I conceive you will not affirme * For then their children begotten in th● estate are bastards So your former ground being groundlesse your comparison is frivolous And considering that Gods ordinance of circumcision was reall and effectuall though administred by a false power you cannot say that it was none of Gods ordinance for then they should have been circumcised again so the like may be said concerning baptisme Therefore your other comparison and application * Pa. 14. at l 26 in this case about Jannes and Jambres rods c. 2. Tim. 3.9 Exod. 7.10 ver 11.12 is of no weight but rather a wresting of the words of the Scripture for you can gather no such conclusion out of Pauls words neither by any part of the Scripture it self or necessarie consequence for though these Antichristians in opposing the truth are like Jannes and Jambres yet because they draw neer unto God with their mouthes and their hearts farre from him they are rather like the Apostate Israelites For which Papist of the grossest of them will deny verbally that Christ is come in the flesh that there are three persons in the Trinity c. so farre are they from denying it that they abhorre those that say to the contrary and are readie to burne them with fire and fagot Such a kind of zeal have they for him whom they know not rightly but in their superstitious works denie him And by your own confession ** Pa. 15. l. 20. the Church of England doth in their nineteenth Article professe that the visible Church of Christ consisteth of faithfull men c. this is a reall truth And yet these persons I say do deny Christ because they submit not unto him as he is Prophet Priest and King And yet notwithstanding we will not say but that these Apostaticall persons have baptisme and as much right unto it and power and authoritie to administer it as the Apostates of old had to receive and administer circumcision But the Temple and the Altar and the worshippers must be measured when the Court which is without by Gods command must be left out and not measured because it was given to the Gentiles Rev. 11.1 2. *** Christian Reader understand that whereas Mr. A.R. hath in his treatise of Baptisme p. 12. to 22. p. 31.32 spoken against the power and authoritie and office of ministry which the man of sin hath given to the Ministers of Antichrist I contradict him not in this but do judge them in the same visible estate as Ieroboams apostaticall priests were though they have baptisme as the other had circumcision Fourthly you * Pag. 23. to p. 24. lin 4. say the ground from which baptisme is there administred is the repentance and faith of the sureties the evidence whereof you bring out of the Catechisme where they declare that repentance and faith is required to baptisme and that the infants performe it by the sureties who take upon them to answer for the infants Answ That repentance and faith is required to baptisme is true but seeing the sureties are not able to perform it for themselves much lesse can they do it for others It is not Noah Daniel or Job that can save any sinner from Gods wrath a Ezek. 14.14 the righteous are scarcely saved themselves b 1. Pet 4.18 how then shall the wicked undertake so presumptuously to answer for any especially for

estate For though God visiteth the iniquities of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation of those that hate him yet he sheweth mercie to thousands of those that love him and keep his Commandments h Ver. 6. The deniall of Baptisme to the infants of beleevers ariseth from many grosse and ignorant mistakes of the true sence and meanin● of many texts of Scriptures as also from many foolish conceptions and idle dream●s wherewith persons have intoxicated their minds and wraped themselves into grievous absurdities As in other things they bewray a great deale of ignorance so do they in this about infants and are driven in maintenance of this errour to discover more errours in themselves g Exod. 20.5 and to strike at the fundamentall principles of Religion They suppose that those Scriptures which set forth the excellent priviledges of the faithfull and their seed concerne not infants at all but only persons of yeers that are capable and do professe faith and repentance limiting the seed to them of yeers onely or to Christs person barring out infants in their conceptions from visible union and communion with him Where it is said that the Covenant of Circumcision was to be in their flesh * Gen. 17.13 they interpret that flesh to be Christ where Circumcision in Scripture is called the signe a Gen 17.11 and seal of the righteousnesse of faith b Rom. 4.11 they limit that to Abraham onely and Gen 17.10 these words this is my Covenant * For this see A. R. his second book pa. 24 lin 13. 14. they take literally to be a reall Covenant without taking the exposition vers 11. even as the Papists expound Matth. 26.26 This is my body for his reall and corporall presence They also would most absurdly make Baptisme lesse general and more generall then circumcision which implyeth a flat contradiction Whereas it is said He that beleeveth and is baptised shall be saved c. This they say cannot be applyed to any infants for say they infants have no faith either by action or imputation then they are driven forcibly to run upon another absurditie that either Infants are saved without faith ar else that they are not saved at all Circumcision they conceive was not a seale of the new Covenant but of some carnall thing but this is a carnall affirmation like the judgement of him that saith the Church of the Jews was constituted upon nature and carnalitie opposite to the spirit and farre different from the Churches of Christ * Pag. 22.17.18.19.20 These absurdities with many more follow one another like links of one chain yea this is an evill under the Sun that those things which are old errors by some now adayes are esteemed as new truths Amongst whom some there are in particular who deny the heavenly state and baptisme of holy infants and also the baptisme of Christ received in the state of apostasie not distinguishing between a thing well done ill done and not done at all which distinctions ought to be observed both in spirituall and temporall things And considering Christian Reader that in many things we sin all and are subject to erre in our best actions I earnestly desire thee to take nothing upon trust which I set down but duely trie and discreetly weigh the same in the balance of the Lords sanctuary and if thou reap●st any profit by my poore endeavours give the glory to God and wherin I misse it let me be informed that the same may by me be reformed for the unchangeable truth of Jesus Christ we ought to love dearly prize highly and purchase it without ever parting from it and cherish it as the Lord doth put it into our bosome and so become one with it even like unto Jesus Christ who is the way the truth the life and the light of those who in his light do see light whose unsearchable riches I desire with all Saints every way to comprehend and therewith bid thee farewell And so remain Thy Christian Brother in the fellowship of the Gospel S C. A REPROOF OF SOME things written by A.R. in his Treatise intituled The vanitie of Childish Baptisme In the Answer whereof The lawfulnesse of Infants Baptisme is defended the sufficiencie of our Baptisme received in the state of Apostasie shewed and the deficiencie of the Arguments brought against it manifested by sufficient grounds and reasons drawn from the sweet fountains of holy Scripture Mr. AR. YOu have in your title page and Epistle to the Reader taken upon you to do that which you are not able and promised that which you cannot perform and affirmed that which you cannot prove by Scripture which is that the Baptisme of Infants is unwarrantable and a meer device brought into the world for politick and by ends c. and that therefore it being the baptisme in the Church of England you have undertaken to prove it to be deficient and none of Gods Baptisme IN the entrance of your discourse you confesse Pag. 1. That Baptisme is a great ordinance of the new Testament To which I adde that though every ordinance of the new Testament be great yet there is a difference between them for some ordinances are active both in respect of the administrator and partaker thereof other ordinances are meerly passive in reference to the parties upon whom the same are administred amongst which passive ordinances Baptisme is one * So Mr. Spilsbery saith the subject of Baptisme is to be passive See his Treatise pa. 26. li 7. That Baptisme is so as I have here declared the Scriptures Mat. 28.19 Acts 2.38 which you have quoted d●●xpresse where the Apostles were commanded to baptise others And the Disciples are not bidden by Peter to baptise themselves but to be baptised by others And you may know that the Eunuch baptised not himself but Philip a baptised person baptised him Act. 8.38 And therefore in this respect baptisme is unto us as circumcision was to the Saints of old to wit an ordinance not acted by the subject or receiver but submitted unto Josh 5. and suffered so it is said Joshua circumcised the children of Israel the second time for they were uncircumcised God did not require them to circumcise themselves but Joshua a circumcised person was to circumcise them Jos 5.2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9. And as to circumcision then there was required a right instrument a right subject and an enrighting power so there is now required to baptisme But as circumcision was Gods though the subject and instrument and power was not right So is baptisme now Gods holy institution though done by a false minister upon a false subject and by a false power And though these Antichristians have no command or warrant from God to baptise Apostates or any other persons no more then the idolatrous Israelites had to circumcise yet as that circumcision then administred after that manner contrary to Gods revealed will was

those whom God in his revealed will hath made no promise to save yet though the members of the Church of England do presume so farre it doth not make a nullitie of the ordinance no more then the Philistines presumption in taking the Arke of God c 1. Sam. 4.10 11. and 5.1 or the men of Bethshemosh their looking therein d 6.19 made it to be no Ark of God neither doth mens traditions destroy Gods institutions for Gods pillars and posts are still his own though Idolaters do set theirs thereby e Ezek. 43.8 But though some in the Church of England do baptise by sureties which they commonly call godfathers and godmothers yet others see it to be vaine and popish and do baptise their children without them these in respect of the ground which you have here instanced you cannot object against Now the ground wherefore the Church of England doth administer baptisme is taken out of Gods Word at least pretended by them so to be how Christ declared that little children belong to the kingdom of God and he took them up in his arms laid his hands upon them and blessed them c. yea from the very institution of Jesus Christ unto his disciples Matth. 28.19 Mark 16.16 this I say though it be the ground whereby they administer baptisme as peradventure the ground of the Apostates of Israel circumcising was taken from the commission of God given to Abraham yet these Idolaters like the Apostate Israelites are sacralegious abusers of this holy institution of God Thus having answered directly to your foure particulars which you have brought against the baptisme in the Church of England I now proceed to answer your fifth and last particular to wit concerning the subjects which you treated of in your first particular where you passed from the end to the subject Pag. 24. THe subjects say you on which baptisme is there administred are infants To which I answer that you have omitted a materiall word for you should have said the infants of Idolaters but when you speake of infants in generall without denoting what sort of infants you mean you speak in the aire But you grant that the Scripture holdeth forth that disciples or beleevers onely are to be baptised which is really my judgement that onely beleevers or disciples are to be baptised as formerly they were to be circumcised and as Abraham himself had no command to circumcise all nations or seeds or any apostate whatsoever though the off-spring of his body but those that were the seed in covenant with God * Gen. 7.14 so the Apostles had no warrant to baptise any other but beleeving men and women and their holy seed according to the great commission of our blessed Saviour where all nations were commanded to be baptised onely upon this condition that they should become disciples Matth. 28.19 Mar. 16.16 Act. 2.38 And I grant with you that to be a disciple of Christ is to abide in him and to continue in his words Joh. 8.31 such are Christs disciples indeed and are made free by Christ * Joh 8.36 such as beare the crosse and come after Christ forsaking all that they have But know this that free Justification cometh not by any act of our own but by the righteousnesse of Jesus Christ imputed unto us * Isa 63.3.5 53.10 11 12. Rom. 3.6 Rev. 1.5 5.3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10. And therefore holy infants may be said in one respect to do all these things Christ himself hath declared that they receive the kingdome of God and such holy infants are his disciples indeed such have born the crosse divers times suffering with their holy parents for the same cause and they resist not the will of God in any thing these are not all infants but onely the infants of beleeving parents whom we ought to judge as righteous and as holy till they manifest otherwise as any other Saint on earth though he professe great things these are those heavenly creatures to whom the Gospel ought be applyed though they are uncapable to receive it actually yea when the Gospel is verbally applyed to the parents their infants are not exempted but received according to Christs words unto Zacheus To day is salvation come to this house for as much as he also is the sonne of Abraham * Luk. 19.9 Christ hath promised life to those that chuse life and also to their infants and therefore the same infants have faith imputatively for he that beleeveth not shall be damned So that it appeareth that salvation cometh not but by faith in Christ For as much then as the Scripture is so clear that these holy infants are saved and seeing that salvation cometh not without repentance and faith It is too much presumption to say that infants are destitute of faith and repentance though all the men in the world would grant it But I do wonder what is the maine ground that doth drive you or the greatest reason or conceit that doth draw you so to determine concerning infants * Pag. 25. as if they were destitute of the heavenly gifts and graces of Gods Spirit Is it because they cannot verbally expresse or actually perform such things as those of riper yeers can do If this be your greatest reason it will not beare down the least weight in the ballance of Gods sanctuary as may easily appeare But though baptisme in the Church of England be administred upon the wrong subjects namely the seed of Idolaters and though eternall life be sought and promised by them another way then God hath appointed yet to affirm that because some infants are not meet subjects of baptisme that therefore no infants are is a saying founded upon the sands and fetched out of the fond fictions of mens brains and not from the word of God Your best way had been this to have searched into the records of holy Scripture and observed the nature of the ordinance of circumcision and compared the same signe a Gen. 17.13 and seale b Rom. 4.11 of righteousnesse with baptisme c Col. 2.11 12. and so to have found out the equivolence which the one hath with the other and then you should have examined whether the circumcision of Apostate Infants were according to the will of God and if it were not whether they were commanded by the Lord at their returning to be circumcised again If it had been so then you might have had ground to have beaten down the baptisme which is received in the Church of England but this is not the way you take but instead of this you shoot at rovers not keeping to the matter in hand And till it can be proved that the circumcision of infants was none of the Lords circumcision I must still say that the baptisme of Infants is the Lords baptisme wherefore stand to your cause and bring forth your strong reasons For as yet your reasons are verie weak though