Selected quad for the lemma: honour_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
honour_n	build_v	house_n	moses_n	1,832	5	9.9525	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45244	A treatise concerning the covenant and baptism dialogue-wise, between a Baptist & a Poedo-Baptist wherein is shewed, that believers only are the spirituall seed of Abraham, fully discovering the fallacy of the argument drawn from the birth priviledge : with some animadversions upon a book intituled Infant-baptism from heaven and not of men, defending the practise of baptizing only believers against the exceptions of M. Whiston / by Edward Hutchinson.	Hutchinson, E. M. (Edward Moss)	1676 (1676)	Wing H3829; ESTC R40518	127,506	243

see how this learned man ere he was aware hath spoyl'd Infant-Baptism for if baptism be a symbol of regeneration as undoubtedly it is then unless you say and that from Scripture grounds that your infants are regenerated or seem so to be baptism doth not at all belong to them And it will no ways help you to say that the Baptists do baptize some persons that are not regenerated for it is enough to warrant our practise if they profess so to be and give us those Scripture characters i.e. actuall faith and Repentance Poed But pray Sir what think you of the Covenant made to Abraham and his natural seed what kind of Covenant was it Bap. I confess there are various opinions about it some say it was a Covenant of grace others a Covenant of works others a mixt Covenant But surely that Covenant made with Abraham and his natural seed called the Covenant of Circumcision or Covenant of the Law was not the Covenant of Eternal life and salvation which was made with all the elect in Christ upon the condition of faith but a distinct Covenant of it self concerning the worship and service of God and so may be called a Covenant of works rather then a Covenant of grace though there was also grace in it as there was in all the Covenants that God ever made with men yet we say it was a distinct Covenant and therefore called the old Covenant and the Covenant of grace the new Covenant And if you say the Covenant of grace was the same in all ages under various administrations we confess it and say that the Covenant of grace was made to Adam after the fall to the Patriarchs and to Abraham before the Covenant of Circumcision was mentioned and is the same to us now But as ours it s called new or renewed yet it doth not follow but this Covenant of Circumcision was a distinct Covenant still for Abraham and all believers in that age were in the Covenant of grace before this Covenant was made and would have been so if the Covenant of Circumcision had never been And if you demand then why the Covenant of works is called the old Covenant and the Covenant of grace the new 1. I answer because of its priority it being the first Covenant God made with man before the fall as Protestant Divines say that God made a Covenant of works with Adam concerning perfect obedience which he had then power to perform And some think God renewed this Covenant of works after the fall as appears by the sacrifices that Adam Abel c. offered and from that Scripture if thou dost well shalt not thou be accepted if not sin lyes at the door And afterwards this Covenant of works or Covenant concerning worship is renewed to Abraham and his posterity 2. It is called the old Covenant in respect to its deteriority it being a Covenant found fault with as the Scripture saith 3. In respect to its decaying and perishing nature it was not durable or lasting as the Apostle saith that which decayeh and waxeth old is ready to perish meaning this Covenant And the Covenant of grace is called the new Covenant First because of its meliority or bitterness it is more excellent as the new heavens and the new earth that God will make will be more excellent then the old 2. In opposition to the old as appears Heb. 8.8 when God says he will make a new Covenant he adds not according to the Covenant when I brought your fathers out of Egipt which was by virtue of the Covenant made with Abraham 3. In respect to its perpetuity and duration it is the everlasting Covenant the Covenant made with Abraham and his natural seed is vanished and done away but this remains as the Apostle says if that which was done away was glorious how much more that which remains That which was done away was the old Covenant or Covenant made with Abraham and his natural seed with all the priviledges of it And that which remains is the new Covenant or promise of eternal life made in Jesus to all believers 4. It is called the new Covenant as to us because renewed in a more Gospel and glorious manner So that we are indeed still under the same Covenant of grace made with Adam and all the partriarchs but not under the same Covenant of works made with Abraham and his natural seed But further that you may know what the Covenant made with Abraham was take the opinion of a late learned Author The old Covenant saith he was a political Covenant made with the Jews as Princes compacts are with their people when they first set up Government God promises them his protection and that he would lead them to a fruitful land overcome all their enemies c. with the like blessings And they promise they will be ruled by him c. To this purpose did God in sundry ways appear to them To Moses to their elders to them all in the cloud and fire and then causes a Tabernacle to be made for him which was a keeping house amongst them where the sacrifices and offerings were his provisions and the Priests his servants that lived on him And unto that Tabernacle and Ark might they repair for counsel and Judgment This people then being under a Theocracy which Samuel does in two places expresly signify at least unto the time of Saul so that the Church and Common-wealth of the Jews were but one It is no wonder if Religion be made their laws and so required of them together with other political Ordinances and statutes for their happinesse and publick peace as a nation And though in their ceremonial offerings and Priests appointmens there was a remembrance still of sin yet had they Types of Christ of remedying mercy and of the glory to come Their sacrifices as I have said serve to the maintenance of this house the Tabernacle and Temple which he was pleased to keep up amongst them for a time God indeed making use of these for Types and representations of other things that is to say spiritual and so the law being a Paedagogy under a temporal dispensation leading men to Christ So far my Author But God hath quite pulled down this house brake up house-keeping as we say and turned the servants Infants and all out of doors Rom. 11. The natural branches are broken off and Heb. 8.13 That which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish And saith the Apostle if that which was done away was glorious c. what was that but this old house with all the priviledges of it But now God hath built him a new house into which he hath admitted none as his houshold servants but believers or such as profess so to be And these two houses are mentioned Heb. 3.2 3 4. where one is called Moses his house and the other Christs house As Moses was faithful in all his house For this man was accounted worthy of more honour then Moses

in as much as he that hath builded the house hath more honour then the house Moses was faithful as a servant but Christ as a son over his own house whose house are we if we hold fast the confidence c. where the servants are also described they are belivers not infants hence they are also called living stones and a spiritual house 1 Pet. 2.3 And that none but such are of this houshold appears in that Christ the great Master of this house is compared to a king travelling into a far Country who called his servants all his servants and delivered unto them his goods that is Certain Talents to improve Math. 25.14 15. which cannot be supposed to be delivered to infants while they want the use of reason for these ●alents are presently to be improv'd and laid out not laid up So again Christ is compared to a house-keeper who made a great supper and invited his guests but they were not infants because the first that were invited made excuses The next are compeld to come in which supposes an unwillingness in the parties and that they were persons capable to consent or deny The summe of all is that the old house the Jewish Church with all the appurtenances and priviledges of it is pulled down and a new one built into which infants are not admitted because not invited nor appointed by any law They were of the houshold of old but it was by a positive law shew us the like now or you say nothing Sure I am there is no institution that makes infants now fellow Citizens with the Saints and of the houshold of God Neither are they so to be accounted till they believe and are able to do service in the house And if you say that amongst men infants are counted of the houshold though they can do no service I answer that comparison does not run upon four feet it doth not follow that because we count our infants of our family therefore they are to be accounted members of Gods family the Gospel Church unless God by any institution had made them so The houshold of God is called the houshold of faith do good unto all especially the houshold of faith or a house consisting of believers now unless you prove your infants to be believers they are not of this house For all the servants here must be believers either really or Historically and professedly which infants cannot be And it will not help you to say the Church was or may be called the houshould of faith synecdochically from the greatest part for it is evident all the materialls of the first Churches were adult persons and professed believers as appears by the narrative we have in the Acts of the Apostles the direction of all the Epistles and divers Scriptures Besides it may so happen that the infants may be the greatest part of a Congregation and then where is your houshold of faith Poed But Mr. Wills tells us that Mr. Baxter saith That Infant Church membership did take place as an ordinance of God before Circumcision was enjoyned or the Ceremonial law instituted and why then should it cease with it It was no part of the typical administration but a moral institution of God even from the beginning of the world God ever made a distinction between the seed of the faithful and the seed of the wicked as visibly belonging to several kingdomes of God and of Satan Mal. 2.15 Therefore they are called a holy seed Wills pag. 54. Bap. Here is vox praeterea nihil 'T is true Mr. Baxter saith so but if it be warrant enough for Mr. Wills to believe it it is not for me It is strange of what authority some mens words are when they have got the estimation of Orthodox and pious and we have no great cause to wonder at the implicite faith of the Church of Rome when an ipse dixit from an English oracle commands such credit and vassals us to their raw and undigested dictates But let us examine this assertion He saith that Infant Church-membership did take place as an ordinance of God before Circumcision c. But where is that ordinance why are we not directed to some place of Scripture where we may find it Did God make Mr. Baxter of his Cabinet Councel and reveal it to him and no body else Or in what Ancient father did he find it Did any one ever say so before him 2. He saith that it was no part of the typical Administration but a moral institution of God c. I answer there hath been enough said to prove the fallacy and novelty of this position Therefore I referr you to what hath been written But he saith it is a moral institution We still demand where we shall find that institution or else wee 'l say Mr. Baxter is wise above what is written 3. He saith God ever made a distinction between the seed of the faithful and the seed of the wicked But what distinction Did God single them out and separate them by any visible sign or character before the law of Circumcision It is evidently known he did not Or did God distinguish them by his providential care of them or provision for them more then others The Scripture is silent as to this also Or did God love them with a saving love more then the children of unbelievers This seems to be his meaning because of his next words as visibly belonging to several kingdoms of God and Satan But is it so Did all the children of believers from Adam to Abraham belong to the kingdom of God and all the children of unbelievers belong to the kingdom of the Devil If it be Mr. Baxters Divinity or M. Wills charity it shall be none of mine But he thinks to salve all with the word visibly But pray when the sons of God took the Daughters of men and all flesh had corcupted its ways to what kingdom did they belong Did not the seed of believers grow prophane and wicked and the seed of unbelievers pious and Godly as appears in divers even Abraham himself whose father was an Idolater as is probably supposed he himself being bred up in Idolatry But Mr. Baxter hath some Scripture for his warrant and it is Mal. 2.15 that he might seek a godly seed But he that can find infants Church-membership in this text and that the seed of believers did always belong visibly to the kingdom of God and all others to the kingdom of the Devil erit mihi magnus Apollo What though God says he that s●ught a godly feed therefore let none deal treacherously with the wife of his youth implying that children born in lawful wedlock are this Godly seed Let none whether believer or unbeliever unless you hold that children of unbelivers may not be a godly seed But these are such Non sequiturs that it is in vain to spend further time about them So that the Morality of Infants Church-membership is a very fancy And that