Selected quad for the lemma: mercy_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
mercy_n	great_a	lord_n	spare_v	2,993	5	9.3697	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26961	Much in a little, or, An abstract of Mr. Baxters plain Scripture-proof for infants church-membership or baptism with a few notes upon the anti-queries of T.G. / by the same hand that wrote the Fifty queries.	Barret, John, 1631-1713.; Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691. Plain Scripture-proof of infants church-membership and baptism.; Grantham, Thomas, 1634-1692. Quaeries examined.	1678 (1678)	Wing B1314; ESTC R14073	29,895	84

anothers sin or the Parents sin only imputed but for their own contracted As Mr. Baxter of Original Sin p. 135. The overthrow of both those Generations in the deluge spoken of Gen. 6. is a strange Medium to prove the Salvation of all their Infants which you hint at Antiq. 7. p. 6 And Rom. 5. 18. which you there cite will no more prove that all Infants that die Infants are saved then that all men are saved The free gift came upon all men unto justification of life This all must be limited to all in Christ Antiq. 22. p. 16. Whether God hath not said that His ways are all equal And whether this do not secure Infants of Gods mercy when God saith that the Son shall not bear the Iniquity of the Father and every one shall bear his own Iniquity whether this be not a promise of Mercy to Infant-children and that in respect of Eternal Life Here you imply that Gods ways are not equal if he shew not Mercy on all Infants if he give not Eternal li 〈◊〉 e unto all that die Infants And if you take these words every one shall bear his own Iniquity to be a promise of Eternal life to all Infants as such you must hold that no Infant hath any iniquity to bear and so wholly deny the doctrine of Original sin which I perceive you do though you will never be able to answer the Arguments and Scripture-evidence brought to prove it But you misapply the Scripture What is spoken of the Adult you apply to Infants a very common mistake of those of your way and perswasion In the 18. of Ezek. the Lord pleads with men that had too good a conceit of themselves and would cast the blame on others if they suffered as if they themselves were guiltless Vers 2. The Fathers have eaten sour Grapes and the childrens Teeth are set on edge q. d. Our Fathers have sinned and we their children smart and suffer for it Now the Lord to shew that his ways are equal declares that he that is righteous shall live vers 5. c. But if such a one hath a Son that proves wicked that Son shall die vers 10. c. Again if the Son of a wicked man sees and abhors his Fathers wicked courses if he be righteous he shall live and shall not bear his Fathers iniquity v. 14. c. yea if a man have been never so wicked yet if he repent and turn he shall surely live vers 21. c. But in all this there is no promise of Eternal life to all the Infant-seed of the wicked Antiq. 37. p. 29. And where are we taught to doubt the Salvation of the Infants of Pagans Sometimes we are troubled at some of your way that they seem to allow us no more ground of hope concerning the Seed of the Faithful then concerning the Seed of the Heathen and Pagans But if it be so clear that none are to doubt the Salvation of the Infants of Pagans we should rest satisfied and think it enough that the children of the faithful are put into so good a condition But I told you in my Treatise of the Covenants p. 359. That to assert the Salvation of all that die in Infancy seems to imply that Gods destroying the old world and Sodom c. were eminent Acts of Mercy rather then of Justice wherein such multitude of Souls were sent to Heaven together who if they had lived had probably at least the greatest part of them gone to Hell I desire you would remove this doubt of mine So likewise I cannot yet reconcile your opinion with that Reason the Lord gives for his sparing Nineveh Jonas 4. 11. which I also there took notice of Had there not been more Mercy suppose the Lord had taken away above sixscore thousand little ones that were not come to the use of reason if then they had all been undoubtedly saved then in sparing them with the City whereupon probably not one of very many of them was saved Help me over this doubt And if the Salvation of Pagans-Infants is not to be doubted as you suggest then suppose the French King should have power to over-run all the Pagan countries in the world though he spoiled plundered fired all the Towns where he came yet provided he did but withal slay all their little ones then will it not follow that he might be looked upon as a greater Blessing than Scourge to the world Had the world your light and knowledge they must conclude that they ought not to be so sorry for the spoiling of their Countries a temporal calamity as they should rejoyce have cause of rejoycing indeed that all their little ones were undoubtedly saved certainly sent to Heaven And then what shall we make of Eph. 2. 3. And were by nature the children of wrath even as others And v. 12. That all that time ye were without Christ being aliens from the Common-wealth of Israel and strangers from the Covenants of Promise having no hope and without God in the world Having no hope If there be no ground to doubt of the Salvation of their Infants is not here some hope But have you not forgotten that you told us you do not doubt but the promises made to the Seed of the Righteous and the promise of shewing mercy to the children of them that love God c. remain unrevoked How are those promises made to their Seed as such if as great mercy be ensured and secured procured by the death of Christ to and for all Infants that die Infants as you intimate Antiq 37. p. 14. and in other places And when you would have the blessing of Abraham understanding it of eternal life to belong to the Infants of the Gentiles as Antiq. 19. p. 14. if you understand and take in the Infants of the unbelieving as well as believing Gentiles then do not you forget that Expression Gal. 3. 14. That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles As to their Infants you here suppose it to have been on them all along and not to come on them by their Parents receiving the Promise through faith According to your opinion all Infants are and ever were blessed with faithful Abraham notwithstanding many of the Parents have been and are Pagans Infidels and such as the word Pronounces under a Curse Now how may divers of your own party such as you call Baptists justly object that to you which without ground they are wont to object against us you would make the promise of Salvation run unto a fleshly line indeed as Mr. Baxter notes in his Review p. 33. And who can forbid water now that Baptism is the initiatory Sign and Seal of the Covenant to any dying Infant of a Pagan since he may be confident the Blessings of the Covenant belong to it You query ubi supra Antiq. 37. p. 29. Will not the second Adams obedience salve the first Adams disobedience And Antiq. 38. p. 30. Whether the

make it Is it a fundamental point and duty of absolute necessity to salvation why then was not Baptism in the Creed called the Apostles Mark 16. 16. saith only He that believeth not is condemned not He that is not Baptised Doth not the Apostle speak of Baptizing as a small part of his work in comparison of Preaching 1 Cor. 1. 14 17. Though all Christs commands both great and small must be obeyed so far as we know them yet if Christians make that which is comparatively so small a point a chief part of their study and conference and lay out at least one half of their zeal about it are not such deluded And if they were in the Truth here yet is not that Truth a snare to them 11. Tho the point of Infant-Baptism be comparatively of less moment yet whether the grounds on which it stands and which are usually denied with it be not of great moment Now to the Question whether some Infants ought not to be Baptized 1. Ought not all Christs Disciples ordinarily to be Baptized Mat. 28. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make ye Disciples Baptizing them And are not some Infants Christs Disciples May not the word Disciple be taken in a larger sense Relatively for one that is of the number of those that belong to Christ as Master and King of the Church and devoted to his oversight and rule and teaching for the future as well as in a narrower sense for those who are actual Learners And 1. Doth not the Holy Ghost call them Disciples Acts 15. 10. Is it not evident that those on whose necks the false Teachers would have laid the yoke were Disciples If you say not All but some of them are here called Disciples that is only them at Age then will it not follow that it is but some only whose Circumcision the Apostle and the Synod doth conclude against that is those of age Then for any thing the Apostle saith or this Synod all Infants might be circumcised still and is not this absurd 2. If no Infants are Disciples what is the cause Is it because they are not capable or because God will not shew them such mercy Can you find out a third cause which is not reducible to one of these And 1. If Infants are capable of being servants of God how can they be thought incapable of being Disciples If you will make a difference is not more required to a Servant than to a Disciple Yet is it not plain that Infants are capable of being Gods Servants Lev. 25. 41 42. If God call Infants his Servants though they are uncapable at present of doing him Service what forbids but that we may call them Disciples tho at present they are uncapable of learning Were not the Jews and their Infants called Gods servants in a sense peculiar as chosen and separated from all others that the Gentiles at age were not so Gods servants as the Jews Infants were Otherwise how could it be a reason for releasing them in the year of Jubilee any more than for releasing any other 2. Are not Infants capable of being Subjects of Christs Kingdom And is not Christs Church both his Kingdom and his School and every Member of it under him both as King and Prophet Are not all Subjects of Christ in his visible Kingdom or Church Christians And are not Disciples and Christians all one in the Language of the Holy Ghost Act. 11. 26. Again can it be that Infants are not Disciples because God will not shew them such Mercy Were not Infants in the Jewish Church Servants and Disciples of Christ tho not so fully and explicitly as now was not Christ then the King of the Church as Mediator upon undertaking to pay our debt And if Infants in the Jews Church were Servants and Disciples doth not God shew as great and greater mercy to his Church now under the Gospel And to your common objection that Infants cannot learn 1. Yet can they not partake of the protection and provision of their Master and enjoy the Priviledges of the Family and School and be under Christs charge and Dominion 2. And be devoted to Learning if they live and consecrated to him as their Master 3. And why should any be more vigorous with Christ in this case than with Men Is it not common to call the whole Nation of the Turks both old and young by the name of Mahometans or Disciples of Mahomet And what if Infants cannot at first learn to know Christ Is that the first Lesson Is it not somewhat if they can be taught any of the duty of a rational creature And doth not Scripture require to teach Children the trade of their life in the time of their youth as early no doubt as they are able to understand and to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord And does not this nurture belong to them as Schollars of Christ 2. Ought not all ordinarily to be Baptized that ought to be admitted visible Church-Members Since Baptism was instituted have we any Precept or Example of admitting visible Members any other way Will you not grant that all visible Church-Members must be admitted by Baptism Now what plentiful proof may be brought that some Infants ought to be admitted visible Church-Members And does there need any more to prove that they ought to be Baptized 1. Whether were not some Infants once to be admitted Members of the visible Church by the merciful gift and appointment of God not yet repealed Were not Infants part of them that entered into Covenant with the Lord that he might stablish them for a people to himself and might be to them a God Deut. 29. 10 11 12 13. And were not Infants engaged to God by the Seal of his Covenant Circumcision If you say That this merciful gift of God to Infants and ordinance for their Church-Membership is repealed does it not lie on you to prove it yet how will you fail herein whereas it is easie to prove the contrary 1. If this Ordinance and merciful Gift be repealed and revoked whether is it in Mercy or in Justice whether is it for their good or for their hurt Dare you say that God hath repealed Infants Church-Membership to their hurt in justice Did he ever revoke his Mercies in Justice to the parties hurt till they first brake Covenant with him and so procured it by their own desert Now were there not many Jews that believed and did not forsake the Covenant of God How then could these or their Infants be put out of the Church in justice to their hurt Or can you say that it is in Mercy for their good How can it be a mercy to take away a mercy except it be to give a greater mercy instead of it Now is there any greater mercy given to Infants than Church-Membership Those Infants which were in the Church before Christ had