Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
truth_n divine_a reveal_v revelation_n 1,705 5 9.2853 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A37484 Truth defended. or, A triple answer to the late triumvirates opposition in their three pamphlets viz. Mr. Baxter's review, Mr. Wills his censure, Mr. Whiston's postscript to his essay, &c. With Mr. Hutchinson's letter to Mr. Baxter a little before his death. And a postscript in answer to Mr. William Walker's modest plea for infants baptism. By Tho. DeLaune. De Laune, Thomas, d. 1685. 1677 (1677) Wing D897; ESTC R213236 99,906 139

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

charity exempt dying Infants from the benefit of that grace they having by no actual sins barred themselves from its saving communications And what Scripture can be produced that any one is damned meerly for the non-application of a Sacrament provided it to be not contemned I can no where find Ursinus tells us in his Catechism that it is not the want but the contempt of the Sacraments damns Privatio Sacramenti non damnat si non accedat contemptus Christus non adimit sal●tem eis quibus adimitur Baptismus The Consequences produced for Infant Baptism we find to be sophistical wretched Non-sequitur's and against the rules of that Logick so celebrated by the Authors that make them The Jewish high-Priesthood will prove a high-Priesthood now by as good Consequence of the faederal right then proves a faederal right now And the Passover being to be taken and eaten Exod. 12.4 according to the number of jouls in the house and by every one according to his eating and therefore by Children will afford a consequence of Infants right to the Supper as valid as that drawn from their Circumcision to their Baptism But that indeed there is no Birth-holiness now that being a legal priviledge abolisht and not comporting with the Gospel is unanswerably evident by this Argument If the legal commoness and uncleanness of some meats Flesh Birds Beasts Persons and their natural seed above others be taken away then the legal holiness and cleanness of some meats Flesh Birds Beasts Persons and their natural seed above others is also taken away But the Antecedent is true Ergo so is the Consequent The major is undenyable from these received Maxims Contrariorum eadem est ratio And Contrariorum uno sublato tollitur alterum viz. Of Contrary's take away one and the other cannot remain in its opposition to it any longer The minor is evident from Act. 10.11 to 28 Act. 11.2 to 9. Gal. 2.11 to 28. But to the matter VVe find the true reasons of the primitive Saints being Baptzed at age to be because they durst not recede from the Rule And that 's our reason for practicing as they did 4. VVe know no advantage accruing to Infants from their Baptism it makes them in your own esteem nominal not real Members of the visible Church And the name without the nature is worthless And the absurdities and inconveniencies of that practice are obvious in our VVritings The Gospel Church must consist of living Stones at least such as to our cognizance profess so to be not ignorant Babes untransformed out of their natural state 5. That we place too much of our Religion in an external mode is false suggestion not to be made out by Mr. Whistons Logick VVe profess to worship God in Spirit and Truth according to our measute and by Divine assistance in an exact conformity to his Revealed VVill. 6. Our enquiry's after the will of Christ are from the Revelations of his will in his word and if that be termed prepostero●s let our opposites find a better foundation for their enquiry's and it shall be considered VVe think it a fruitless and ●indeed preposterous undertaking to seek for the Institution of Baptism in Gen. 17.7 VVe have it nearer home in the New Testament and that we adhere to No Arguments from the pretended Analogy to Circumcision are deemed by us of any greater force then those drawn from the Levitical Priesthood and its Ceremonious appurtenances to vindicate the Papal or National Prelacy and its concomitant rites In Mr. Whistons 1 Book he layes down his grand proposition p. 1. thus That it is the will of our Lord Jesus Christ that the Infant seed of one or both believing Parents should be baptized To prove which p. 2. he layes down three subordinate propositions viz. That God in Gen. 17.7 Intended Abraham and his natural seed 2. That God settled the same promise upon and confirmed it to believing Gentiles 3. That all under the promise ought to be Baptized Page 3. He distinguishes Abrahams seed into natural and spiritual or Mystical p. 4. He subdistinguishes the spiritual or Mystical into visible and Denominative 2. Invisible and Real Rom. 9.6 Tells us p. 5. That Baptism doth not properly incorporate into the body of Christ as invisible but as visible p. 7. Sayes the difference between both Seeds is only Respective because the same persons in different respects may be both his Natural and Spiritual Seed Natural Seed are such as descend immediatly from Abrahams own Lovns or 2. his whole race and Posterity p. 10 He sayes that under the term Seed both Natural and Mystical are comprehended p. 17. That under this Covenant both Jews and Gentiles are comprehended And that God had a peculiar regard to the Natural Seed that Parents performing the Conditions of the Covenant convey to their Children the same Interests themselves had Cap. 1 p. 19. He labours to prove that all Abrahams immediate Natural seed were intended as the immediate subjects of his promise Gen 17.7 p. 36. That the Covenant made with Abraham was a Covenant of Grace And the same for substance that believers are now under That it was conditional p. 51. A Covenant being a mutual compact p. 52. That the Condition required of Abraham was also required of his Natural Seed p. 54. Chap. 4. p. 64 The 2 d. subordinate proposition is Prosecuted into which service these Scriptures are pressed Deut. 29.10 to 13. Isa 59.21 and 65.25 and 44.3 4. Jer. 3.12 Ezek. 37.21 22. with Rom. 11.26 That is the same Covenant Jews and Gentiles are under Jer. 31.31 with Heb. 8.8 Isa 54.1 with Gal. 4.27 Hos 1.11 and 2 3. with Rom. 9.25 26. Amos 9.11 with Acts 15.20 so out of the New Testament Gal. 3.13 14. Chap. 6. p 104. He proceeds to make our that the promise of Salvation appertains to the houses of believing Parents as such without respect to the personal faith of any in the said houses of such besides there own for which he urges Mar. 10.31 Luke 19.8 9. Acts 2.38 39. and 16.31 1 Cor. 7.14 And p. 106. sayes the promise believers are under is not absolute but Conditional and so it must be understood of their houses which Condition he expounds p. 108. viz. That the Master of the Family believing his house shall be saved upon Condition of his believing He affirms ibid. that Children in an especial manner are included and comprehended under the term house p. 203. That the Interest of any of Abrahams natural seed arises from their Relation to their immediate Parents included in the phrase their generations Affirms p. 205. that the Infant seed of believing Gentiles are to be accounted of numbred amongst Abrahams Mystical seed Chap. 7. p. 213. The 3 d. subordinate proposition is prosecuted from Gen. 17.9 That as Circumcision of old so Baptism is now the token of that Covenant And p. 222. That the will of God concerning Circumcision shews us what is his will concerning Baptism