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
A65671	Infant baptism plainly proved a discourse wherein certain select arguments for infant baptism, formerly syllogyistically handled, are now reviewed, abbreviated, and reduced to a plain method, for the benefit of the unlearned, and persons of weaker capacity / by Joseph Whiston ; with a large epistle to the pious and learned among the anti-pædobaptists, especially the authors of the late confession of their faith.	Whiston, Joseph, d. 1690.	1678 (1678)	Wing W1694; ESTC R1322	72,861	137

of bringing things together that lay in my former Treatises at some distance one from another in order to a due comparing them one with another 3. I may probably here have put my last hand to this Controversy I am aware of the uncertainty of Life neither am I supposing God should lengthen out that altogether without hope that the addition of any thing more in pursuance of it will be utterly unnecessary the Reasons of this my Hope will more fully appear before I take my leave of you And now Brethren having given you this brief Account both negatively and positively of my adding these Lines to you to the foregoing Copendium bear with me though I say to you as Elihu to Job I am ful of matter the Spirit within me constraineth me I must speak that I may be refreshed and let me I pray you as he there adds not accept any Mans person I speak to you as Friends yea as Brethren as Joint-heirs with us of the common Salvation purchased by our Lord Christ both for you and us Hence ad Plainness of Speech most becomes me so to you I hope it will neither be offensive nor grievous Your Orthodoxy and Soundness of Judgment in the main Fundamental Doctrines of the Gospel with that Love to Truth Moderation of Spirit and Christian Charity afore taken notice of appearing in your late Confession and Appendix thereunto annexed are greatly commendable and I hope I may truly say they have endeared you not only unto me but to all that love our Lord Christ in sincerity neither shall you as I hope at any time find me in Endeavours after mutual Love Conversation and Christian Communion in things wherein we are agreed in the Rear as you have still done in these unpleasing Contests For though I would and dare do no less than * Quia inextricabile quodammodò malum nanquam desinit humana corda pulsare atque inopinatis argumentis fidem inquietare Catholicam necesse est Sectatoribus veritatis prudenter captiosas ejus sententias praevidere sapientérque detegere prolatásque in medium malleo veritatis cohibere usque ad effusionem sanguinis contra eas pro verstate certare Ibid. praef manifest a true Zeal in maintaining the Truth yet that through Grace shall be no Let to me in an amicable and peaceable walking with you according to what we have jointly attained unto I have of a long time been and still am wholly perswaded that those Alienations of affections and Distances in point of Christian Conversation and Communion in things wherein they all agree found among Christians holding the Head and sincerely embracing and practising the Truth as it is in Jesus according to the measures of Light they have respectively received are utterly dissonant from the Doctrine of our Lord Christ and his Apostles and the Simplicity of the Primitive Practice And surely might we be so happy as to take true measures of those Differences that are between us and manage them with that Spirit of Moderation and mutual Forbearance that the Gospel requires it would not only not a little conduce to our mutual Edification and Comfort but greatly obviate those Offences taken at them by the Men of the World Grace never shines more brightly nor appears with a greater lustre than when it is duly exercised under visible Disadvantages Hence if that mutual Love of Christians when yet thinking the same thing appeared so beautiful in the eyes of the Heathens that they could not behold it without an Ecce quam mutuò se amant much more would it so do when it is kept up under the disadvantages of some Differences both in judgment and Practice And hence the Disadvantages Religion may lie under through the Differences in Judgment and Practice among the more strict Professors of it would be abundantly recompensed through the Illustriousness of their Grace rendred more beautiful by occasion of them And hence as I cannot but greatly commend in you that Gospel-becoming Frame of Spirit you have discovered so you may assure your selves I shall through Divine Assistance always endeavour to maintain and promote the like both in my self and all others walking in the same steps with me according as opportunity is put into my hands But Brethren though I cannot but in faithfulness commend what appears in you so greatly commendable yet I must and that also in faithfulness to you shew you wherein I cannot but judge you blame-worthy I remember what the Comick saith Assentatores non veniunt ut arrideant sed ut arrodant Flattery however it may please yet is prejudicial Two things more especially I cannot but judge blame-worthy in you 1. That when you come to give the Reasons why you cannot acquiesce in what as you express is urged by us against you or as you elsewhere candidly interpret is offered for your Satisfaction you wholly overlook those Scriptures and Scripture-Arguments that we at least some of us conceive most cogent and answerably are most insisted on by us to establish our Practice and convince you of your Mistakes and either only suppose us to reason quite otherwise than indeed we do or only single out some of those Scriptures and Arguments drawn from them that we only make use of as additional enforcements of our main Arguments but not as demonstrative of themselves First I say you suppose us to reason quite otherwise than indeed we do or to make use of other Mediums than indeed we do Thus in your 114th and 115th pag. you thus express your selves That albeit this Covenant-Holiness Church-Membership should be as is supposed in reference unto the Infants of Believers yet no Command for Infant-Baptism does immediatly and directly result from such a Quality or Relation insinuating thereby as though we should affirm there did which we do not So Pag. 125. you again thus express your selves Of whatsoever nature the Holiness of the Children mentioned 1 Cor. 7.12 be yet they who do conclude that all such Children whether Infants or of riper years have from hence an immediate Right to Baptism do as we conceive put more into the Conclusion than will be found in the Premisses Whereas we do not conclude meerly from their Covenant-Holiness that they have from thence any immediate Right to Baptism we only improve that Scripture as a Confirmation of their Covenant-state which you at present deny not neither will you determine of what Holiness the Apostle there speaks so that as you grant not so you deny not but the Apostle may speak of foederal Holiness which is all that we affirm Hence what you subjoin in those 114 and 115 pages so in 125 and onwards to 129 is utterly impertinent We say not that a Command for Infant-Baptism doth immediatly and directly result from their Interest in the Covenant or Church-Membership but this we say that God having graciously extended his Covenant to them hath been pleased of his Sovereign will and pleasure to annex a

immediatly discern such evident Notices of the Mind and Will of God concerning the Infant-Seed of his People as upon which our Understandings taking hold and we being guided by the further Manifestations that God from time to time till the sealing up of the Vision as Daniel speaks hath made of his Mind and Will concerning them we shall as by a safe Clew be led to such a clear Insight into and Understanding of the Agreeableness of that Practice we inquire after to the Mind and Will of God as we may comfortably acquiesce and proceed on therein For the clearing up of which let a threefold Proposition with that Evidence the Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament give unto each of them be carefully attended to Prop. I. That when God at the first Establishment of his Covenant with Abraham promised to be a God to him and to his Seed in their Generations he in that Term Seed intended his natural Children immediatly proceeding from his own Loins Prop. II. That this grand Promise of the Covenant is continued to New-Testament Believers in the same Extent and Latitude in which it was at first given to Abraham Prop. III. That all those that are under or are the actual Subject of that grand Promise of the Covenant are the due Subject of Baptism Supposing the Truth of these three Propositions none can with the least shew of Reason question the Agreeableness of that Practice of Infants Baptism the Practice enquired after and by us contended for to the Mind and Will of our Lord Christ To begin with the first Viz. Prop. I. When God at the first Establishment of his Covenant with Abraham promised to be a God to him and to his Seed in their Generations be by that Term Seed firstly and immediatly intended his natural Children and that as immediatly proceeding from his own Loins For the right understanding of this Proposition and preventing all Mistakes about it I readily grant yea positively affirm that together with his natural Children his Spiritual Seed viz. true Believers whether living under the Old or New-Testament-Administration were included and as taken of his natural Seed I do not say that his Children immediatly proceeding from his own Loins were only but this I say they were firstly and immediatly intended I readily grant the Promise had a respect unto and did include all the natural Jews yea even those yet in being Yet this must be carefully observed That though in this Term Seed God intended and had respect to all Abraham's natural Posterity as well as his Children immediatly proceeding from his own Loins yet he did not intend nor had respect to both as falling under one and the same Notion had Consideration As for his Children immediatly proceeding from his own Loins he intended and had respect to them as severally and particularly considered that is he intended and had respect to each of them in particular as Ishmael and his Children by Keturah as well as Isaac but as for his Posterity mediately proceeding from him as all the Jews in following Ages God intended and had respect to them in this Promise only as more generally considered that is he intended and had respect to them only in general as Abraham's Posterity but he intended them not nor had respect to them as severally and particularly considered Hence no one of Abraham's Posterity beyond those that did immediatly proceed from his own Loins had this Promise appertaining to them as singularly or particularly considered meerly as of his natural Seed but whosoever among them were in Covenant or had the Promise appertaining to them they were either such as had personally taken hold of the Covenant themselves or were the natural Children of those who had so done So that for the understanding the full Mind of God in that grand Promise we must distinguish of this Term Seed or of this Seed of Abraham to whom the Promise was made as thus Abraham's Seed is either Natural or Spiritual Again take it of his Natural Seed so they were either such as proceeded immediatly from his own Loins or such as proceeded from those who originally descended from him and were on that account to be reckoned as of his Posterity Now take the Promise as respecting both Abraham's natural Seed immediatly proceeding from his own Loins and also his Spiritual Seed so it was intended of and had respect to each of them in particular But take it as respecting his natural Seed mediatly descending from him in after Ages so it intended and had respect to them only in the general but did not intend nor had respect to any taken apart and singly by themselves As for Instance take the Promise as respecting Abraham's immediate Children so it intended and had respect to Ishmael as well as Isaac and to each of his Children by Keturah as well as either Ishmael or Isaac but take it as respecting his Posterity in after Ages suppose Jacob or any of his Children in Ages at a greater distance from him suppose Moses David or the like so it did not intend them in particular only had a more general respect unto them as of Abraham's Posterity but had no other respect to them than it had to any other of his Posterity that were or are alike descended from him with them But now this I say however this Term Seed is to be understood yet Abraham's natural Seed or Children immediatly proceeding from his own Loins were firstly intended as the immediate and next Subjects of the Promise with Abraham himself Yet further for the fuller clearing up the Mind of God in this Promise and that our Foundation to the main conclusion may be more firmly laid Two things must be carefully observed and remembred 1. That as this promise had a respect to Abraham's whole Seed according as is before opened so it was made to them in their respective Generations that is to them and their Seed that is their natural Children immediatly proceeding from their own Loins 2. That as it respected all Abraham's natural Seed immediatly proceeding from his own Loins and his Spiritual Seed with their respective Children immediatly proceeding from their own Loins as severally and particularly considered so it was made only conditionally it did not secure the Good contained in it absolutely let them live how they would but it did suppose and indispensibly require That as the natural Children of Abraham so the natural Children of all his Seed as grown up to years of Maturity should personally take hold of the Covenant themselves as perform the Conditions of it in their own Persons so that his Spiritual Seed should continue in that way of Faith and Holiness they were entered into in order to their respective enjoyment of the Good promised But to come to the Proof of this first Proposition That Abraham's natural Seed immediatly proceeding from his own Loins were intended in this Promise as the first and next Subjects of it is so

Housholds may be rationally supposed to be considerably great These Phrases of Housholds all his and the like are a sufficient Ground for such a Supposition 3. That not only Infants new born but Children as arrived to a higher state of Childhood or Youth must be supposed to be baptized upon the account of their Fathers Faith supposing there were any such in those Housholds And the reason of this is evident because it cannot with any shew of reason be supposed that such Children though arrived to some use of Reason could yet attain to such a measure of Knowledg in the Mysteries of the Gospel as would have been necessary to qualify them for Baptism had they been to be baptized on their own account in so short a time as did intervene between the Conversion of Parents and the Application of Baptism Children though past meer Infancy yet while in their Youth or Childhood cannot be supposed to attain to the Knowledg of Gospel-Mysteries in the same space of time that Persons come up to their full maturity may do So that it must be either granted that some in or of these Housholds were baptized as the Children of believing Parents on the account of their Parents Faith or we must either deny not only that there were any pure Infants but any Children in their Childhood or Youth in these Houses or else we must contradict the express Letter of the Scriptures But now to deny the former is at least to say no more somewhat unusual that so many Houses and these considerably great should not only have no meer Infants but no Children yet in their Childhood or Youth is utterly improbable and to depart from the Letter of the Scriptures where there is no reason why we should so do is not only unreasonable but in a sence impious So that these Instances made it at least exceeding probable that some were baptized as the Children of believing Parents without consideration had to any personal Qualifications of their own Housholds were baptized and it can hardly be supposed that so many Families and these considerably great should have neither any new born Babes nor yet any as yet in their Childhood or Youth and if any such there were they must be baptized upon the account of their Parents Faith This will more clearly appear if we take a particular account of Lydia's House said to be baptized with her Acts 16.14 15. For 1. It is evident her Houshold was with her at that Assembly to whom the Apostle preached as appears from ver 15. 2dly It 's evident that this was an Assembly of Women vers 13. 3dly There 's no mention made of the conversion of any excepting Lydia her self Now that Lydia should have an Houshold all of Women as so they must be in case she had no Children and these grown up and all converted at one and the same Sermon when not one in the whole Assembly besides was converted and yet that the Holy Ghost should take no notice of any of their Conversions but only of Lydia's her self seems utterly improbable That such a thing is possible cannot be denied but sure that it is improbable must be granted As for those Brethren mentioned vers 40. there is no rational ground to suppose that they were of Lydia's Houshold said to be baptized It is certain they were not for they were all at the Assembly with her which is expresly said to have been an Assembly of Women But 2. Let it be considered that it doth not appear from Scripture that my one in or of those Housholds said to be baptized were converted before their Baptism excepting only the Persons whose Housholds they were This is evident past all Contradiction in respect of Lydia's Houshold And as for the Jailor's though it be said that Paul and Silas spake to him to Words of the Lord and to all that were in his House yet 1. From this it cannot be concluded that any said to be baptized were converted before their Baptism Acts 16.33 seems to intimate that it was after and besides all things are not recorded in the Scriptures exactly in the order in which they were done 2. It doth not appear that those to whom the Word was spoken were the same individual Persons said to be his who were baptized they seem rather to be the Prisoners and those that appertained to the Prison as Under-keepers and such like 3. Though some of them might be the same Persons yet it doth not appear that they were converted by the Word So that from these Passages it cannot be proved that any of his said to be baptized with him were converted before their Baptism And as for what is said concerning his rejoicing be with his Houshold believing in God if the words were rightly translated they are so far from proving the Conversion of his Houshold before their Baptism that they rather intimate the contrary they should be translated He rejoiced with his Houshold he believing in God And the Apostle laying the Ground of his Housholds rejoicing in his personal Faith seems plainly to imply that the Good that was the matter of their Joy did arise from his Faith And as for Stephen's Houshold there is nothing evidencing that any of them were converted before their Baptism although it is said they addicted themselves to the Ministry of the Saints yet that they were the same Persons intended in that Term Houshold said to be baptized is uncertain or suppose some of them might be yet whether they were converted before their Baptism is uncertain how long this Epistle was written after he and his Houshold were baptized we cannot say some then in their Childhood might be grown up to a capability of ministring to the Saints when this Epistle was written 3. Let it be considered in the last place that though it should be granted that some in or of those Housholds might be converted before their Baptism yet from thence it cannot be concluded that all intended in these Terms Houses or Housholds were so Suppose some in the Jailor's House might be concerted before their Baptism yet it will not follow from thence that all were so and much less will it follow that there were none in Lydia's House baptized but such as did personally believe Now if there be but a probability that any one in or of these Housholds said to be baptized were baptized on the account of their personal Faith that gives as full an evidence to the Truth pleaded for as the probability of all in those Houses being baptized on the same account would do So that sure it cannot be denied but that all these Instances do at least make it probable that some were baptized in Primitive Times as the Children of believing Parents without Consideration had to any thing in themselves and a Probability added to those foregoing Arguments may greatly establish us in the Truth pleaded for But as a Close of all let these two things be considered 1.

The utter Improbability in case it had been the will of our Lord Christ that none but adult Believers should be baptized that the Holy Ghost should leave upon record the Baptism of so many Housholds and yet leave it utterly uncertain whether any in or of these Housholds were baptized on the account of their personal Faith and Repentance especially there being so great a Probability according to the account he gives us of some of those Housholds that there must needs be some more of them who must be baptized on the account of their Parents Faith We cannot reasonably imagine that the Holy Ghost would record these Instances so as to give so great an occasion of Mistake to the People of God to take up a Practice so prejudicial to the Honour of Christ and his Interest in the World as our Opposers suppose the Baptism of Infants to be in case it had been the will of our Lord Christ they should not be baptized 2. Consider how the Holy Ghost doth vary his manner of expression when he speaks of the Baptism of Housholds and when he speaks of the Baptism of others When he speaks of the Baptism of Housholds he tells us of their Baptism together with the chief Heads and Governors not taking the least notice of the Faith of any in or of those Housholds as the Ground of their Baptism but when he speaks of the Baptism of others he speaks more distinguishingly So many as gladly received the Word were baptized And why the Holy Ghost should not express himself after the same manner when he speaks of the Baptism of Housholds no rational account can be given save only this that it is to shew that as the Covenant with the Promise thereof is continued to the Infant-Seed of Believers so that the present Token which is Baptism should be applied unto them But to have done with this From all that hath been said our three foregoing Propositions are sufficiently evident and from all our main Conclusion viz. That it is the Will of our Lord Christ that the Infant-Seed of his People should be baptized fully established CHAP. V. Sundry Objections answered The Conclusion Object 1. THE main and chief Objection against Infant-Baptism and that which alone is of any considerable weight is that raised from Mat. 28.19 compared with Mark 16.15 16. where we have the Institution of Baptism as some though groundlesly would have it rather the Commission authorizing and enjoining the Administration of the Ordinance among the Gentiles recorded And I find our Opposers grounding their Plea against Infant-Baptism upon this Commission two ways I. Some argue from a threefold Supposition which they conceive this Commission lays a fair Ground for as differently recorded by those two Evangelists 1. That that Relative Term them must refer to Disciples supposed to be included in the word which we translate teach or as others would have it disciple or make Disciples as its Antecedent and not to that word Nations 2. That Infants not being capable of teaching neither are nor can in propriety of Speech be said to be Disciples 3. That this Institution or Commission is to be understood as excluding all from Baptism who are not comprehended in it hence they argue that the Subjects proposed by our Lord Christ to be baptized being Disciples and Infants not being nor in propriety of Speech can be called Disciples and all others besides Disciples being excluded by Christ his proposing them only to be baptized hence Infants neither may nor ought to be baptized In Answer to this we say That all these Suppositions are utterly groundless and false For the first viz. That them must refer to Disciples included in that word we translate teach or make Disciples and not to Nations This we utterly deny and affirm on the contrary that it must refer to Nations and not to Disciples and that for two Reasons Reas 1. Because we ought to keep to the literal and plain Grammatical Construction of Scriptures where there is no necessary reason why we should depart therefrom Now according to the literal and plain Grammatical Construction of this Scripture Them must be referred to Nations whether we translate that word to teach or Nations or make all Nations Disciples baptizing them baptizing who why according to the literal Construction of the words the Nations to be taught or made Disciples and here is no reason why we should depart from the literal and plain Grammatical Construction of the words But 2. It is altogether doubtful whether our Lord Christ in this Commission had any respect to such a Criticism as this viz. That Disciples are included in that word we translate to teach Now to depart from the literal and plain Grammatical Construction when there is no reason so to do upon the Supposition of a Criticism in a word when it is utterly uncertain whether our Lord Christ had any respect to any such Criticism or no is unreasonable and subjects all Scriptures to be framed into any form according to the various Fancies of Men So that undoubtedly they are the Nations that are to be baptized And as for what is said to give Countenance to this Supposition it signifies nothing at all For 1. Whereas it is said Thus to expound this Text agrees with what is recorded of Christ viz. That he made Disciples and by his Disciples baptized them this is of no weight for though he made Disciples and baptized them viz. by his Disciples yet it is not said he only baptized them he made or might make Disciples and order them to be baptized and with them their Children or Housholds 2. Whereas it is yet further said that thus to expound this Scripture seems best to agree with the words of Mark recording the same Commission And answerably that that Clause in Mark Go preach the Gospel to every Creature answers this Clause in Matthew Go teach all Nations and the next Clause in Mark He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved answers this other Clause in Matthew Baptizing them And consequently that the Subjects of Baptism must be Disciples and those Disciples must be Believers For answer to this there is no necessity that we should take these several Clauses as answering one another we may conjoin both the words of Matthew and Mark together and take the Commission as given out by Christ in more words thus Go teach all Nations baptizing them I say Go preach the Gospel to every Creature he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned And then as in Matthew that Phrase all Nations expounds that Clause in Mark every Creature so in that following Clause Mark only shews what should be the Issue of their Administration of these two Ordinances of Preaching and Baptizing not at all determining the Subjects of the one or the other as for those that did believe and were baptized they should be saved but as for others that believe