Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	according_a	jesus_n	lord_n	1,817	5	3.2256	3	false

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

and to come up again out of the Water when they were never in it as those are said to do in Acts 8. 38. They went both down into the Water and they came up again out of the Water Besides I challenge all the Learned in the World to shew one Instance in the New Testament that these words Rantizo Rantismos or Rantisma are ever made use of by the Spirit of God to express that Ordinance of Baptism by For they know right well that Bapto and its Derivatives are always made use of to express it by And where they are translated into English the one is rendred Dipping and the other Sprinkling But if these Men will keep up a Practise contrary to Holy Scripture and the Judgment of the most Learned Lexicographers and Criticks in the Greek Tongue it 's their own fault and not ours The Assembly of Divines Annotations Acts 8. 38. They went both down into the Water They were wont to dip the whole Body or go down into the Water as here and Matth. 3. 16. And upon Rom. 6. 4. Buried with him by Baptism See Col. 2. 12. In this Phrase the Apostle seemeth to allude to the Ancient Manner of Baptism which was to Dip the Parties Baptized and as it were to bury them under the Water for a while and then to draw them out of it and lift them up to represent the Burial of our Old Man and our Resurrection to newness of Life The late Dr. Gabriel Towerson in his Explication of the Catechism of the Church of England Part 4. pag. 20 c. speaks largely upon it in Vindication of the Rite of Dipping in Baptism of which I shall recite some few Passages and refer you to his Book for the rest Baptism is intended as a Sign and that in respect of the Manner of Application used I mean the dipping or plunging the Party Baptized in it A signification which St. Paul will not suffer those to forget who have been acquainted with his Epistles for which he Quotes Rom 6 4. and Col. 2. 12. It was performed by the Ceremony of Immersion that the Person Immersed might by that Ceremony which was no obscure Image of a Sepulture be minded of the precedent Death as in like manner by his coming again out of the Water of his rising from that Death to Life after the Example of the Institutor thereof Then he puts this Question Whether it ought to be performed by an Immersion or an Aspersion c His Answer is It may be a more material Question than is commonly deemed by us who have been accustomed to Baptize by a bare Effusion and Sprinkling of Water upon the Party For things which depend for their force on the meer Will and Pleasure of him who Instituted them there ought no doubt great regard to be had to the Commands of him that did so as without which there is no reason we should receive the benefit of that Ceremony to which he has been pleased to annex it Now what the Command of Christ was in this particular cannot be well doubted of by those who shall consider First The words of Christ Matth 28. 19. concerning it and the Practice of those Times whether in the Baptism of John or our Saviour for the words of Christ are That they should Baptize or Dip those whom they made Disciples to him for so no doubt the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptizontes properly signifies Though if there could be any doubt concerning the signification of the words themselves yet would that doubt be removed by considering the Practice of those Times For such as was the Practice of those Times in Baptizing such in reason we are to think our Saviour's Command to have been concerning it c. there being not otherwise any means either for those or future Times to discover his intention concerning it What the Practice of those Times were will need no other proof than the resorting to Rivers and other such Receptacles of Water for the performance of that Ceremony as that because there was much Water there Matth. 3. 5. John 3. 23. And the Scripture expresly affirming concerning the Baptism of the Eunuch Acts 8. 38. That Philip and the Eunuch went both down into a certain Water which they met with in their Journey in order to the Baptizing of the latter For what need would there have been of the Baptists resorting to great Confluxes of Water or of Philip's and the Eunuch's going down into this were it not that the Baptism both of the one and of the other were to be performed by an Immersion a very little Water as we know it doth with us sufficing for an Effusion or Sprinkling The same is to be said yet more upon the account of our conforming to the Death and Resurrection of Christ which we learn from St. Paul to be the design of Baptism to signifie for though that might and was well enough represented by the Beptized Persons being buried in Baptism and their rising out of it yet can it not be said to be so or at least but very imperfectly by the bare pouring out or sprinkling the Baptismal Water on him But therefore as there is so much the more Reason to represent the Rite of Immersion as the Only Legitimate Rite of Baptism because the Only One that can answer the ends of its Institution and those things that were to be signified by it so especially if as is well known and undoubtedly of great force the general Practice of the Primitive Church was agreeable thereto and the Greek Church to this very Day for who can think that either the one or the other would have been so tenacious of so troublesom a Rite were it not that they were well assured as they of the Primitive Church might very well be of its being the Only Instituted and Legitimate One. I cannot but think the forementioned Arguments to be so far of force as to evince the necessity thereof c. For what benefit can Men ordinarily expect from that which depends for its force upon the Will of him that Instituted it where there is no such compliance in the least with it and the Command of the Institutor as may answer those ends for which he applied it Dr. Barlow late Bishop of Lincoln in his Letter to Mr. John Tombes Printed in his Life-time and owned by him He saith thus I believe and know that there is neither Precept nor Practice in the Scripture for Paedo-Baptism nor any just Evidence for it for about two hundred Years after Christ Sure I am that in the Primitive Times they were to be Catechumeni and then Illuminati or Baptizati And this not only Children of Pagans or Pagans Converted but Children of Christian Parents Nazianzen though a Bishop's Son being not Baptized till he was about Thirty Years of Age as appears in his Life And the like is evident in some others I have seen what my Learned and Worthy Friend Dr. Hammond Mr. Baxter and others say in defence of it and I confess I wonder not a little that Men of such Parts should say so much to so little purpose For I have not seen any thing like an Argument for it I shall add no more but my hearty Wishes That as God was pleased to make the Hearing of the Dispute of such use to several Persons that they were fully convinced by the Grace of God towards them of the Truth of the Doctrine of Holy Baptism and did in few Days after submit themselves to be Dipt in Water upon Profession of their Faith according to the Commission of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ That it may also be of the like use to many others in the Reading of it that so there may be added to the Church daily such as shall be Saved And then my design will be answered in its Publication and I shall count it a sufficient Reward for all my Pains and Labour therein FINIS

Then you must suppose that Christ hath required some of his Ministers to Baptize Infants Mr. Leigh We distinguish between consequential Truths and express Words Dr. Russel So do we But I hope our Lord's Commission about Holy Baptism is delivered in express Words and not consequential The Term in my Argument is very lax I do not there say Commanded but required and if you prove the Baptism of Infants any where required by Christ it is sufficient Mr. Chandler Will you allow genuine Consequences drawn from Scripture Mr. Leigh Will you allow good Scripture Consequences in this Case or do you expect plain Scripture Words Dr. Russel What need is there of so many Words about this Certainly Mr. Chandler is bound to fix upon some Answer to my Argument I say again the Term I use admits of any Proof he is not thereby obliged to produce any express Command if he can do without it if he prove that Christ hath any way required it it will suffice Mr. Leigh Gentlemen you that are Notaries pray observe how ambiguously he expresses himself Dr. Russel I think I express my self plainly enough when I tell you that if you prove it any ways requir'd I will allow it Mr. Robinson their Moderator saith Will you allow this of Consequence or not Dr. Russel Let us not thus stumble at the Threshold how often must I tell you that if you can prove it any way required by Christ prove it either by Consequence or which way you will if you do but prove it I will allow it But you must remember that you are to prove it according to Christ's Commission for those are the Terms in the Queston and I believe you will find a difficult Task to do that by Consequence For suppose an Embassador should declare to the Prince to whom he is sent That his Master hath given him Authority by his Commission to negotiate with him about such a particular matter that he shall name and that he is charged to do this in his Master's Name and Stead If when his Credentials are produced there is no such thing mentioned therein he cannot expect the Prince should give credit to him therein when he had told him before it was a Part of his Master's Commission which is our Case And his alledging only consequential Proofs after that will not serve his turn But if you think you can do it by Consequences you may try your Skill with all my heart so you do but prove it required according to Christ's Commission which is the thing in Question between us Mr. Chandler What from the Commission Mr. Robinson the Moderator cries out to Mr. Chandler Hold Dr. Russel must prove it by an universal Negative Dr. Russel Then Mr. Chandler must deny some part of my Argument which I have not yet been able to prevail with him to do Mr. Chandler I deny the Minor Dr. Russel By denying the Minor you say that Christ hath some where required some of his Ministers to baptize Infants Mr. Chandler By good Consequence Dr. Russel Then I will make good my Minor thus If Christ hath any where required any of his Ministers to baptize Infants it 's somewhere so recorded in the Holy Scriptures But it 's no where so recorded in the Holy Scriptures Ergo Christ hath not any where required any of his Ministers to baptize Infants Mr. Chandler What do you mean by being recorded Dr. Russel I hope you know what the word Recorded signifies I mean any where so written Mr. Chandler To this I answer by distinguishing again If you mean by being Recorded in Scripture being Recorded in express Words I deny your Major but if you mean by Consequence I deny the Minor Dr. Russel If you do but prove it recorded it is sufficient Mr. Chandler I deny your Minor Dr. Russel Then you say it 's somewhere so Recorded in Holy Scripture I therefore argue thus If it be any where so recorded in Holy Scripture Mr. Chandler or some other Person is able to shew it But neither Mr. Chandler not any other Person whatsoever is able to shew it Ergo It is not any where so recorded in Holy Scripture Mr. Chandler I deny your Minor Dr. Russel Hold Sir it is an universal Negative You must give your Instance where it is so written I appeal to your Moderator Mr. Robinson You must prove it still Suppose Mr. Chandler cannot give an Instance nor no body in the Company you cannot thence infer that none in the World can Dr. Russel This is in Effect to give away your Cause when there are so many Men of Parts and Learning present if none of them are able to give us one Instance from Scripture for Infant-baptism we cannot expect that any body else should Besides I would desire those Honourable Persons and others in this Assembly that understand these things to consider that I am not fairly dealt with and that I am under a great Disadvantage not having other learned Persons to assist me as Mr. Chandler hath and yet am forced to answer two or three at a time But to proceed I do affirm that it being an universal Negative he ought to give his Instance and I demand it of him and till he doth my Argument stands good Mr. Chandler This is only a Trick to turn off the Opponency Dr. Russel What do you talk of a Trick I hope you are able to give one single Instance of what is your daily Practice Mr. Leigh You do this to turn the Opponency upon Mr. Chandler Dr. Russel If Mr. Chandler will say he can give no Instance I will urge it no further Here Mr. Chandler was going to speak and Mr. Leigh hindered him Dr. Russel Sir why do you hinder Mr. Chandler from speaking Mr. Chandler Because you would turn the Opponency upon me Dr. Russel I intend no such thing When you have brought your Instance after I have spoken to it I will then go on with the Opponency Mr. Leigh You can bring no Argument can throw the Opponency upon him like this Mr. Robinson You must know that according to all the Rules of Logick you are to prove your Proposition For you universally affirm it though in Form it runs negatively You say no Person can give an Instance in Scripture whereby we baptize Infants How do you prove this Dr. Russel I never yet knew that an universal Negative was an universal Affirmative This is to say any thing tho' never so contrary to Truth I wonder at it that you should take the matter upon you thus by Turns especially that you should take upon you to be a Disputant whose Work is only to be a Mederator Is this civil Treatment to a Stranger that comes so many Miles to meet you Mr. Robinson I must not suffer the Question to be alter'd Mr. Chandler is Respondent you put the part of an Opponent upon him I must not allow it Do you prove your Question Dr. Russel Mr. Chandler I understand