Selected quad for the lemma: heaven_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
heaven_n	church_n	kingdom_n	visible_a	4,215	5	9.6422	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A63577	A true narrative of the Portsmouth disputation, between some ministers of the Presbyterian, and others of the Baptist, persuasion, concerning the subjects and manner of baptism held in Mr. Williams's meeting-place there on Wednesday, Feb. 22. 1698/9. The managers for the Presbyterians were, Mr. Samuel Chandler of Fareham. Mr. Leigh of Newport in the Isle of Wight. Mr. Robinson of Hungerford in Berks, moderator. For the Baptists were, Dr. William Russel of London. Mr. John Williams of East Knoyle in Wiltshire. Mr. John Sharp of Froome in Somersetshire, moderator. Transcribed from two copies taken at the dispute; the one by Mr. Bissel Town-Clerk of Portsmouth, and the other by Mr. Samuel Ring. Revis'd and publish'd by Dr. William Russel.	Bissel, Mr.; Ring, Samuel.; Russel, William, d. 1702.	1699 (1699)	Wing T2806A; ESTC R215290	67,061	90

fell a laughing at Mr. Leigh and his Countenance changed pale and he was under some seeming Consternation of Mind so that he could not presently recover himself but at last his Spirits rallied again and then he spake to this effect Mr. Leigh Our Discourse was grounded on the Commission Now was this before the Commission or after it Dr. Russel It is a mistake Mr. Leigh we were not now upon the Commission but upon your Question And I think Mr. Williams hath given you a pertinent Answer every way suitable to your Question and the Challenge you made us and you are bound to take it Upon this he made no Reply But Addressed himself to us after this manner Now if you please I will become Opponent Our Answer was You may if you think fit we are contented Mr. Leigh Then I Argue thus If Infants are visible Church-Members then they are to be Baptized But Infants are visible Church-Members Ergo They are to be Baptized Dr. Russel This Argument doth not include the Point in question for you ought to put in these words according to Christ's Commission Mr. Leigh refused so to do Upon which Dr. Russel asked him this Question Are you of Mr. Chandler's mind in this Matter He says That Baptism is an Initiating Ordinance Mr. Leigh answered Yes I am Dr. Russel Then make Sense of your Argument if you can For it will run thus If Infants are already visible Members of the Church then they are to be Baptized that they may be made so It is as if I should say That because such a Man is in this House already therefore there must some Act pass upon him to bring him in when he is actually in the House before Make Sense of this if you can However I will deny the Minor and say they are not visible Church-Members before they are Baptized Mr. Chandler If there be no Precept or Example in all the Word of God to warrant us to make any other Initiating Ordinance into the Church but Baptism then visible Church-Members ought to be Baptized But there is no other Initiating Ordinance into the Church besides Baptism Ergo Visible Church-Members ought to be Baptized Dr. Russel What doth not Mr. Chandler know the difference between the Major and Minor I deny the Minor and his Argument is to prove the Sequel of the Major which I had confute● before But if this be true that Mr. Chandler says it is a full Answer to Mr. Leigh's Minor For then it runs thus If there be no other way to bring Persons into the visible Church but by Baptism then they were not visible Church-Members before they were Baptized Which is directly opposite to what Mr. Leigh hath affirmed Mr. Robinson This Argument was brought to prove that visible Church-Members are to be admitted to Baptism Mr. Williams I deny that Infants are visible Church-Member in their Infancy Mr. Leigh I will prove that some are so from Matth. 19. 14. Suffer the little Children and forbid them not to come unto me for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven Dr. Russel Do you bring this to prove that these Children were Baptized Mr. Leigh No I do not pretend to any such thing Dr. Russel What then do you bring it for Mr. Leigh I bring it to prove that Infants are visible Church-Members Dr. Russel If you had brought it to prove that Infants had a right to the Kingdom of Glory I should have thought you had brought it to a better purpose and more agreeable to the scope of the Place Mr. Leigh I Argue thus upon it Those that belong to the Kingdom of Heaven that is the visible Church of Christ are visible Church-Members But the Kingdom of Heaven that is the visible Church of Christ is in part made up of little Children Ergo Little Children are visible Church-Members Dr. Russel I might here object against the form of your Argument But to pass that by I do deny your Minor Mr. Leigh I shall prove my Minor by an Induction of Particulars There are divers Acceptations of the Kingdom of Heaven in Scripture As 1. It signifies the Laws and Promises of the Kingdom 2. The Graces of the Kingdom whereby we are enabled to observe those Laws And thus it is set forth by a grain of Mustard-seed by Leaven and the like 3. It sometimes signifies Jesus Christ his Management of his Subjects on Earth 4. And sometimes it signifies the happiness of the Saints in Glory 5. And many times it is taken for the visible Church Militant And in no other Sense but this last can it be taken in this Scripture to make good Sense of it which I shall prove by an Argument of Induction If it be Nonsense to say Of such is the Laws and Promises of the Kingdom If it be Nonsense to say Of such is the Graces of the Kingdom If it be Nonsense to say Of such is Christ's Management of his Subjects on Earth If it be Nonsense to say Of such is the Happiness of the Saints in Glory and it be good Sense to say Of such is the visible Church then the visible Church is in part made up of little Children But it is Nonsence to apply it to all the other and it is good Sense to say of such to the visible Church Ergo The visible Church is in part made up of little Children Dr. Russel There is so much Nonsense in this Argument I know not well how to make Sense of it It seems to me little to the purpose But however I will deny your Minor and say It is good Sense to say that little Children belong to the Kingdom of Glory I pray observe by the way what sort of Subjects Mr. Leigh ' s Church must consist of if they have no Interest in the Graces of the Kingdom nor yet in the Glory of the Kingdom Mr. Leigh I say it's Nonsense to understand it otherwise And upon this he desired that all those who were satisfied with what he had said should hold up their hands And of that great Multitude there was but a very few that did it So that it was manifest they were not satisfied with what he had said Mr. Williams Is it Nonsense then to say that any Infants belong to the Kingdom of Glory Mr. Leigh Yes while they are in their Infant State for when arrived to Glory they are perfect as grown Men whatever they were on Earth Otherwise we must say that there are Infants of two foot long poor weak ignorant things in Glory Therefore it must be thus taken for we must make good Sense of Scripture Mr. Williams I deny you Minor and shall form an opposite Argument thus If Infants are neither Members of the Universal visible Church nor yet of a particular Constituted Church then they are not Members of the visible Church at all But they are neither Members of the Universal visible Church nor yet of a particular Constituted Church Therefore they are not Members of the