Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	heart_n	spirit_n	word_n	8,255	5	4.2520	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85777	A contention for truth: in two several publique disputations. Before thousands of people, at Clement Dane Church, without Temple Barre: upon the 19 of Nevemb. [sic] last: and upon the 26 of the same moneth. Betweene Mr Gunning of the one part, and Mr Denne on the other. Concerning the baptisme of infants; whether lawful, or unlawful.	Gunning, Peter, 1614-1684.; Denne, Henry, 1606 or 7-1660?	1658 (1658)	Wing G2234; Thomason E963_1; ESTC R202279	30,275	53

A Contention for TRUTH In Two Several Publique DISPUTATIONS Before thousands of People at Clement Dane Church without Temple Barre upon the 19 of Nevemb last and upon the 26 of the same Moneth Betweene Mr Gunning of the one part and Mr Denne on the other Concerning the Baptisme of INFANTS Whether LAWFVL or VNLAWFVL The Inspiration of the Almighty giveth Vnderstanding Great men are not alwayes wise neither do the aged understand Judgement Job 32. 8 9. LONDON Printed by J. Moxon for Francis Smith and are to be sold at his Shop in Flying Horse Court in Fleet-street neer Chancery Lane end And by John Sweeting at the signe of the Angel in Popes head Alley 1658. To the Reader IS there no end of writing Books Have not our Ears been filled and our Eyes wearied with Hearing and Reading touching this subject Both Pro and Contra Are not the later writers in behalfe of Infants Baptisme very many viz. Cardinal Bellarmine and a great number of the sons of the Church of Rome who have in this point dealt as ingeniously as pithily as ever any that took up the defence of it could do Have we not often heard of it from the pens of the reformers in the infancy of their reformation viz. Luther Melancthon Calvin with a great number of late Doctors and Masters viz. Featly Marshall Goodwin Fuller Baxter Audley with others Have we not had also many who have laboured not a little on the opposite party And both by their pens and suffrings testified against the Baptisme of Infants as Morton with some others contemporary the Ministers of Transylvania and since of later years Blackwell Tombes Cornwall Fisher Lamb Senior Lamb Junior Writer Haggar with many others who will not be offended because they are not named Have the Protestants of late said any thing more then the Papists before them Or will this Book tell us one thing more then either Protestant or Papist hath not formerly Declared On the other hand what can be said more effectually to prove the Baptisme of Infants to bear an humane stamp and superscription and not Divine then hath been said over and again What need then of this Book Patience good Reader and know it is neither any conceit of the impotency of those that have written before or of the excellency of any thing herein contained above what hath been before written that hath occasioned me to shew this to the world but that the importunity of friends might be satisfied and the mouths of lying adversaries might be stopped that they may be shamed out of those slanderous reports whereof they have been coyners Thou hast here the relation of the discourses that passed between Mr. Gunning and my self I cannot warrant it in every tittle perfect but as fully impartially as I am able to give thee This I will affirm that willingly I have omitted nothing that might conduce to the making his arguments or answers seem valid Indeed I did wish I could have shewed thee this discourse in a more perfect form then it is and I did wish it heartily and for the same purpose I did write unto Mr. Gunning declaring mine intentions to send my papers to the Press and intreating his favour to come to my house in regard I was not able to stir abroad and to put to his file if any thing were omitted it should be inserted if any thing were inserted that was not spoken it should be expunged declaring also that I would wait for him four or five daies I did wait twelve daies and at last I received from him not by writing but by word That he could not come if I pleased I might proceed and if I did any injury to him hee would let the world know of it Thus when I could not do as I would I was forced to do what I was able to do I have here propounded to thy consideration the matter as well as I can Read and in the presence of the Lord setting prejudice aside consider what Mr. Gunning hath produced that is of greater weight then those arguments Men have formerly written I leave thee to the perusall of the Book at the latter end whereof thou hast an account of some arguments that I had intended for to have urged at that time Consider them also with the rest and let the Readers that can pray unto the God of peace that hee would cause the Sun of Righteousness to arise That divisions may cease and all that fear the Lord may be of one lipp and of one heart serving the Lord in Godly Simplicity and Sincerity AMEN A Conference between A and B Wherein is Contained an Impartiall Relation of a Disputation holden at Clement Danes two several dayes viz. on the 19th day of November and on the 26th day of the same Moneth between Mr. Gunning and Mr. Denne Concerning the Lawfulness or Unlawfulness of Children Baptisme A MY dear friend I rejoyce very heartily to see you in health and to enjoy your society this day And so much the more because I have heard that you were present at a dispute two several dayes at Clement Danes concerning the Baptisme of Infants whether it be to be accounted Lawful or Unlawful Concerning which dispute I have heard Reports so different that I find it a matter of difficulty to find a ground for Credence I desire your gentleness not to deny my request but to grant me so much favour as to make me partakers of your apprehensions of the whole matter That by your impartiall Relation of the transactions of both dayes I may find some good assurance of confidence B It is no wonder that you should hear various and uncertain reports both of this or other disputes of like sort Seeing that unto such like meetings as these are The greatest part Come with prejudice upon their spirits Judging before they have heard and determining the whole matter before it begin Some bringing with them hearts fraught with envy anger and malice insomuch that if they Could they Would not and if they Would they Could not sincerely discern the truth of matters propounded If it may prove a thing acceptable in your eys I will not refuse to relate unto you the sum of the matter so far as my memory can comprehend I shall not willingly omit any thing material As for words which might well have been spared on both sides I shall take no notice of them at all A I pray begin and I shall Lend an attentive ear B I will first declare unto you the Occasion of this dispute which was this A gentlewoman who had through mercy set her heart seriously to seek the Lord and his face with resolution to walk in his wayes was not a little troubled in spirit about the many differences in and about Worship amongst those that profess the name of the Lord Shee looked upon her former wayes as evill and to be forsaken but what to embrace shee knows not Forasmuch as so soon as shee

have no Command nor Commission from God to require Baptisme for Infants then it is a sin in them to require it for Infants but Parents have neither Command nor Commission from God to require it for their Children therefore it is a sin in Parents to require Baptisme for their Infants Res Parents have a Commission from God to require Baptisme for their Infants Oppo Shew us a Commission Res Mat. 28. 19. Make Disciples of all Nations Baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Teaching them to observe all things that I have Commanded you and lo I am with you always even to the end of the World Oppo Here is no Commission to Parents but only to the Apostles Res The Apostles are here commanded to teach them to observe all things which Christ Commanded them They are sent into the World to teach those that are of years and make them willing and then to Baptise them and as for Children to make them Disciples by Baptising of them and to teach the Parents to require Baptisme for their Children that thereby they may be made Disciples though they be not Capable of teaching Oppo You have often urged me with antiquity and charged me with novelty I do now justly charge you with a Novel interpretation of the Scripture Not above twenty years old at the most viz. that the meaning of the TEXT alledged should be this Make them Disciples by Baptising them Res This is ancient and the Fathers did understand this TEXT so But as for your opinion it was not heard of little above 500 years ago Then there rose up on Henricus that denyed the Baptisme of Infants They that followed him were called Henricians and he and his followers were condemned for Heretiques and excommunicated for their Heresie A Have patience I pray you and bear with me a little I desire to understand the whole matter of these Heretiques and Heresies and by whom they were comdemned and excommunicated for this will give me satisfaction in some things B I will declare the matter from the beginning of it About the year 1047. there reigned in Germany Henry the third King who held two grand Heresies as the Pope and his followers were pleased to stile them the one was detected viz. That Church Lands and Church-men were subject to his Jurisdiction A This was his detected heresie What was the other suspected B De Baptismo parvultorum perperam sonsisse Creditur He was suspected to have an evill opinion of the Baptisme of Infants from this Henry the third King who was afterward Emperour the second of that name Began the Henrician heresie After him succeeded not in the Empire but in opinion Peter de Bruis His opinions laid to his charge were 1. That Infants could not be saved by Baptisme 2. That the faith of other men could not stand them in stead that had no faith of their own 3. That crosses were to be pluck down and burned 4. That the Body and bloud of Christ was not really or corporally present in the Sacrament 5. That the Sacrament was not a Sacrifice to be offered to God 6. That Prayers and Alms made and given by the living did not profit the dead 7. That Christians had no need of consecrated places to Worship God in neither need they to build any 8. Vpon the Lords day before Easter He invited much People to a feast and dressed his meat with a fire made of woodden crosses After this man in the Year 1147. there arose one Henricus a Monk which is the man spoken of by the answerer who was accused of Heresieby his adversaries His heresies as they termed them were these First Infants are not to be Baptised 2. The cross of Christ is not to be Worshipped 3. The Body of Christ is not in the Sacrament of the Eucharist 4. It is in vain to pray for the dead 5. God is provoked to wrath by Church musick This was the Henrician Heresy in the full They who did condemn and excommunicate these Men were the Pope his Cardinalls andCouncell and Bernard the fairest flower among them A Surely I beleeve the same persons would have comdemned this Answerer also forasmuch as he also is guilty of some of their opinions for which they were condemned B That is true enough I therefore wonder why he did instance in these persons But I will return to the Disputation Oppo I will prove that this interpretation of the place alledged cannot be true viz. to make Disciples by Baptising First By the Grammaticall Construction of the place Secondly By the general Consent of Translators Thirdly By the ●cripture Compared with this place And Fourthly by the practice of the Apostles who were the persons executing this Commission Make Disciples of all Nations Baptising them {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} I demand what is the antecedent to the relative {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} if {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} not understood in the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Res {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Nations is the anticedent Oppo That cannot be for then the Commission should be this make the Nations Disciples by Baptising them and you have granted that this Commission doth not extend to all in the Nations but only to such as are willing Secondly {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is the Newter gender and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the Masculine how do they agree Res It is a figure called Synthesis wherein one gender is put for another which is frequent in the new Testament Oppo I do not remember any place neither do I beleeve any parallel place can be shewed out of the new Testament Res Although I do not carry a Concordance in my head yet I can shew you one place in John 14. 26. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and here the Relative {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} hath for his antecedent {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Oppo It is nothing so for the anticedent is {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in the beginning of the vers and the words between {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} are a Parenthesis and may be omitted without breaking the sence Res Is the Parenthesis noted in your Book Opp. No But your consience tells you it ought to be Res I will give you another place Ephesi 1. 13 14. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Here {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} hath {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} for his antecedent this is a plain Synthesis Oppo It is so because of the word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} understood What is the earnest of the inheritance Res {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} The Spirit of God A Here the Respondent speaketh not punctually according to the truth

for here the Relative {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} comming between two words of different genders it may accord with either So that according to rule it may be either {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and in my judgement this is as little to the purpose as the other for here is no Synthesis in either of these two places Oppo I will prove that the commission in the 28th of Mat. cannot be a warrant for Parents to require Baptisme for their Children If the TEXT do require teaching before Baptising then it can be no warrant to Baptise Children who cannot be taught but the TEXT requires teaching before Baptising Therefore that can be no warrant to Baptise Children or require Baptisme for them before they can be taught Res I deny the minor the TEXT in the 28th of Mat. Go Disciple all Nations doth not require teaching before Baptising in all persons indeed in those that are of years of discretion and capable of understanding the Apostles were first to teach them and to make them willing by teaching and afterward to Baptise them But for Infants they were first of all to make them Disciples by Baptising of them and afterward to teach them when they are capable of understanding Oppo I have to oppose unto you The translators and translations of all sorts in all Languages from the first to the last so far as I know translated it Teach without any doubt or scruple Res Do you know what is the Ethiopick word Oppo No I do not Next compare Scripture with Scripture there being no better interpreter this TEXT being compared with Mark 16. 15. Go ye into all the World preach the Gospel to every Creature These Commissions are the same indifferent words Matthew Saith Go Disciple or teach all Nations Mark Saith Go preach the Gospel to every Creature Res I deny them to be the same neither given at the same time nor at the same place for the one was given in Galilae in a mountain where Jesus had papointed them The other was given to them when Jesus appeared to them as they sate at meat Oppo Time and place doth not alter the Commission or prove them to be two how doth it appear by your words that these words were spoken at several times and in two places was it possible they might sit at meat in the mountain of Galilae The next thing I have to urge you with is the practice of the Apostles who best knew the meaning of the Commission They in the execution of this Commission did preach the Gospel and when the People beleeved they Baptised them both Men and Women but not a word of Children Acts 9. 12. In the City of Samaria were there no Children there Res Philip Baptised both Men and Women under which Children are comprehended which is usual in Scripture for Josua 8. 25. it is said that Josua destroyed all the Inhabitants of Ai And so it was that all that fell that day both of Men and Women were twelve thousand even all the Men of Ai Here Children are comprehended under Men and Women for they also were destroyed for he utterly destroyed all the inhabitants of Ai and Children were part it may be a great part of the inhabitants of Ai Oppo This is not much to the purpose the TEXT doth not say that there were no more inhabitants but twelve thousand but the Men and Women were twelve thousand and that they were all the Men of Ai It is possible notwithstanding that TEXT that the inhabitants of Ai might be twenty thousand the Children being accounted I leave your answer to consideration and proceed to another argument If Baptisme of Infants be Lawfull then it is of God but it is not of God Therefore it is not Lawfull Res Baptisme of Infants is of God and an ordinance of God Oppo Whatsoever is of God is to some good use or purpose But Baptisme of Infants is to no good use or purpose Therefore Baptisme of Infants is not of God Res Baptisme of Infants is to very good purpose namely to wash away their Original sin that so they may be made the Children of God without which they cannot be saved Except any one be born of Water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdome of God Opp. I will prove that Baptisme cannot wash away the sin of Infants If all the sin that Infants are or can be guilty of be taken away before Baptisme then Baptisme cannot wash it away But all the sin that Infants are or can be guilty of is washed away before Baptisme Therefore Baptisme cannot wash away sin of Infants Res The sin of Infants is not washed away before Baptisme Oppo If Infants have no other sin but the sin of the World whereof they are guilty then all their sin is taken or washed away before Baptisme But Infants have no other sin but the sin of the World therefore all their sin is washed away before Baptisme Res I deny the consequence Oppo If the sin of the World be taken away before Baptisme then the consequence is true But the sin of the World is taken away before Baptisme therefore the consequence is true Res I deny the minor the sin of the World is not taken away before Baptisme I know your Scriptures Oppo If Christ took the sin of the World away by his death when he died then it is taken away before Baptisme But Christ Jesus took away the sin of the World by his death therefore it was taken away before Baptisme Res Christ did not actually take away the sin of the World by his death Oppo John 1. 29. Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the World 1. Pet. 2. 24. Who himself bare our sins in his own body on the tree Heb. 9. 28. Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many with a multitude of places Deut. 9. 24. To finish sin and make an end of transgression c. Res Christ did not actually take away the sin of the World but only Potentially in procuring a possibility of pardon upon conditions performed namely of Faith Repentance and Baptisme in those that are of years of discretion and of Baptisme in Infants and as they who are of years of discretion cannot have sin taken away without repentance Faith and Baptisme no more can Infants without Baptisme Opp. I will prove that Christ did actually take away the sin of the world by his death That which was not imputed was actually taken away but the sin of the World was not imputed Therefore it was actually taken away Res The sin of the World was imputed before Baptisme Oppo 2. Cor. 5. 19. God was in Christ reconciling the World to himself not imputing their Trespasses unto them Coll. 1. 20. And having made peace through the bloud of his cross by him to reconcile all things to himself Heb. 10. 14. By one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified Esa.