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	know_v	see_v	1,739	5	3.3479	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B23662	The controversie about infants church-membership and baptism, epitomized in two treatises the first, shewing the certainty of the salvation of all dying infants, against the doctrine of the Pædo-baptists, who deny salvation to all infants that die unbaptized, either directly, or by the natural consequence of their arguments : the second, being a plain confutation of Mr. J.B. his second book of more than 60 queries, about infants church-membership and baptism, by a proportionable number of antiqueries : being an essay towards a more Christian accomodation between the Pædo-baptists, and the baptized believers, published for that happy end / by Thomas Grantham.	Grantham, Thomas, 1634-1692.; Grantham, Thomas, 1634-1692. Querist examined.	1680 (1680)	Wing G1529	50,899	65

make my work too bulkie to set down his Queries at large yet I shall endeavour partly by what I shall present of his Queries and partly by the purport of my Anti-queries to give a true understanding of the import of all his Demands And first we shall take notice of his Preparatory Questions which he grounds upon the silence of the Scriptures in the case of Infant-Baptism The first is this J. B. 1. Is not the Scripture more sparing in such cases as these 1. In speaking of those to whom it speaks not as concerning the Heathen and concerning Infants c. T. G. 1. When Mr. Baxter and you from him have born the World in hand that you would offer plain Scripture proof for Infant Church-Membership and Baptism Is it not a strange way to make this good by telling us the Scripture is more silent in these Cases than in others Or is not one plain proof in any Case enough to forbid any to say the Scripture is more silent in that than other Cases seeing more silent must import not speaking at all or else very darkly And indeed Mr. Baxter does elsewhere grant That many Papists and Prelatists who are all for Infant Baptism have maintained that it is not determined in Scripture And how then shall he being inferiour to so many bring any plain Scripture for it 2. Is not the Scripture plain enough Gen. 3. 15. that the Covenant of God's Grace and Mercy to Sinners concerns all Mankind as they are fallen in Adam And how then can it be silent concerning Infants in any thing needful to their Salvation seeing Christ now by the Grace of God hath tasted Death for every Man Heb. 2. 9. J. B. 2. In lesser points of Faith 3. In points not then questioned 4. Does not the New Testament speak more sparingly of that which is more fully discovered in the Old And is not this the very case here c. T. G. 1. Who that is truly wise would query this Is any Persons Church-Membership and Baptism to be reckoned among the lesser points of Faith Or is it not of very great moment rather for us rightly to understand who ought to be incorporated into the Church of Christ which is his Body If there was no question in the Scripture-Times about your Infant Church-Membership and Baptism was it not because there was none then that held with your Opinion in that Case And whether it be not Anti-evangelical to make the Age of any Person the rule of his admission to the Christian-Church-Membership and Baptism whiles in the Law the Eighth Day was a time prefixed But is not the time of the New Birth at what Age soever the time of Incorporating Persons into the Christian Church Seeing it is expresly said If any Man be in Christ he is a new Creature 2 Cor. 5. 16 17. And whether Pedo-Baptists must not grant this seeing they are forced to say of the Infants which they sprinkle This Child is Regenerate and Born again though they can never prove this J. B. 2. Will the difficulty of a Point that is not so clear as we would have it prove that it is not a truth The Apostle Peter tells us many things in Paul s Epistles are hard to be understood are they not Truths for all this c. T. G. Whether it be not idle in you to compare Church-Membership and Baptism with the hard things in Paul's Epistles seeing what is needful to meer Church-Membership and Baptism are easie things even that which every Babe in Christ should know and which three thousand learned in one Day by one Sermon Acts 2. 40 41. Then they which gladly received his Word were Baptized and the SAME DAY was added unto them about three thousand Souls And whether the whole carriage of this place do not shew your Vanity in putting your Church-Membership before Baptism sith here as well as else-where this Church-Membership evidently follows Baptism And whether you do not here also plainly enough tell us that your case is very difficult and hard to be understood and indeed you may rightly place it among things unintelligible For as one of your Way going to a Dispute 't is said to hear Infant baptism proved by Scripture told his Companion He was going to hear a Miracle J. B. 3. If never so clear Evidence be produced will not Truth still be dark to them that are uncapable of discerning it And is not this the case of many Godly that are but Children in knowledg T. G. Whether this be not an excellent way to query Men out of their Wits And if that which hath never so clear Evidence may still be dark to the Godly c. How can you blame Men for not seeing that for which you can bring no clear Evidence But for all this whether every weak if a Godly Man may not as easily understand the Mind of God about Church-Membership and Baptism as to know that Jesus is his Saviour unless your 100 or rather 500 Queries have blinded his Eyes And what one Point hath been pestered with such a cloud of Questions as you have invented about this And whether you and Mr. Baxter cannot invent as many more and so make good the Proverb Plura potest interrogare asinus quam respondere Aristoteles J. B. 4. When the case is so difficult that we cannot attain to clearness and certainty must not we follow the most probable way c. T. G. Whether you are not upon a dangerous Point to suggest that the case of Church-Membership and Baptism is to be judged of by Probabilities and not Certainties And if you will needs have our way of Baptism to be more difficult than yours who can know it Seeing there is thus much said by a learned Man of the Church of England against your Way viz. That there is Dr. Ba●low neither Precept nor President for Infant-Baptism in Scripture That there is nothing in Dr. Hammond or Mr. Baxter 's Discourses about Infant-Baptism that looks like an Argument And whether it will not be hard for any Body to say more for Pedo-baptism and against our way of Baptizing Believers than they have done And yet whether it be not safe for us to see you offer more than your Probabilities before we part with our Baptizing Believers for your sprinkling of Infants J. B. 5. And is it not a spirit of Rashness and Headiness that runs Men presently upon NEW untried Ways upon every doubting about the Old c. T. G. Whether the way of Baptizing Persons upon personal profession of Faith by Immersion be not the old way of Baptizing and granted to be so by the Learned of your own Church for example Ludovicus Vives Grotius and Diodate And then whether you are not the rash and heady who run so eagerly after the new mode of Infant-sprinkling And are not thousands involved in your new Way before they do or can try it And on the contrary whether any can rationally be

Mercy to take away a Mercy except it be to give a greater Mercy in stead of it c. T. G. Though we might say much of the Justice of God in Repealing the Covenant of Circumcision and therewith the Infant Church-Membership once allowed in the Jewish Church yet how dare you say that this was to the hurt of any Person whether Infant or any other But we will abide by this that God made this Repeal in Mercy And how should you not see that to be set at Liberty from the Yoke of the Law and from Circumcision which made them Debtors to the whole Law Gal. 5. 3. was all done in mercy And was it not needful to abrogate the first or old Covenant that he might establish the new or second Covenant In which though we have no particular order to admit Infants to the Duties of this Covenant yet we are sufficiently recompensed in the assurance given us by Christ concerning Infants right to the Kingdom of Heaven and his blessing them without Baptizing them that so they are as happy whilst Infants as we can desire they should be And is not this a greater Mercy than the Old Covenant did give to any Infant by Circumcision As for the Capacity of those who are concerned in the Duties of the Second Covenant is it not expresly thus That the Law of Christ should be put in their Hearts and written in their Minds Heb. 8. And So God to be their God and they to be his People as knowing him from the least of them to the greatest And whether in these respects any Infant can from Truth or Reason be said to be in the New Covenant And how then are they to be admitted Members of this Visible Company or Church seeing they know not God And yet is it not very evident that the Grace of the New Covenant extends to them from our Saviour's Testimony that of such is the Kingdom of God Again Was not Infants partaking of the Passover and other Sacrifices and Rites of the Law as great Mercies as their being circumcised And yet what Mercies of this kind was given them in the taking away of these and yet were they not all taken away in Mercy And whilst you deceitfully lay the stress of the word Mercy upon your Sprinkling of Infants do you not invalidate the substance of those Types which being come for the Salvation of Infants as well as others is their sufficient Passover though they cannot celebrate the memorial of it in Bread and Wine as the Adult ought and do And is not the true Jubilee which came by Christ a sufficient Gain in stead of the Jewish Jubilee both to the Adult and to Infants though neither the one nor the other hath any Jubilee in the nature of an Ordinance in stead thereof Especially not Infants seeing they know not the sound of the Gospel J. B. 7. And is there any Scripture that speaketh of delivering any from this sad estate meaning to be without hope but Church-Members c. T. G. Will Ephes 2. 12. prove that no Infants among the Gentiles were saved Does not that Scripture Rom. 2. 14 15 26 27. as clearly prove that the Gentiles which had not the Law and yet did by Nature fulfil the Righteousness of the Law shall be as much excused in the Day of Judgment as the Jews who kept the Law And do you not here espouse that Doctrine Out of the Church is no Salvation Not considering that the Vniversal Body of Christ may comprehend many that had never the opportunity to be incorporated into the Visible Company of such as worship God in the use of Legal or Gospel Institutions And will you thus damn all Infants in the World but those that are Sprinkled or Crossed by the Pedo-baptists And will not the Text Acts 2. 47. alleged by you if compared with Acts 5. 14. make against you Seeing those that were added to the Church were not Infants but Men and Women J. B. 8. If it be no benefit to the Catholick Church to have Infants kept out of Heaven nor 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 c. T. G. If I might follow your Fancy I might ask you what hurt it will be to the Church to see an Infant of a poor Indian in Heaven And why then do not you admit them here on Earth But is it not childish in you to suppose that any shall be Infants when in Heaven Seeing according to Austin they are called Infants A non fando because they cannot speak may we not more rationally believe that what is lost of stature and knowledg by the Sin of Adam shall be restor'd by the Righteousness of Christ And are not Infants as frequently seen in the Assemblies of the Baptists as in yours And do we not devote them to God in our Prayers as well as you And what do your Infants partake of except your Tradition of Sprinkling them which ours do not as fully enjoy And is it not as great a benefit to the Church to delay the Baptism of their little ones as to delay their coming to the Lord's Table If your delay make them more fit for the one does not ours make them more fit for the other If ours die without the one do not yours die without the other What cause then of your murmuring For who casts Infants out of the Church Is not this a Barbarism For if they be in we do all we are allowed of God to keep them there by timely Instruction and by imploring God's Blessing for them and you do no more only you Cross or Sprinkle them This is your all on this you build your hope for your dying Infants This your Tradition is therefore your Idol This is that small parcel of bad Wooll about which you make this hideous Cry as if God had no Mercy for poor Infants unless this be done Why are you so Imprudent DIVISION III. Concerning Rom. 11. 17. J. B. 1. Is it not evident from Rom. 11. 17. That only some of the Branches were broken off from the Church Therefore the rest remained in the Gift was not Repealed Doth not the Apostle say it of that Church whereof Infants were Members c. T. G. Here you seem to hold that the Church in her Legal state and in her Evangelical state were both one in such a sense as that he that by Faith was added to the Christian Church was not broken off from the Jewish Church Hence I Query Does not Paul plainly shew Rom. 7. 1. to 8. That the Christian Church was freed from the Law of her former Husband When therefore she ceased to be a Wife upon the account of the Law did she not then cease to be a Church on that account that she might now be married to another even to Christ and so bring forth Fruit unto God Why then should these words some were

capacity to enter into Heaven as for any one of them As also when the Apostle exhorts us as touching Malice to be as Children does he not hereby justifie the whole in that state of Childhood to be devoid of that evil And why even of our selves do we not judge what is right Could any Man from the beginning to this Day bring the least charge against an Infant much less against one Infant more than another unless God by Miracle shews some special Power upon them no difference can be seen in them in point of Innocency SECT VIII J. B. 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 Promises of shewing Mercy to the Children of them that love God c. remain unrevoked Answ I have not forgotten that but do still believe that there are many more Blessings pertaining to the Seed of the Righteous according to the Texts by you alledged than to others And that they may be the better considered I will set that down in Words which you writ in Figures Psal 102. 28. The Children of thy Servants shall continue and their Seed shall be established before thee This had doubtless been the Portion of the Sons of God in the days of Noah had they not sinned with the rest of Mankind Psal 103. 17. But the Mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting to them that fear him and his Righteousness to Childrens Children to them that keep his Covenant and remember his Commandments to do them Prov 20. 7. The Just walketh in his Integrity his Children are blessed after him Now what do these places prove Surely nothing less than that no Infants but the Infants of Believers shall be saved and if not how do these places suit your case They prove indeed that God will bless the Posterity of his faithful Servants if they keep his Covenant and remember to do his Commandments and I think David well expounds this place in Psal 37. 25. I have been Young and now am Old yet did I never see the Righteous forsaken nor their Seed begging their Bread And yet I grant though you prove it not that there are many other advantages even in Infancy attends the Seed of the Righteous they being a Seed of many Prayers and devoted to God from the Womb as far as their pious Parents has authority to do it which I have more fully set down in my Book of Primitive Christianity L. 2. P. 5 6. whiles God knows others are destitute of these Blessings being Crossed and Exorcis'd c. among the Papists and offered to Molech among the Jews and the like among the Heathens And yet for all this I can see no ground to think that the Righteous God will punish with Hell Torments those dying Infants for the wrong which their Parents have done them It being to me inconceivable how it can stand with his glorious Attributes either of Mercy or Justice both which must have effect upon these Infants His Justice hath effect upon them that is evident in their Death Sickness and Diseases and the like befalls our Infants now either his Mercy must have effect upon them in the next World or not at all and if not in that World how then shall that saying hold true His tender Mercies are over all his Works SECT IX J. B. You would not have the blessing of Abraham as it concerns Eternal Life to reach to the Infants of the Gentiles which believe not because Gal. 3. 14. it 's said to come upon the Gentiles by Faith Answ I told you that the Blessing in respect of Eternal Life was not peculiar to Abraham and his Seed but was made as well to Adam and his Seed and so common to Mankind and may well be called the Common Salvation being derived from Christ promised Gen. 3. 15. before Abraham was who is therefore the Saviour of all Men. Indeed Abraham and so all Believers have some things in special and which are peculiar to them as a People engaged in the duties of Religion * See and consider Rom. 3. 1 2. whilst the Unbeliever is under the sentence of Wrath because he neglects so great Salvation Heb. 2. 2 3 4. But all this injures not dying Infants who neglect not this Salvation and so forfeit not their right to that common Salvation obtained by Christ for Mankind In Gal. 3. 14. the Apostle speaks of the Promise of the Spirit which as it concerns the Church under the establishment of the second Covenant concerns not Infants it being understood of a greater measure of Wisdom and Power to walk in the Paths of Righteousness than was ordinary under the former Testament 2 Tim. 1. 6. Gal. 3. 2 3 5 7. Gal. 5. 25. Nor can you with any shew of Reason say that I make the Salvation of Infants run in a Fleshly Line when I derive it only from the Free-grace of God manifested in the Lamb slain from the foundation of the World to take away the Sin of the World Nor do I consider Adam as in a state of Nature but as under a Covenant of Grace from whom the second Adam must in time proceed as touching the Flesh and therefore his Descent is reckoned from him Luke 3. 23. to the end In this second Adam the Repairer of Mankind do I place the Salvation of all Men and of the Infant Race I say seeing they never sinned against the second Covenant nor can any other sin them out of the Mercy of God their title to that Grace being not tide to Man's Will it follows that they shall not be hurt of the second Death Shew the contrary if you can To what you say about God s putting the Salvation of Infants out of his own Hand I say That though he put the Salvation of no Creature out of his own Hand according to my opinion yet when he stretcheth forth his Hand to Gain-sayers as Rom. 10. and gives them the Word of Life and they put it from them Acts 13. 46. then Men may truly be said to have a Prize in their Hand and to put it from them even the Salvation of their Souls And then I pray you consider that if their putting Salvation from them be equally or really a putting it from their Infants as that must be your opinion or else we differ not then I say according to your opinion God suffers Men to damn poor Infants whom he would save seeing according to your Doctrine had their Parents believed their Infants had been in the Covenant of Grace but now for their Fathers Sin for what you say of their own Sin contracted is but a Fable they are left by you in the Kingdom of the Devil and that among the Devil and his Angels for ever And here it is that I oppose you as greatly erring from the Truth and this Error was that which first brought in your Pedo-baptism as may be seen in

you do And are you not then deluded to spend so much time in defending your own Tradition And with what credit can you blame others whom you constrain for spending time to break the Snares which you have laid in the way of Sinners to cause them to continue in Error J. B. 11. Though the point of Infant-Baptism be comparatively of less mement yet whether the grounds on which it stands and which are usually denied with it be not of great moment T. G. Whether this be not like a Contradiction For seeing every Ordinance receives from the grounds on which it stands it s very being and value How can the Ordinance be of small moment when the grounds on which it stands are of great moment And how can Infant-Baptism stand upon grounds of great moment when it is not grounded upon Scripture nor determined by Scripture as is confessed by many Pedo-baptists both Papists and Prelatists DIVISION II. Concerning the Commission Matth. 28. 19. Having done with your Preparatory Queries I come now to try your Main Question and the Queries which attend upon it Your Query is thus stated by you J. B. Whether some Infants ought not to be Baptized T. G. Do we not alwayes tell you of Infants in general that they ought not to be Baptized So that you had better ask thus Whether some Infants ought to be Baptized For should you be put to shew That some Infants ought to be Baptized and that other some ought not as Mr. Crage was pleased to Fable it out at Abergavenny it would prove too hard a Task and never be done by plain Scripture proof But I suppose I understand your Question I shall therefore follow you J. B. 1. Ought not all Christ's Disciples ordinarily to be Baptized Matth. 28 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 May not the word Disciple be taken in a larger sence Relatively for one that belongs to Christ as well as in a narrower sence for those who are actually Learners T. G. Here you seem to grant That some of Christ's Disciples ought not to be Baptized i. e. their case being more than ordinary and then I would know why Infants may not be excused sith it must be an extraordinary thing if any Infant be Christ's Disciple For if Infants be Disciples they are either made so by God or Man that God does make some or all or any Infants at all Christ's Disciples no Man can demonstrate And I demand whether ever Mr. Baxter or your self did make an Infant Christ's Disciple according to the import of the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if your Consciences shall tell you that you never did or could make an Infant Christ's Disciple how can you suffer your selves to be deluded with this fancy of a Relative Discipleship i. e. for one that belongs to Christ For why may not all Infants belong to Christ as well as those which you sprinkle And then why do you not call all Infants Disciples Is not Christ the Master and King of all Infants whether Men will vouchsafe to devote them to him or no How dreadfully do you lessen his Authority or Soveraignty J. B. 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 put the Yoke were Disciples If you say not all but some of them then will it not follow that it is but some only whose Circumcision the Synod doth conclude against T. G. Does not the Holy Ghost sufficiently expound Acts 15. 10. not to intend Infants Whilst in Verse 19. he notes them to be such as from among the Gentiles were turned to God and are not all that are called Disciples Ver. 10. called Brethren Ver. 23. and as such are written unto by the Assembly And was not their Epistle read to all the multitude of the Disciples Ver. 30. and did not all the Disciples rejoyce for the Consolation Ver. 31. And is it not ridiculous to say the Holy Ghost intends Infants Ver. 10. and yet excludes them in the Appellation Disciples in all the other places And is it not grosly fallacious to say That because the false Apostles would have put the yoke of Circumcision upon the Necks of the Disciples that therefore all were Disciples whom they would have Circumcis'd Is there any more truth in it than in this Austin would have Infants brought to the Lord's Table therefore all were Infants whom Austin would have brought to the Lord's Table Or is it not clear from Ver. 1. that the Discourse Acts 15. does only concern the Brethren Except ye be Circumcised ye cannot be saved this they are said to teach the Brethren and thereby to subvert their Souls And can you think the false Apostles could subvert the Souls of Infants And is it not a sad thing that you should thus grope for the Wall at Noon and deceive your selves and others with meer Fallacies and Ridiculosities And why was not the Decree Acts 15. a sufficient repeal of Circumcision in respect of Infants seeing the Disciples themselves were discharged or freed from that Yoke and then whether your Absurdity concern any Body so much as your self J. B. 2. If no Infants are Disciples what is the cause Is it because they are not capable Or is it because God will not shew such a Mercy Can you find a third cause If Infants are capable of being Servants of God how can they be thought incapable of being Disciples Lev. 25. 41 42 c. T. G. Is not Instruction the cause of Discipleship as truly as Teaching is the cause of Learning And what instruction or teaching hath God appointed for Infants and if none as I am sure you can assign none then what cause have they to learn And if no cause to learn then what cause can they have to be Disciples And therefore what cause have you a Learned Man to query so unlearnedly And should I follow you in your Fancies I might also demand what is the cause that Infants are not Repentant seeing they are Sinners is it because God will not shew them such a Mercy To-grant them repentance unto Life what is the cause they have not Faith Is it because God will not shew them such a Mercy as to purifie their Hearts by Faith What is the cause they are not brought to the Lord's Table Is it because God will not shew them such a Mercy as to partake of the Body and Blood of their Redeemer Especially seeing it is said Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of God and drink his Blood you have no Life in you What Will God deny Life through Christ to Infants Now if Infants want no Mercy from God though they be denied all these Mercies what reason is there for you to cry so loud against God because they are not Disciples And what though Infants should be called God's Servants does it follow they must needs be Christ's Disciples according to Matth. 28. 19 Why then the

to believe our Infants as happy though not Baptized as any Infant of the Faithful in the Old World And did not Augustine think Infants as miserable if they died without the Lord's Supper as you think them to be if they die without being Crossed or Sprinkled And yet do not you believe he was deceived And are we not as justifiable to believe that you are also deceived Is it not as needful to feed upon Christ in the holy Supper as to put on Christ in holy Baptism Can you have comfort concerning your Infants in the want of the one and must we have none concerning our Infants in the want of the other And what is now become of the Covenant of Grace Gen. 3. 15. if Infants can have no benefit by it but on the condition of their Parents works of bringing them into the Church by your Tradition as you suggest in the latter part of this Query J. B. 7. If the Church be not in a worse state now will it not follow that our Children ougbt to be admitted Church-Members c. T. G. Whether this be not a false suggestion which keeps company with most of your Queries viz. That all Infants which are not brought to some Rite or Ceremony are put out of the Church Were the Infants of six days old in Israel put out of the Church Did not thousands of Infants die before they were admitted to Circumcision And if they were in the Church before it were lawful to Circumcise them why may not ours be in the Church as well as the Infants of six days old in Israel before and until it be lawful to Baptize them May we not do well to nurture and fit them for Baptism as they nursed and fitted them for Circumcision And what though our Work may require more Years than they theirs did Days yet we making all the speed that God requires are we not as excusable as they And what though some of our Children die before they can be fitted for Baptism Did not some of theirs die before they could be fitted for Circumcision And why may not we have comfort in our disappointments by Death as well as they when so disappointed And suppose our Children refuse to be Baptized when they come to understanding and will not be fitted for it by all that we can do what comfort would it be to have had them Sprinkled in their Infancy when now we find them reject Faith and Repentance the most substantial parts of true Baptism J. B. 9. If the Children of Believers now be put out of the Church are they not in a worse condition than the very Children of the Gentiles were before the coming of Christ T. G. Do you not abuse the World to talk at this rate as if either God or we put Infants out of the Church when the only Question is about their admission to such or such Duties of Religion Wherein yet you do the same in many cases as I have shewed which we do in the case of Baptism And if any have in the heats of Disputation absolutely denied Infants to be of the Church yet you know their sence is only to deny your way of making them Church-Members Not but that they all assert Infants to be of the Body of Christ of the number of the saved and so of the Church And I here assert they are of the Visible Church because by the Word of God declared to be accepted of God to the Grace of Life through Christ But we put no Infants out of the Church For example I have had many Children for which I give thanks to God as soon as he gives them to me I do by Prayer to God devote and heartily commit them to him and by his Grace I do my best to teach them the Knowledg and Fear of God as they grow up and I bless God with this success that all that yet are capable have been Baptized And now wherein am I to be charged for putting my Children out of the Church And if I be Innocent as I know I am in this then I hope the Churches of the same Faith are as excusable And whether if there were faithful Ministers of Christ in every Parish it might not be a more likely way to bring Souls to true Christianity to instruct the Children twice or thrice a Week especially such Children whose Parents cannot instruct them as soon as they could learn and so to fit them for Baptism than to run to the Minister with them to be Baptized in their Infancy when God knows neither the Infants Priests nor their Parents know what they do J. B. 9. Was not the Covenant Deut. 29. 10 11 12. a Covenant of Grace as distinct from the Law which was Repealed How then is it or Infants Church-Membership grounded on it Repealed c. T. G. Seeing this Covenant Deut. 29. obliged the Israelites to the whole Law and left them under the Curse of the Law if they kept it not as appears by reading Deut. 29. and 30th Chapters will it not follow that all the parts of this Covenant was not of the Covenant of Grace Indeed some things repeated or expressed here might pertain to the Covenant of Grace But what then Why Infants Church-Membership say you is grounded upon it And I pray who denies that by the Covenant of Grace Infants are Members of Christ of his Body or the Universal Church But what then must they therefore be brought to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church visibly professing the Worship of God in all Ages as much as in any Age This indeed is your false Inference and with this you delude your self and others And how long will it be ere you make the Covenant Deut. 29. and 30. agree with that which you quote out of Rom. 10. Heb. 10. in all Points And if they differ in any thing why may it not be in this the one admitted Infants to Circumcision and other Rites of the Law the other only brings those that know the Lord by the word of Faith being in their Heart and Mouth to partake of Institutions of the Gospel J. B. 10. If Infants then were entered Members by that Circumcision which was a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith How comes that Church-Membership to be Repealed T. G. Not to contend with you whether Circumcision was a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith to any that had not the Faith of Abraham though plain Truth and all good Reason seems to be full against you yet to concess a little to see the most you can say how do you prove that none were Church-Members before they were Circumcised And how was Abraham admitted a Member of the Church by Circumcision Was he not a Member of the Church before he was Circumcised Was not Isaac a Member of the Church before he was eight Days old Were they not Circumcised because God had taken them into a Church-Covenant rather than to enter them into a Church-Covenant