Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	apostle_n	church_n	receive_v	2,532	5	5.3979	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A84133	The Anabaptists ground-work for reformation: or, New planting of churches, that no man, woman, nor child, may be baptized, but such as have justifying faith, and doe make profession thereof, before, to the baptizer, found false, with all things depending thereon. As being contrary to the Scriptures, and to the examples of Christ and his Apostles, ... Proved by severall arguments. Whereunto one T.L. a principall baptizer, (and apostle in their account) hath given his answers. Unto which answers, replies are also made by I.E. and some arguments annexed, proving, that the children of all such beleevers as were baptized, and so received into the Church, might be baptized, and received also. With a brief declaration what the true reformation is, and shal be, farre above these Anabaptists, and all such carnall builders conceits. And who the two witnesses of God are, by whom chiefly it is to be performed. Imprimatut [sic]. Iames Cranford,	Etherington, John, fl. 1641-1645.; Lamb, Thomas, d. 1686.	1644 (1644)	Wing E3381; Thomason E50_2; ESTC R23515	28,610	37

THE ANABAPTISTS GROUND-WORK For Reformation OR New Planting of Churches That no man woman nor child may be baptized but such as have justifying Faith and doe make profession thereof before to the Baptizer Found false with all things depending thereon As being contrary to the Scriptures and to the Examples of CHRIST and his APOSTLES Which was that they all who gladly received the Word were baptized though they had not yet justifying Faith Proved by severall Arguments Whereunto one T. L. a principall Baptizer and Apostle in their account hath given his Answers Unto which Answers Replies are also made by I. E. And some Arguments annexed proving That the Children of all such beleevers as were baptized and so received into the Church might be baptized and received also With a brief declaration what the true Reformation is and shal be farre above these Anabaptists and all such carnall builders conceits And who the two Witnesses of God are by whom chiefly it is to be performed Imprimatur Iames Cranford London printed by M. Simmons in Aldersgate-street 1644. The Preface to the Reader GIving him to understand the occasion of this that followeth which was first upon some little speech had with three or foure of these Anabaptists about their opinions and practice some of them saying they could bring men who had as sufficient gifts and authoritie from God to preach and baptize as the Apostle Peter had Acts 2. To which saying it was replied That if they could bring such a one he was worthy to be hearkned unto And they answered That they could bring many such And it was replied again One such a one would be sufficient So that he were one of the best and most able And so the time and place being appointed there came divers of them whereof one sate him down at the Tables end as to be the chiefe speaker So it was told him what some had said and he was asked if he did professe so much of himselfe or no which he did seem in part to deny But yet professed that he had as good ground and authority from God for that which he undertook to do and practise as the Apostle Peter had for that which he did And so hereupon some speeches passed between us touching the rule for baptizing and the first principle or ground-work affirmed by T.L. was that every one must first have justifying faith and professe the same to the baptizer and he so judge of him before he might be baptized Which was opposed and answered That the receiving of the word gladly was sufficient for outward Baptisme though justifying faith were yet wanting The question being concerning men and women of yeares But T. L. was by some of his company hastned away because many people staid at his house as they said to hear him preach that evening by which means our Speech was broken off and he went his way So upon these occasions the arguments which follow were written and sent him and he hath returned his answers unto them unto which answers replies are also made And some arguments after them to prove that little children may lawfully according to the rule of the word of God be baptized And also a brief declaration what the true reformation is and shall be farre exceeding in spirituall and heavenly respects the corrupt conceits of these Anabaptists and all other such like earthly and carnall builders And who the two witnesses of God are by whose meanes chiefly it is to be performed All which I referre to the consideration of the judicious Reader desiring of God that he would give him his holy Spirit of truth to lead him into all truth And so I rest his Christian friend I. E. The Anabaptists Ground-worke for Reformation or new planting of Churches found false and disproved BY certain Arguments proving by the Scriptures and Practice of Christ and his Apostles That a Teacher sent of God may Baptize such as gladly receive the Word though they have not yet justifying Faith and therein do according to the rule of Christ The Inquiry of T. L. to this I make inquiry What rule any Teacher hath to distinguish a person gladly receiving the Word from one concluded by him in his own knowledge void of justifying Faith at the same time and hee to baptize the same if no rule then it 's transgression so to do because Whatsoever is not of Faith is sin Rom. 14. The Reply of I. E. to this Quere To this I reply and say Christs example is a rule sufficient Christ did distinguish in his own judgement at the same time and baptized such as gladly received his Word though he knew they had not justifying Faith and upon the ground of Christs example such as he sends may and so do it of Faith and not sin but T. L. denying this and practising otherwise without example or rule from Christ doth it without faith and sinneth The first Argument of I. E. If Christ did baptize or cause to be baptized such disciples as hee knew had not justifying Faith then such as he sends may and not do contrary but agreeable to the Rule because what Christ did was agreeable and not contrary But Christ did baptize such Disciples as he knew had not justifying faith as it is manifest by these Scriptures John 4.1 Iohn 6.64 65 66. Therefore such as he sends may The answer of T. L. I answer by distinction of Christs practice from ours in respect of his knowledge above his Ministers in which respect it was not agreeable but above the rule given to the Ministers of Baptisme and therefore his practice in reference to his knowledge no rule for his Ministers in reference to theirs And thus is your first argument refelled The Reply of I. E. This distinction of T. L. in putting such a difference between Christs practice and the rule given to his Ministers in respect of his knowledge is utterly false for the more perfect Christs knowledge was the more perfect was his practise giving his Apostles and Ministers an example for them to follow And although they could not follow him in the measure and fulnesse of his knowledge he being God and knowing all things yet as he knew how to distinguish and put a difference between such as gladly received his word and so farre became his disciples fitted to be entertained into the outward state of the Church by outward Baptisme and this kind of beleeving and such as afterward by a more excellent gift of the Spirit did eate his flesh and drink his blood beleeve in him unto justification and life So he gave gifts to his Apostles and such as he sent whereby they were able to discern and distinguish between persons and persons between faith and faith and knew that they which gladly received the word were to be baptized though yet wanting justifying faith And so according to Christs example through the grace and gift given them they practised as Act. 2.4 Act. 8.12.13 where they

nor could they so judge of all whom they baptized neither did they require such a profession from them as T. L. would have it Thirdly whereas T. L. saith that although Christ did not take it for granted nor so judge yet the Apostles did which to prove he quotes Phil. 1.7 the words are these Even as it is meet for me to think of you all Whereby T. L. would make Paul like unto himselfe to put no difference between judging upon knowledge and confidence and thinking well upon some kind of hope or probabilitie Wherein he greatly wrongs the Apostle For the Apostle he directing his Epistle especially to the Saints as his usuall manner was to all other Churches so unto the Saints in Philippi of whose fruit hee had had good experience judgeth confidently of many thinks well of all that he writes to and sayes of others clean contrary For many walke of whom I have told you often and now tell you even weeping that they are enemies to the crosse of Christ wh●se end is destruction c. Phil. 3.18 So that this place serves nothing at all to prove as T. L. would have it that the Apostles took that for granted to be which was not and judged contrary to Christs judgement The fourth Argument Which is to prove That such a beleife as those disciples had that fell away mentioned Matth. 13.21.22 Ioh. 16.64.65 Acts 5.1.2 Acts 8.17 is sufficient for outward baptisme To this preface of the Argument T. L. first answers saying To which I answer that it is sufficient in respect of the Minister who cannot but conclude them to have justifying faith by their profession till they manifest the contrary but not sufficient in respect of the subject requiring Baptisme The Reply of I. E. to this In this answer T. L. speaks again as though Christs Ministers were bound by the word of the Lord and their own consciences to conclude the glad receiving of the Word such a beleef as men may have fall from and so perish to be justifying faith and the people so to conclude of it in themselves and professe So upon their profession being a lie the Minister is to conclude a lie for a truth and so baptize them Whereas if the people had been so ignorant and bold as to conclude their glad receiving the word or beleefe which they might have and yet fall away and perish to be true justifying Faith professe as much yet the true Ministers of Christ especially the Apostles they understood better and knew justifying Faith to be a more excellent thing and therefore would have reproved their ignorance and boldnes and informed them truly what justifying Faith was and the necessity of it according as Christ and his Apostles did afterward very often and that with many exhortations and teares as the Scriptures witnesse knowing that their gladly receiving the word that common beliefe and outward baptisme was not sufficient to salvation T. L. quotes for the ground of his opinion doctrine Luk 14.33 which how it serves for his turn you may see The Argument it selfe That which the holy Ghost hath by the Evangelist Luke written down and affirmed of Simon Magus he knew to be true and wee are bound to beleeve it But the holy Ghost hath by the Evangelist Luke written down and affirmed that Simon Magus also as the other of Samaria beleeved and was baptized Therefore such a beliefe as Simon Magus had was and is sufficient for outward baptisme according to the Rule The answer of T. L. I answer true in respect of Philip who when he baptized him did not know but that hee had justifying faith but in respect of Simon himselfe not so Secondly I answer that as Luke affirmes of his Faith so he affirmes of his being in the gall of bitternesse and in the bond of iniquitie As the state of being in the gall of bitternesse and in the bond of iniquity doth not present a person a fit subject for baptisme in Lukes esteem no more doth such a Faith as doth not distinguish a person from such a one The former I suppose you will grant Ergo Luke doth not esteeme such a beliefe sufficient for baptisme according to the rule in respect of the subject baptized Thirdly by this reasoning it will follow that a person which in case were in the Church should be excommunicated out of the Church by the rule should be received into the Church by baptisme which is contradictious The Reply of I. E. Here again T. L. grants such a beliefe as Simon Magus had sufficient for outward Baptisme in respect of Philip who when he baptized him did not know but that he had justifying faith but in respect of Simon himselfe not so Where he maketh ignorance which he falsly chargeth Philip with to excuse him but not Simon Magus though he were far more ignorant than he And yet T. L. in his ignorance for I will not say he doth it with knowledge chargeth Philip with two severall great sinnes making him guiltie of them both in that he saith Philip did not know but that Simon Magus had justifying faith when he baptized him For if Philip was to have knowne and did not know that Simon had justifying faith and yet judged and concluded that he had it which is T. Ls. doctrine for the rule Then did Philip sinne in so judging and concluding not doing it of faith because whatsoever is not of faith is sinne as Paul saith Rom. 14. But Philip did not know that Simon had justifying faith yet he baptized him Therefore T. L. chargeth Philip with two great sinnes at least first in judging and concluding Simon to have that which he had not and secondly in his baptizing him upon the same also not of faith For if to eate and not of faith that is to say not of a full perswasion in the heart be sinne as Paul saith Rom. 14.23 then much more to judge and conclude in so great a matter as justifying faith to be in a man when it is not and to baptize him also and not of faith is sinne But it is otherwise then T.L. teacheth Philip did know assuredly and judge and conclude rightly of Simon Magus that he did beleeve as the other of Samaria beleeved So as that according to the rule and example of Christ he might be baptized and was And whereas secondly T.L. invents a kind of Argument against the Evangelist Luke from the Apostle Peters words to Simon Magus written down by Luke Thou art in the gall of bitternes c. saying As the state of being in the gall of bitternes and bond of iniquitie doth not present a person a fit subject for Baptisme in Luks esteem no more doth such a faith as doth not distinguish a person from such a one and hereupon wickedly but cunningly concludes that Luke did no more esteeme the faith that Simon Magus had by the preaching of Philip and his seeing the miracles that he did