Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	believe_v	church_n	know_v	4,058	5	4.1423	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A75851	A modest reply humbly offer'd, as an answer to, and confutation of seven arguments collected and deliver'd by Mr. Samuel Lawrence, in a sermon preach'd at his meeting-house in Namptwich, Octob. 16th, 1691, whereby he would shew, that the infants of professing Christians ought to be baptized : with a seasonable word to my brethren of the baptized church / presented by the most unworthiest of her servants, S.A.	Acton, Samuel, d. 1740?; Lawrence, Samuel.	1692 (1692)	Wing A452aA; ESTC R203313	36,660	49

same Right as their Males besides by vertue of the Institution such were to receive Circumcision as you will have much ado to believe were interested in the Covenant to instance only in Ishmael and Esau and the words of the Apostle that saith All are not Israel that are of Israel Abraham's whole Male natural Seed must needs be circumcised yet who will imagine that the numerous Issue proceeding from him were so interested in the Covenant as Abraham and the Faithful were neither was any thing of Duty required as a necessary Prerequisite to qualifie Abraham's Seed for Circumcision more than a descending lineally from him a being his Children according to the Flesh qualified them for and interested them in the Blessing of the Covenant of Circumcision which are inferior to the Blessings of the new Covenant and Gospel Ministration So that it 's evident the carnal Seed of Believers can obtain no greater Priviledge than the Seed of Abraham did by the Covenant of Circumcision whose Priviledge reached not to an Interest in Gospel-Blessings or the New Covenant unless they had obtained that Right for themselves by believing otherwise as one saith well they had no more Right to them by their natural descent from Abraham than Ishmael had in their Covenant of Peculiarity And as of old Circumcision was not to be administred to any but those appointed by the express Will and positive Law of God neither ought Baptism now nor can any man conclude from a good ground for Infant-Baptism till as good Authority be produced for it as they had of old for circumcising the Males of Israel You add further Doubtless if it had not been so the believing Jews would have debated with the Apostles about it c. Ans I confess had they not learned better Manners and been of much a better Temper than many in our days they would not only have debated but quarreled with them as some do thrusting away Truth as a Troubler of their Coasts as the Gadarenes did Christ but the Believers of old learned Christ to better ends than to maintain unnecessary Debates with the Apostles being satisfied from the nature of the Gospel Ministration that there was no room for Controversies in Christ's changing the Subject as well as the Ceremony and you may see that Point as fully decided and resolved as they did would you rid your mind of Prejudice and with a single Eye look into the Commission where Christ bids them to make Disciples and baptize them and into the general Practice of the Apostles which did perfectly correspond with the Command which Command was made the Rule of their Proceedings and not the demolish'd form of the Jewish Church And Christ in faithfulness to his Church and in mercy to little Infants hath as evidently changed the Subject as the Sign Mark 16.15 16. which in conjunction with the general Practice of the Apostles in that they never baptized one Infant puts the thing out of doubt Thus I hope your three topping Arguments are fully answered which you say are equivolent to an express Command an Assertion so impudent that I pray God it may not be laid to your Charge for there is not any thing said in all of them but what may bespeak you to need that some one teach you which be the first Principles of the Oracles of God Hebr. 5.12 And now Brethren I hope as wise men you will judge and seriously consider what is said and the Lord give you understanding in all things 2 Tim. 2.7 I now come to your Argument of lesser magnitude Fourth ARGUMENT Little Children belong to the Kingdom of Heaven therefore are of the Church and ought not to be excluded but admitted by Baptism Matth. 19.14 They how little soever have an interest in the Priviledges of the Gospel Dispensation as well as they had under the Law formerly and accordingly are as capable of Eternal Blessedness in Heaven and the same Objections lye against their being saved as against their being baptized viz. That they cannot actually believe Mark 16.16 If any object Christ means Children in Humility not in Age as he doth Matth. 18.2 3. Answer That cannot be so understood here because he here speaks of such as were brought unto him and he took into his Arms. Besides it would not then be a sufficient ground for the check he gives his Disciples Objection But he did not baptize them Answer We do not know that he baptized any He did that which was greater and that which makes them qualified Subjects for Baptism for grant to them a Church Relation and Baptism will follow upon it if one stands good the other will and that is what we plead for from this Text. Fourth ANSWER That little Children as such belong unto the Kingdom of Heaven we discent not from you one jot in this Truth for since Christ hath said that of such is the Kingdom of Heaven we joyfully and stedfastly believe the certainty of it and that little Children are of the Church of God i e. the Universal and Invisible Church which contains all the Elect of God known and unknown known unto us and that to the most remote Corners of the Earth in which blessed state they abide though their Parents may suffer a change of state by sin yet that alters not the state of Children nor nothing can till by their voluntary departure from God in choosing sinful ways they destroy themselves To prove Infants as such in a visible state of Salvation we conceive not difficult the words of Christ strongly concluding it But if by Church you mean the visible Church of Christ and do say That because little Children are of the Kingdom of Heaven that therefore they are of the visible Church as that most be intended because of your pleading for admission for them then I conceive your Conclusion to be most untrue 1. Because to say the Fleshly Seed of Believers are born within the Pale and Members of the Church of Christ is a Doctrine Forreign to that of the Gospel 2. Because such a Doctrine in a great measure destroys the right end of Baptism which is to make them Members of it that are not Acts 2.41 and 47. and not to bring them into the Church that are in it already 3. Because Infants as such are not capable and fit matter to make right Members of the Church of Christ under the Gospel For says the Apostle writing to Church Members Ye also as lively Stones are built up a Spiritual House an holy Priesthood to offer up Spiritual Sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ 1 Pet. 2.5 which Infants can neither be nor do 4. To say Infants are Members of the visible Church is incongruous to all Definitions that ever I met with of a Gospel Church as I might shew by some of your own I forbear to name ours as that which may not pass with you for currant therefore shall assign only that of the Church of England as an

could quote you Justin Martyr Origen Jerom Cyprian and S. Augustine the great Lights of the Church all for it Seventh ANSWER You are pleased I perceive to restrain the Churches of Christ to the conventions of your own practice and to exclude all differing with you in the point of Baptism so that many Churches as perspicuous as your selves especially in a trying season have little thanks to give you for your Charity towards them however since you make not the practice of preceding Churches the Basis on which you build only call them in for Light and Evidence to help you in Cases dark and difficult as by your own Grant as well as Mr. Baxter's That the Baptizing of Infants is if it be an Ordinance at all it is next to a Miracle that all the famous Lights shining in the Churches have not given so much light and clearness in this thing of so much weight and moment but that it should still be found so dark and difficult as it appears to this day and when a Star will arise to make it more clear then it is I know not But in fine to perswade your Brethren into a good and firm opinion of it you tell them that you could quote Justin Martyr Origin Cyprian Jerom and S. Augustin all for it to tell them you can do it is much easier than to do it And to tell you by the way if you have read the Fathers you know in your Conscience that though some baptized Infants in the Third and Fourth Centuries for particular ends yet none in those Ages practised Infant Baptism as a Gospel Ordinance if any before Austin as may be shewed from Dr. Taylor 's Testimony with others Therefore to come to a Conclusion though I might give Instances at large from Tertullian with all or most of those you name together with Nazianzene Ambrose Athanasius and many more as they are handed to me all bearing head strongly against your practice yet take one for all which sways much with me as I find it quoted by Mr. Baxter and you may read it in this order of words in his Saints Everlasting Rest pag. 143. viz. In the primitive times none were baptized without an express Covenanting wherein they renounced the World the Flesh and the Devil and ingage themselves to Christ as you may see saith he in Tertullian Origen and Cyprian and others at large Now Sir I would ask you whether Mr. Baxter never read of any that opposed Infant Baptism whereas he tells you That none of old were baptized without an express Covenanting Certainly you have either mis-quoted Mr. Baxter or else he greatly forgot himself when he said as you speak of him yea he proceeds and names Justin Martyr in particular in the same Book and Page speaking of the order and manner of baptizing the Aged and how we are dedicated to God being renewed by Christ saith he we will now open unto you As many as being perswaded do believe these things to be true which we teach and do promise to live according to them they first learn by Prayer and Fasting to beg pardon of God for their former sins our selves joyning also our Prayer and Fasting then they are brought to the Water and born again or baptized in the same way as our selves were born again for they are washed in water in the Name of the Father the Lord and God of all and of our Saviour Jesus Christ and of the Holy Ghost Then we bring the Person thus washed and instructed to the Brethren as they are called where the Assemblies are that we may pray both for our selves and the illuminated Person that we may be found by true Doctrine and by good Works worthy observers and keepers of the Commandments and that we may obtain Eternal Salvation Then there is brought to the chief Brother so they called the chief Minister Bread and a Cup of Wine washed which taking he offereth Praise and Thanksgiving to the Father by the Name of the Son and Holy Ghost and so a while he celebrateth Thanksgiving and after Prayer the whole Assembly saith Amen Thanksgiving being ended by the President or chief Guide and the consent of the whole People the Deacons as we call them do give to every one present part of the Bread and Wine over which Thanks was given and they also suffer them to bring it to the absent this Food we also call the Eucharist to which no Man is admitted but only he which believeth the truth of our Doctrine being washed in the Laver of Regeneration for remission of sins and that so liveth as Christ hath taught This then saith Mr. Baxter is no new and over strict way you see Thus I have done with your seven Arguments believing through the Mercy of God might what is said be impartially considered be sufficient to bring us to that Unity of Judgment in all the Truths of Jesus Christ and Conformity in Practice that might render us more serviceable in carrying on that Interest in the World for our One and Only Lord which would be mighty conduceable to his Glory and a full Evidence through Grace of our own Title to that Glory which shortly will be revealed in him unto whom be given all Glory in the Church throughout all Ages Even so Amen An APPENDIX Seven Arguments shewing that Infants ought not to be Baptized First Argument IF Christ in the Commission Matth 28.19 commands his Disciples to baptize none but the very fame persons he commanded them also first to teach and make Disciples by teaching then that place is a plain prohibition and not a precept to baptize Infants for Men cannot teach or disciple Infants But Christ there commands his Disciples to baptize none but such as he commands them also first to teach and make Disciples by teaching therefore that place is a plain prohibition and not at all a precept to baptize Infants If it be required we shall give you proof enough hereof out of your own Authors as well as others Second Argument If Infants ought to be baptized then Infant Baptism is of Divine Institution but Infant Baptism is not of Divine Institution therefore they ought not to be baptized The Major is true if as you say there is but one Command for Baptism viz Matth. 28.19 which appears by the fore-going Argument to be a plain prohibition of Infant Baptism The Minor is true because no Man can shew any Institution of Infant Baptism Third Argument If Infants ought to be baptized as agreeable with the Command of Christ then it is agreeable to the practice of the Apostolical Churches but Infant Baptism is not agreeable to the practice of the Apostolical Churches therefore Infants ought not to be bapized as agreeable to the Command of Christ The Major is true because the Apostolical Church did observe T.G. all that Christ commanded in the Case of Baptism The Minor is true because no Man can shew that the Apostolical Churches did Baptize so