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
A89333	A messenger sent to remove some mistakes; or A desirous instrument for the promoting of truth, unity, peace and love in the church of Christ. By way of answer to a book, untruly and improperly intitled, A vindication of that righteous principle of the doctrine of Christ called laying on of hands upon baptized believers. / By Thomas Morris, a servant of Jesus Christ. Also Robert Everards Three questions propounded to Benjamin Morley about his practice of laying on of hands, with his answer, and R. E. reply.	Morris, Thomas, Baptist.; Everard, Robert, fl. 1664. Robert Everards Three questions propounded to Benjamin Morley.	1655 (1655)	Wing M2811; Wing E3541; Thomason E838_23; Thomason E838_23*; ESTC R207456	30,573	49

A MESSENGER SENT To remove some mistakes OR A DESIROUS INSTRUMENT For the promoting of TRUTH UNITY PEACE and LOVE in the CHURCH of CHRIST By way of Answer to a Book untruly and improperly intitled A vindication of that righteous principle of the Doctrine of Christ called laying on of hands upon Baptized believers By THOMAS MORRIS a servant of Jesus Christ Also Robert Everards three Questions propounded to Benjamin Morley about his practice of laying on of hands with his Answer and R. E. Reply Study to shew thy self approved unto God a workman that need not to be ashamed rightly dividing the word of truth 2 Tim. 2.15 To the Law and to the testimony if they speak not according to this rule it is because there is no light in them Isa 8.20 LONDON Printed for R. E. and are to be Sold by Richard Moon at the seven Stars neer the North Door of Pauls Church 1655. To all that love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity DEar Brother and Brethren I taking notice of the design of Anti-Christ whose trouble it is to see the Church of Christ increase and his honour flourish it being the decay of his worldly honour and wicked Government and so he hath as from the very root of envy against the honour of Jesus Christ and the good of his Church his viz. Anti-Christs honour and interest being concerned in his design which moves him to indeavour the ruin of Christs honour and of his people in that he hath in these last days indeavoured to confound Christs Church and the way his people walk in by using Instruments to perswade them to shift obedience to Gods Ordinances especially in point of Baptism and breaking of Bread pretending as if he hath brought in a new dispensation by way of Revelation and immediate inspiration consisting of the power of Godliness without the form sometimes appearing like an Angel of light in point of opinion and sometimes like a civil honest man for matter of conversation thinking the Church of Christ could not have espied his painted blasphemy in point of opinion nor his dissembling hypocrisie in using civil honesty as a cloak for his Knavery so that under pretence of bringing men over to serve Christ in a higher dispensation as he calls it he might bring them to serve himself in a blasphemous way giving God the lye in saying he hath not commanded the Saints now to be Baptized in water nor to hold visible Communion in the Supper or breaking of Bread and thus he indeavours to divide the Church of Christ by this means but when he could not prevail utterly to confound the Church this way Christ having some stout Souldiers who as instruments under God did withstand him he now attempts utterly to ruin the Church of Christ another way for finding many in the Church whom he cannot by his former design deceive they were so zealous for obedience to Gods Ordinances he now lays his bait where he thinks it is most likely to catch viz. in actions relating to Ordinances and so with something like truth which is not truth but an error so neatly dressed with truths habit that few are able to look through truths habit so as to see the ugly shape of errour that barks under it he strikes at the very being of the Church and therefore seeing Gods honour and the Churches Peace and well being is so much concerned in it I desire all my dear Brethren and Friends as they with me tender Gods honour and the Churches well being Impartially to read and deliberately to consider this following Treatise the which if you do though Anti-Christ hath prevailed with some who have a great influence upon the Churches to be Instrumental for the promoting of his defence though I verily believe they know it not but as some zealous Presbyters do when they sprinkle Infants think they do God good service you shall see this error stript of truths habit and laid open in its own colours and whereas Brother Morly in his Epistle to the Reader seems to be the more confident in his way because the Bishops kept the name of Gods Ordinances of which saith he laying on of hands was one but I must tell him and you that for my part I dare not receive neither the name nor nature of Baptism nor laying on of hands as from what the Bishops said or did no further then they said and did according to the rule of Scripture and so if your practice had been such a one as had been taught by way of Doctrine and injoyned by way of Command from Scripture it had been well but your practise of laying on of hands being such a one as is neither taught by way of Doctrine nor injoyned by way of Command is of the more sad and dangerous consequence as sad experience hath proved so hoping you will take the Counsel of the Spirit of God by the Apostle 2 Cor. 13. viz. To examin your selves whether you be right in the Faith or not I shall refer you to the following discourse for further satisfaction and rest and remain Your Fellow Servant in the Faith and Fellowship of the Gospel THOMAS MORI● TO THE READER READER THough upon the reading of this following Treatise thou mayst discover two friends contending one against another yet take heed that thou doest not stumble and fall for though an unhappy difference is now fallen out in the Church of Christ yet it is no new thing for in the Apostles time Acts 17.2.7.10 there was great contention amongst the Brethren whether or no Circumcision was of necessity to salvation therefore think it not strange that Brethren should differ in some things for if thou dost stumble thou mayst fall and perish when the parties differing may be reconciled and live for ever but if it should so unhappily fall out that this one thing should cause us to break our visible Communion yet know that I hope we have all of us better learned Christ than to turn back again to the beggarly rudiments of the National Church of England so hoping thou wilt be wise for Gods glory and thine own good I shall leave thee to him who is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance 2 Pet. 3.9 and would have all men saved 1 Tim. 2.4 And shall still remain a well wisher to thy Soul THOMAS MORRIS AN ANSWER TO Mr. MORLEYES First Chapter By THOMAS MORRIS Thomas THe difference between you and I as in relation to those two sorts of laying on of hands you treated on in your first Chapter viz. about Officers and Sick is so little that I shall at present say nothing to them onely methinks you are overseen in the beginning of this Chapter in saying you would treat of those layings on of hands which you find in Scripture and not meddle with any other and yet there in your naming of them you have left out two viz. that of the Saints patient suffering persecution

they were baptized both men and women from whence I argue my first Argument If they had not imposition of hands as Church Officers nor as sick parties then they had it as Baptized Believers but the former is true therefore the latter Tho. Answer In these words you say you will prove the next part of your Position viz. that it is to be administred and subjected next in order unto Baptisme and yet no part of your Position speaks any such thing but whether it was done next in order unto Baptisme or not it will neither make for you nor against me seeing we differ not much about that and though you say it 's being done next to Baptisme leads you to this Argument yet your Argument doth not say one word that they had it next to Baptisme but sayes they had it as Baptized Believers but for answer to that more anon and whereas you render some Reasons why they had it not as Church Officers nor as sick parties in Acts 8. I grant you they had it not Ben. The next Scripture which you say will plainly prove your Position is in Acts 19.12 5.6 that say you which may be gathered from this Text is First that those people were Believers Secondly that they were Baptized Believers Thirdly that they had laying on of hands after Baptisme which say you leads you to this second Argument Those who have laying on of hands next in order unto Baptisme they have laying on of hands as Baptized Believers but those had laying on of hands next in order to Baptisme therefore they had laying on of hands as baptized Believers the latter part of the Major Proposition may seem somewhat doubtfull namely although they had laying on of hands next in order unto Baptisme yet some may question whether they had it imposed as baptized Believers to which I doe argue further 3. Argument If they had not laying on of hands as unbaptized persons then they had laying on of hands as baptized persons but then they had not laying on of hands as unbaptized persons for the Text saith they believed and were baptized and then they had hands laid on them so that the Conclusion followes that they had laying on of hands as baptized persons Tho. Answer in speaking to this your third Argument I shall also answer to your two Former for you concerving that a doubt might arise from a latter part of the major Proposition in your 2. Argument to remove that doubt you did lay downe this third Argument in the which you tell us what you mean by termes as baptized Believer in your two former Arguments as also in your Position that is as much as to say those who when they have hands laid on them are not unbaptized but baptized Receive it as baptised Believers which must needs be true for unbaptised persons cannot have hands laid on them as baptised persons yet this avails you nothing for those baptised Believers who suffer Persecution from the hands of wicked men have it as baptised Believers because they are such and so those in Acts 8. who received laying on of hands in order to their receiving the Holy Ghost through which as an instrumentall means the Holy Ghost was given received it as baptized Believers Ben. And now to the last Clause in the Position That baptized Believers are to subject to the administration of it as baptized Believers this is very clear as in both these Scriptures is made manifest The Samaritans did not resist Peter and Iohn nor those certaine Disciples at Ephesus Paul which is a very clear demonstration that they were convinced of the necessity of it Had it not been a truth but then to yeeld subjection to I am perswaded they would have advised the Apostles to have desisted from that work and that because they well knew that whatsoever was not of Faith was sin Tho. Answer that they were to subject to the Administration of it as baptised Believers it 's granted because baptised Believers if they subject at all can doe no other but subject as baptised Believers which agrees with the sense of your third Argument yet this makes nothing for it upon that account you practise it And whereas in effect you say they being convinced of the necessity of it moved them to subject I think they were as much convinced of the necessity of it as the Apostles were when Christ washed their feet who knew not what he intended till after he had done it as appears Iohn 13. v. 5. compared with verse 12 13 14 15. And although Master Fisher saith the Believers Acts 8. were very Idiots if they subjected to that they knew no command for he might as well have said the Disciples of Christ were very Idiots because they let their Master wash their feet before they knew what he intended as is clear from Iohn 13.5.12 13 14 15. and indeed I thinke that gesture of laying on of hands in Acts 8. was used only as Liberty and not as Duty for these two Reasons First because there is nothing revealed that there was any command for that gesture Secondly because if it had been duty it must be alwayes used as an instrument for the receiving the Holy Ghost or else when the Holy Ghost was given and no hands laid on before duty must needs be neglected but we read in the Acts of five times the Holy Ghost was given and yet but two times hands laid on it was given in Acts 20. the 4 8 the 10. and the 19. and onely in the 8. and 19. hands laid on which makes it appear it was used as a Liberty and not as Duty and so also to us onely command will open a door for duty and such examples as we can and it is convenient we should imitate will open a door for Liberty But some will object and say examples doe bind because the Apostle saith so walke as you have us for an example Answer if you looke upon the Fore-part of these words you shall see a command in these two termes so walke the following words being doctrinall but I believe every rationall man will grant that these words must be taken restrictively only to follow them in such things as we can and it is convenient we should imitate them for if we should take it generally viz. to follow them in all things they have left examples then we must cast out Devils heale the sick cleanse the Lepers circumcise with many other things which either we cannot or else it is not convenient we should follow them in But then say you Ben. Well my friends was it then a truth and was it never repealed I mean laying on of hands upon baptized Believers we then reason further 4th Argument That which was once in being a truth and never yet repealed remains to this day in truth in being but laying on of hands upon baptized Believers was once a truth in being and never yet repealed therefore that it is not repealed I