Selected quad for the lemma: state_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
state_n	church_n	salvation_n	visible_a	2,151	5	9.7825	5	true

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

nor yet of the Law of Works as such how can you say that it is repealed seeing no other Laws are repealed Will you say it was part of the Law of Works which knows no mercy to those who have once offended Was not Church-membership a mercy And if it was part of the Ceremonial Law what was it a type of What is the Antitype that hath succeeded it And how could this be part of the meerly Judicial Law seeing Infants were Church-members long before the time of Moses when the Jews were formed into a Common-wealth and the Judicial Laws given them And can you say that this was proper to the Jews Was it given to them only that is only to Isaac and his Seed on whom the Jewish priviledges were entailed Were not many hundreds circumcised as Church-members and among them many Infants in Abrahams family before Isaac was born and so all the Proselites with their Infants afterwards that would come in 13. Is it not clear that there is an Universal Church visible And that every one that is a Member of a particular Church is also a Member of the Universal And that the Jews Infants were Members of the Universal And that this Universal Church is not dissolved Now must not he that will affirm the whole species of Infants are cast out of the Universal visible Church prove it well And since we find that they were once in it what need we any more proof that they remain in till it can be shewn where it is revoked And is it any good consequence that is fetcht from the removal of a particular Church or of the Jews particular Church to breaking off from the Universal If a Jew had been forced into a strange Country yet had not both he and his children there been Members of the Universal Church 14. Is not that false Doctrine which makes the children of the Faithful to be in as bad or a worse condition than the Curse Deut. 28. 32 41. doth make the children of Covenant-breakers to be in Is it not said v. 4. that those that keep the Covenant are blessed in the fruit of their Body And of Covenant-breakers v. 18. 32 41. Cursed shalt thou be in the Fruit of thy Body Thy Sons and thy Daughters shall be given to another people They shall go into Captivity Now is it not a sorer curse to be put out of the whole Visible Church of Christ than to go into Captivity To be in Captivity is but a Bodily judgment directly but is it not directly a Spiritual judgment to be out of the Church 15. Doth not the Doctrine which puts Infants out of the visible Church of Christ leave them in the visible Kingdom of the Devil Doth not the World and the Church contain all mankind according to the ordinary Scripture-distribution If you say Infants may be of the invisible Church is not the visible Church wider than the invisible That ordinarily we may not judg any to be of the invisible Church who are not of the visible 16. And will you leave us no sound grounded hope of the justification or salvation of any dying Infants in the world Can we have any true ground of Christian hope that they shall be saved who are not so much as seemingly or visibly in a state of Salvation and so die To judge a thing to be what it doth not any way seem or appear to be is it not likely actually but alway virtually and interpretatively a false judgment And if they that are not of the true Church are not in a state of Salvation then will it not follow that they that seem not to be of that Church do not so much as seem to be in a state of Salvation 17. What a full plain Text is that 1 Cor. 7. 14. Are the children of Believers holy in state then ought they not to be admitted visible Church-members Are not all Divines agreed in the definition of the Church That it is a Society of persons separated from the world to God Will not this Text prove children holy by a stated separation to God Is not the constant sense of the word holy a separation to God And were not the Infants of the faithful Church-members and so holy before Christs time And is it not most probable that the Apostle speaks of the same kind of holiness which was the ordinary priviledge of the faithful before But utterly improbable that he should speak of no other holiness here but legitimation which is common to the children of Pagans And if to be holy in the Apostles sense here be no more than to be lawfully begotten then may we not call all persons holy that are not Bastards Then is not almost all the world holy Because Bastards are called clean will it therefore follow that the legitimate may be called holy The Beasts that chewed the Cud and had cloven feet were clean will you therefore say they were holy 18. When it is said Mark 10. 14. Of such is the Kingdom of God whether this be not more than they may be visible Church-Members And whether these which Christ took up in his Armes and Blessed were not Members of his visible Church Are any visibly Blest without the visible Church And is it not considerable that all the three former Evangelists make full mention of these passages of Christ Is it not evident that they were taken for Doctrines of moment for the Churches information And whether those words of Christ so plain and earnest suffer little Children to come unto me and forbid them not be not a better Plea at Judgment for our admitting Infants than any that ever yet you have brought for refusing them Turn over your Bible and see if you can find where Christ or his Apostles have said as much against our admitting Infants Church-members and then consider which way is safest Now to the Common Objections 1. If these Texts be objected Rom. 9. 8. They that are the Children of the flesh these are not the Children of God but the Children of the Promise are accounted for the Seed Eph. 2. 3. We are by Nature the Children of Wrath. To the first Text what is it the Apostle mainly drives at but that Men are not therefore saved because they are Abraham's carnal seed and consequently not because they are the carnal seed of any other And is it their certain Salvation or their Church-Membership that we dispute for in regard of Individuals And further doth the Apostle speak one word against the priviledge of those Infants whose Parents violated not Gods Covenant nor fell away If a man should affirm That all the Infants of the faithful so dying are certainly saved is there a syllable in the Text against him Were they not aged unbelievers that the Apostle excludeth here And to Eph. 2. 3. What though we are by nature the children of wrath Doth it follow that we may not

they not God engaged in Covenant to be their God and to take them for his peculiar people Deut. 29. 10 11 12. And those that were aliens to the Common-wealth of Israel were they not strangers to the covenant of Promise and without hope and without God in the World Eph. 2. 12. And is there any Scripture that speaketh of delivering any from this sad estate but Church-Members And when God addeth to the Church such as shall be saved can it be any known way of mercy to be cast or put out of the Church Did Christ come in tho flesh to put Infants out of his Church in mercy Will you say he could more fitly save them out of his Church than in it And if it be no benefit to the Catholick Church to have Infants kept out of Heaven nor any hurt to the Church to see them there why should it be a benefit to the whole Church to have them kept out on Earth or any hurt to the Church to see them Members here And whatsoever it may be to strangers yet how can it seem such a mercy to Parents to have their Children put out of the Church why then hath God made such promises to Parents for their Seed as if much of the Parents comfort lay in their Childrens Welfare And hath God no mercy for Infants or can he not shew mercy to the whole Church in an easier way than by casting out all their Infants What great comfort would follow this conclusion That all your Infants are out of Christs visible Church Can you prove that Christ will save those that are no Christians not so much as visibly or seemingly Subjects of his Kingdom If some priviledges were taken away as the Release of the Jews servants c. yet are there not far greater given in their stead 2. Is it not evident from Rom. 11. 17. That only some of the Branches were broken off from the Church Therefore to the rest that remained in the gift was not repealed Doth not the Apostle say it of that Church whereof Infants were Members with their Parents that but some were broken off from this Church and how far is the whole Church from being dissolved And who can imagine that God should cast out the Infant that came in for the Parents sake while the Parents remain in the same Church 3. Is it not evident from Rom. 11. 20. That none of the Jews were broken off but for unbelief And consequently that Believers and their seed were not broken off Will you say that the Apostle speaketh there of the Invisible Church Doth he not speak of that Church whereof the Jews were natural Branches v. 24. and was not that the Visible Church And if the breaking off was visible such wherein Gods severity was to be beheld by the Gentiles as v. 22. was it not from the Visible Church directly Could there be a visible breaking off or removal from an invisible term 4. If it be into their own Olive which they were broke off from and of which they were natural branches that the Jews shall be re-ingraffed at their recovery as Rom. 11. 24. then how is Gods Ordinance for their Infant Church-Membership repealed Is not their own Olive their own Church And did not their own Church ever contain Infants as Members As it will when it is but part of the Catholick Church tho they be not restored to the Mosaical Law or Covenant of peculiarity but taken into the Catholick Church 5. Is it not the same Olive or Church which the Jews were broken off from that we Gentiles are graffed into as Rom. 11. 17 19 24 And if their Church admitted Infant-Members and ours be the same must not ours admit of Infant-Members also Is it not plain from the Text that the Olive or Church it self remained still only some Branches were broken off and others of the Gentiles ingraffed in their stead Then how is it taken down any further than as to ceremonial accidentals 6. Would not Christ have gathered Jerusalem which is usually put for all Judea and the Jewish Nation Mat. 23. 37 38 39. And is it likely that he would have unchurched all their Infants when he would have gathered to him whole Jerusalem or the whole Nation 7. Can ye suppose the believing Jews children and so the Parents in point of comfort to be in a worse condition since Christ than they were before Did Christ come to make Believers or their children miserable or bring them into a worse condition And is it not a far worse condition to be out of the visible Church than in it Hath not Christ made larger promises to his Church Visible than to any in the world that are not of the Church what promise is there to others except the conditional upon their coming in 8. If the Church of Christ be not in a worse state now in regard of the Childrens happiness and the Parents comfort than it was before Christs coming then will it not follow that our children ought to be admitted Church-Members and consequently that Ordinance and merciful Gift is not repealed 9. If the Children of Believers now be put out of the Church then are they not in a worse condition than the very children of the Gentiles were before the coming of Christ Is it not the express Letter of Gods Law that any stranger that would come in might bring his children and all be Circumcised and admitted Members of the Jews Church 10. Was not the Covenant Deur 29. 10 11 12. which all the Jews with all their little ones were enter'd into with God a Covenant of Grace as distinct from the Laws which was repealed How then is it or their Church-Membership grounded on it repealed Is not that a Covenant of Grace wherein God taketh them to be his people and engageth to be their God Hath God entred into such a Covenant with any since the Fall but in Christ and upon terms of Grace Is not that a Covenant of Grace wherein the Lord promiseth to Circumcise their hearts and the hearts of their Seed c. See Heb. 10. 16 17. And doth not the Apostle Paul cite those words of faith Rom. 10. 5 6 7 8. out of this very Covenant Compare Deut. 30. 11 12 13 14. with the Text last cited 11. If Infants then were entred and engaged Church-Members by that Circumcision which was a Seal of the Rightcousness of Faith and was not given on Legal grounds as Rom. 4. 11. how comes that Church-Membership of Infants to be repealed Is it any other than a shift to say that it was only such a Seal of Abrahams righteousness of Faith Is not the nature end and use of Sacraments or holy engaging Signs and Seals the same to all though the fruit be not alway the same 12. If the Law of Infants Church-Membership was no part of the Ceremonial or meerly Judicial Law