Selected quad for the lemma: land_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
land_n	abraham_n	call_v	canaan_n	1,554	5	10.1521	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86928	An ansvver to Mr. Tombes his scepticall examination of infants-baptisme: wherein baptisme is declared to ingraft us into Christ, before any preparation: and the covenant of the gospel to Abraham and the gentiles is proved to be the same, extended to the gentiles children, as well as to Abrahams: together with the reason, why baptize children, is not so plainly set down in the gospel, as circumcise children, in the law, and yet the gospel more plain then the law. / By William Hussey, minister of Chislehurst in Kent.	Hussey, William, minister of Chiselhurst.	1646 (1646)	Wing H3815; Thomason E343_3; ESTC R200939	83,416	79

the Iewes in reference to the promise it is plaine that the promise in reference to Baptisme is the same that it was in reference to circumcision now it is true he further teacheth the inner power and effect of the Covenant which was the turning men away from their iniquity this is the doctrine both of circumcision and baptisme that neither circumcision which is outward in the flesh is circumcision Rom. 2.28 neither is that baptisme which is outward but that is circumcision which is of the heart whose praise is not of men but of God Thus baptisme must be taught it must be taught as from God it must bee administred as by men therefore saith Mr. Tombes the promise is not made but on conditions of calling and faith which may be confirmed abundantly Rom. 4.13 14 16. let the proofe be examined St. Paul doth handle the promise made to Abraham in reference to the fruit and effect of it and so to entitle the Gentiles to the comfort and fruit of the promise forasmuch as the promise did alwayes beare that sense that never any of Abrahams posterity had any benefit from the promise unlesse they were beleevers and that benefit the Gentiles alwayes had if proselites and now in a more free way and this was ground to the Romans to seeke for justification by faith because that was alwayes the sence and meaning of the Covenant made with Abraham but this was the use that the faithfull ought to make of the Covenant Abraham was justified by faith as we are Abraham was not justified by circumcision nor we by baptisme circumcision was administred in facie Ecclesiae according to the appointment of God men had nothing to doe to examin faith the praise of that was not of men but of God it is confessed that Abraham did circumcise without any judgement of faith yet had as much need of faith for benefit by the Covenant as we his justification and salvation the same with ours by faith in Christ Gal. 3.9 They which be of faith are blessed with faithfull Abraham ye see Abraham himselfe had his blessing by faith God preached the Gospell to Abraham the seed of Abraham had the benefit of the covenant by faith whereby it plainly appears that circumcision was not given by the estimation of faith though it had its effect by faith but every male of Abraham must be circumcised and that because of the promise the conditions of faith and repentance were not new conditions put on us which Abraham and his posterity had not though they are more plainly preached to us then to Abraham God was the judge of faith in Abrahams time and is so now but the promise of the land of Canaan stood upon conditions of obedience the effect of faith notwithstanding circumcision but saith Mr. Tombes the promise was not belonging to them simply as Jews but as called the promise did belong to all men quatenus called but it belonged to Jews though not quatenus ipsum yet it doth belong to Jews to be foederati 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every Jew had an interest to the promise though not quatenus a Jew because Gentiles also had this right per accidens as called but it was accidentall to the Gentiles some were called and some were not all Iews before Christ were called but note that called is to be distinguished into outward calling and inward or effectuall calling by an outward calling All the Iews were called by an effectuall only the elect were called whether Iew or Gentile both these callings had their severall respects unto the promise and the seal of the promise The outward call had a right to the Oracles Rom. 3.1 the means of faith and accordingly many had faith by that means though some did not believe that doth not make the faith of God of none effect the promise of God signified by the word faith in that place is effectuall though some do not believe though it be without effect to them that believe not yet it is effectuall to them that believe and though he doth not believe yet the Holy Ghost maketh circumcision an inseparable accident to a Iew shewing that the advantage of the Iew and the profit of circumcision were the same and the chief priviledge is that unto them were committed the Oracles of God Now this outward call had the promise of God being their God and the God of their seed and accordingly had the seal given to them and their seed this is plain in case of the Iews they had circumcision and the Oracles and the promise but all these are ineffectuall without faith Heb. 4.1 2. Let us therefore fear lest a promise being left us of entring into his rest any one of us come short of it For unto us was the Gospel preached as well as unto them but the Word preached did not profit them not being mixed with faith in them that heard it You see many have the promise left them that may come short of it they may have the Word without profit the promise of God circumcision without effect all for want of faith all these externall have an externall dependance one upon another those that were born in a believing family had an externall promise left them had cirumcision had the word though they might come short of the effect of all for want of faith yet the externall administration must go by this outward rule the promise in this place is understood in this sense of outward promise that belongeth to you and your children you are called already and that is implied in the opposition to these words afar off such as are afar off is opposed to them that are nigh Now they that are nigh need no calling but they that are afarre off them we call so that it is plain calling is in reference to them that are afar off and then the sense of the words is as plain the promise belongeth to you and your children therefore be baptized and the promise likewise belongeth to them that are afarre off not yet called as many of them as the Lord shall call and this appears in that the Apostle speaks unto these Iews exhorts them to amend their lives and be baptized for the promise belongeth to them so that the Proposition is immediatly true they shall be baptized because the promise did belong to them calling of them that are afarre off is not at all immediately referred to baptisme but to the promise and therefore cannot by any means be a limitation of such persons unto whom the promise did belong to make fit for baptisme as if there were some persons unto whom the promise did belong that were not called and some called those that are called might be baptized but unto whom the promise doth belong and are not called they may not be baptized but this is to alter the form and sense of the Apostles words though they might have a truth in them yet they are not the words of the

Text nor signifie what is there said Amendment of life hath not relation to baptisme but to that sin they stood guilty of and that they were convict that they had crucified the Lord of glory the immediate argument that he useth to perswade them to baptisme is that the promise belongeth to them it is no argument at all why they should be baptized because the promise belonged to their children nor because the promise belonged to them that are afarre off but because it belonged to them that only was ground why the Apostle should perswade to be baptized what is further added is to note the amplitude of the promise to raise up their faith to lay hold on the promise of so bountifull a God that extendeth his promises so largely not to them only but to their children nor stayeth his bounty there but reacheth it out also to them that are not called to wit such of them as he shall call you and your children sensu determinate them them that are afarre off sensu indeterminate but if all had been limited by as many as the Lord shall call S. Peter had drawn an universall conclusion out of particular premises For if that part of the verse alledged out of which the Apostle doth inferre this conclusion or inference be limited then the proposition is particular as thus If the sense of the words be the promise belongeth to as many of you as the Lord shall call then it is no more but the promise belongeth to some of you a few of you therefore be baptized every one had been a very irrationall argument nay if you restrain promise to its strict sense for promise with effect to the effectually called then it can belong to a very few of them therefore every one of you be baptized were very strange The promise therefore must be understood in such a sense as it was when applied to Abrahams seed according to the flesh as the faith of God in his promise is not of none effect though some do not believe the promise must be understood by us as left for all though all attain not to it and this not in reference to universall grace but universall dispensation of means by us men and herein God did go before us by his owne direction in the infancy of his Church leaving us to walk by the same rule when we have a more ample dispensation of the means of grace committed to us God did command all Abrahams seed to be circumcised and all circumcised to eat the Passeover though they were taught alwayes they should not possesse the land of Canaan unlesse they obeyed the voice of the Lord Deut. 28. and 29. Chapters and all along Moses and the Prophets preach the blessing to the beleever and though under the forme of works not the covenant of works it was faith that God looked as in Heb. 11. all the workes of the Patriachs are ascribed to faith and Abrahams obedience is commended by his faith and he and they justified by faith and not by workes faith grounded on the same truth of God and the same Christ God useth the same liberty of his will Rom. 9.15 in the dispensation of his grace 13. An instance out of the old Testament in Esau and Jacob will serve as well as in Peter and Judas the grace of God did no more nor lesse depend on Sacraments then now God did not account any man circumcised but a beleever no more doth he now baptized Moses and the Prophets did teach faith and obedience so do the Apostles and that notwithstanding the promise yet the unbeleever and murmurer shall not enter into the land of Canaan thus went the doctrine thus the estimation of God in all ages the dispensation of Word and Sacraments to the Iewes and them that were afarre off as many as the Lord shall call under the Law but now to all Nations all are now called God doth command all men every where to repent in the sence of these words all the world have an outward calling St. Peter doth argue with the Jewes to perswade them to Baptisme à notioribus they knew right well the bounds and extent of the promise it was no new thing to them that the Gentiles called should be accounted among these to whom the promise did belong nor that baptisme did legally wash away sinne nor that sinners must repent but that the promise should be sealed by baptisme that only was new as for that Peter did teach repentance with baptisme both together as saith Mr. Tombs that is not the question repentance and faith ought to be taught at all times as being such things as God doth only look on most seasonably at all times to all men Luke 13.3 Except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish but out of this place it doth no way follow that repentance must goe before or is required as a preparation to baptisme verse 38. is an answer to this question what shall we doe we that have crucified the Lord of glory if to this generall question what shall we doe Peter had failed to instruct them to repent he had been wanting to his duty but presently to argue from the promise to move them to baptisme and baptise them presently will scarce stand with any Anabaptisticall discipline you would hardly have any great company of Catechumen's if you follow the example of the Apostle which you so much stand upon nay the keeping men of years many yeares under the discipline of Catechumen's directly contrary to the Apostles example But of preparation to baptisme we shall have further occasion to consider in other arguments Mr. Tombes telleth us that the promise doth not belong to all Infants of beleevers which is the minor universally taken he hath formerly told us of women and believers before Abraham I have formerly given satisfaction to those exceptions but the promise is to be understood three wayes as before may appear Either first in estimation of God or secondly in dispensation of the inward grace of the Sacraments and effectuall operation of the means or thirdly in the outward dispensation of the means of grace The two former are distributed according to the election of grace to the believer only but the last under the Law to Abraham and his seed and in Abrahams seed which is Christ to all the families of the earth But now in a more explicit and plain way to all the nations of the earth and that not only in p●tentia but by particular dispensation and providence unto many nations in actu exercito actually many nations have the Word and Sacraments and God grant more may have But it seemeth he granteth the promise doth belong to some of the Infants of believers but which they are he cannot tell and therefore will baptize none The way of God was to Abraham that because he could not distinguish he should circumcise all God commandeth baptisme to be administred to all nations it will not serve our

seed of Isaac for the promise did not belong to Esau that was the seed of Isaac for that though he were the seed of Isaac yet he was not in Isaac that is he was not inserted into Isaac as a type of Christ by faith and therefore the seed must be so understood that the promise might belong to all the seed Rom. 4.16 not to that which is of the Law only but that which is of the faith of Abraham not to them only which were circumcised according to Law but to believers though not circumcised that is after circumcision was taken away by appointment of God For though circumcision was not so naturall and essentiall to the promise that it was enough at any time to entitle any to the promise without faith yet virtute institutionis divina was not to be omitted untill God took it away for the promise was not to Abraham through the Law therefore not through circumcision which was a legall right but 〈◊〉 the righteousnesse of faith vers 13. to let us know that it was not any 〈◊〉 rite or sacrament that can intitle to the promise it doth but externally 〈◊〉 the vertue of Christs blood and by it the circumcision of the 〈…〉 the sight of God is the only circumcision Rom. 2.29 He is a Jew 〈…〉 and circumcision is of the heart in the Spirit not in the 〈…〉 not of men but of God All this while the Scripture treateth 〈…〉 Abraham in the estimation of God God accounteth none the seed 〈◊〉 Abraham but in Christ none heirs of the promise but in Christ none circum●●●●●● 〈◊〉 them that are in Christ and therefore saith Rom. 2.28 that is not cir 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 in the flesh and this ex regula de nullo Again ex 〈…〉 all that are in Christ Jesus that is believers are the seed of Abraham heirs of the promise circumcised in heart but these have their estimation and praise not of m●n but of God and these are equally denied and affirmed to Abrahams s●●d and Gent●●es according as they are believers or not believers 〈◊〉 without any respect a● all to Abrahams seed according to the flesh so that Abrahams 〈◊〉 had no right at all to any part of the promise in the estimation of 〈◊〉 they did not 〈◊〉 and therefore Rom. 9.8 they that are the children of the 〈◊〉 that is Abrahams fresh are not the children of God the children of the promise a● accounted for the seed and therefore in Gen. 12.3 the Lord did make the promise not to Abraham and his seed only but from Abraham he derived the blessing upon all the families of the earth all the families of the earth were blessed in Abraham Or as Gen. 22.18 all nations are blessed in the seed of Abraham and therefore do Interpreters interpret that former by thee that is in thy seed and all that are in Christ are plainly the heirs of the promise and none but they Abraham in honour and title was called the fountain of the blessing but in de●d and truth not Abraham but Christ for Abraham himself was blessed in Christ not in himself as Christ was Christ was only blessed and justified in and for his own holinesse by the works of the Law inherent in himself So that Mr. Tombes his division of Abrahams seed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christs spirituall seed believers naturall seed is most inartificiall many of his naturall seed were spirituall also Abrahams seed must be divded into equivocall and univocall equivocall seed Christ for that he was not like Abraham he was of Abraham but ex parte according to the flesh Rom. 1.3 He was Abrahams Lord as well as his son his Saviour as well as his seed he was the promised seed not the seed unto ●●●●om the promise did belong as the seed of Abraham but that seed that was the fountain of blessing to Abraham and all other his seed and therefore Christ was the blessing it self the promise that was made to Abraham and his seed was through the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4.13 but the blessing came not on Christ through the righteousnesse of faith seeing the righteousnesse of faith is derivative from Christ to Abraham Christs righteousnesse was primitive in himselfe and that very righteousnesse that became Abrahams by faith and therefore is Christ the inheritance of Abraham and all the faithfull seed Esay 42.6 he is called the Covenant of the people and a light to the Gentiles Secondly Abrahams univocall seed were like unto himselfe in relation to the promise the word seed in the promise I will be thy God and the God of thy seed is only the faithfull nothing belonging to the seed of Abrahams flesh but so as they are faithfull nor excluding any Nation or family or person in the earth so as faithfull as for Abrahams seed according to the flesh if not faithfull non est nostri instituti it is not belonging to the doctrine of the Promise to consider of them at all Rom. 2.29 they were not to be reckoned among the circumcised by God Now for the particular application of this promise to this Nation or that in one age to the family of Abraham according to the flesh in another age to the Gentiles in one age under the seale of circumcision in another of Baptisme sometimes to give a Nation the means of Grace Word and Sacraments sometimes to lead them away into captivity these things were ordered according to the particular determination and purpose of God though God did in a more peculiar manner blesse the seed of Abraham then other Nations with the enjoyment of Word and Sacraments and other blessings yet they had them together with the land of Canaan and the place of Gods worship only on conditions of faith and obedience as in Deut. 28. and 29. chapters and by the many threatnings of removall of them by the Prophets and their actuall captivities may appear so that these graces of faith and obedience come on this or that Nation or person according to the purpose of Gods will as likewise effectuall operation of the Word and the particular effect of the Sacrament under the means of Word and Sacraments wholly depend on the mercy of God according to the election of grace Men are to administer the outward rite and sacrament according to the ordination of God God by his Spirit bestoweth his grace and with-holdeth it from whom he pleaseth The Jewes were tyed to the eight day to signe the flesh with circumcision but it was God that circumcised the heart without which the circumcision of the flesh was no circumcision in the estimation of God as Rom. 2.28 which man cannot nor ought to take notice of it is the way of God no man knoweth it it is God that giveth the new name that no man knoweth but he that hath it Those that have this inward grace of circumcision are called and accounted by God for the seed of Abraham but whom must Abraham for his part

and see just so doth Mr. Tombes baptisme doth not succeed circumcision because baptisme must be given to believers only yet confesseth that both baptisme and circumcision have a like respect to faith it is true he assigneth other differences but none of them will more disable from baptisme then from circumcision The first difference is that circumcision doth signifie Christ to come of Isaac according to the flesh but baptisme doth signifie incarnation death and resurrection of Christs doth this make the difference can children better understand that Christ shall come of Isaac after the flesh then that Christ is incamate dead and ris●n again Secondly can Infants better understand that the Israelites were people separated from all nations then they can understand that all are one in Christ can they better understand that the Law of Moses must be kept then that it is voyd or the promise of the Land of Canaan then of eternall life The difference that Mr. Tombes putteth between circumcision and baptisme cannot make Infants differ under the Law and under the Gospel and do they differ by that which doth agree to circumcision and baptisme As for the place out of which this argument is drawn Colos 2.11 12. Mr. Tombes saith that the Text doth not say we are circumcised because we are baptized but we are compleat in him because we are circumcised in him and buried with him in baptisme I must needs suspect this mans learning or his honesty else he would never abuse his ignorant Reader thus what Mr. Tombes doth the Text say ye are compleat because circumcised Let men that can examine the Text see and they shall find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our translators have dealt more faithfully with us then so that have translated it in whom also that is we are not only compleat in him but we are also circumcised with the circumcision of the heart we have that mercy sealed unto us though circumcision be taken away and we might seem to be without that confirmation or signe of the purity of heart which our Fathers had Why saith S. Paul Christ was circumcised and that gave an efficacy to the circumcision of our Fathers circumcision ended in Christ and is not descended to us but the effect of circumcision is in the circumcision of Christ part of the body was put off in circumcision but the body of sin was signified now this Christ did in circumcision not only so but by buriall he put off that body that became sin for us of both which ye are partakers being buried with him in baptisme so that baptisme doth entitle us to circumcision of the heart by the circumcision and buriall of Christ as the circumcision of the Jewes was made effectuall by the circumcision of Christ so we have the same grace expressed by cicumcision of the heart in baptisme it could not be plainer expressed if it had been said that the benefit of circumcision by Christ is made yours by baptisme Circumcision was the seal of circumcision of the heart to the Jews circumcision of the heart is sealed by baptisme to you For it saith plainly in whom also ye are circumcised with circumcision made without hands in putting off the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ the means of all this conveyed unto you by baptisme no man can deny that circumcision in the flesh did signifie and sacramentally seal the circumcision of the heart which the Apostle here affirmeth of Baptisme After all this incongruous stuffe Mr. Tombes denieth that baptisme doth succeed circumcision and therefore Infants are not as capable of baptisme as of circumcision he hath confessed that faith is as requisite for one as the other in regard they stand both in the same relation to faith and thereby confesseth what he doth deny and yet no more then the Scripture doth affirm Mr. Tombes falleth out with this argument and in a metaphoricall way talketh of an Egge out of which if not restrainedly taken nothing can be gathered but that baptisme and circumcision in some things signifie the same and do so Noahs flood and the red sea yet do we not say that baptisme succeeded into their place much lesse do we inferre any right to be instituted in their steed respecting the same persons I do professe I was troubled to parallel this non-sense with any thing that might equall it if we could get these Anabaptists to speak sense a man might the better deal with them Can any man make any thing of this after Mr. Tombes hath allowed that they both signifie the righeousnesse of faith that both signifie the sanctification of the heart are they again turned into materiam primam that Noahs flood might be parallelled with baptisme as well as circumcision You bid us take heed of such argumentation you might say baptisme and speaking in some things do agree in prolatione verborum and washing pots in some thing in washing in action with whatsoever we can do Your argument to Noahs Ark is fallacia consequentiae à genere ad speciem affi●mativè thus Noahs Ark agreeth with baptisme in something therefore in sacramentall nature as if a man should say est animal ergo equ●s it is a living creature ergo an horse The collection that nothing can be gathered in a restrained sense but that baptisme in some things signifie the same yes more then that they agree in some things we may gather in what they agree they agree in the nature of a sacrament in divine institution in the ●eal of faith they must be administred to all to whom the tender of grace is made not only to all that are partakers of grace The first in respect of providence limited to a narrow compasse and by the ordinance bounded within the nation of Jews though not to the persons of the Jews all nations might come in and be circumcised and offer sacrifice and eat the Pass●over but they might sacrifice no where but at Ierusalem but now the ordinances are tendered to all nations and baptisme must be administred to all nations no assignation of persons by the commission surely the commission was not invented by man Christ commandeth his Disciples to baptize all nations here is not men women nor children we must baptize some body it must then be examined who they are that must be baptized it is no wil-worship to baptize it is no will-worship to baptize all nations to baptize whom we please and refuse others without ground out of Scripture that is will-worship Now these persons must be found à subjecto capaci from the capacity of the subject or from the judgement of the persons in commission to baptize Your part requireth that you prove Infants are unfits subjects and I will prove in due time that Ministers are unfit judges For arguments drawn from analogies I willingly grant to be invalid if you mind analogies of proportion to invent any part of Gods worship by as if we had invented baptisme by rules of proportion