Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	lord_n	mercy_n	psal_n	4,793	5	8.0417	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A41329	The plea of the children of believing-parents for their interest in Abraham's covenant, their right to church-member-ship with their parents, and consequently their title to baptism. The cause of publishing this discourse after so many learned men have laboured in this province, is declared in the preface to the reader. By Giles Firmin.	Firmin, Giles, 1614-1697.	1683 (1683)	Wing F960; ESTC R216413	52,287	130

Christ to the Apostles to baptize Infants This was put upon me in the Congregation Now it is meet the Anabaptists should be honest men buy and sell by the same measure If they require of us express Scriptures we may well require of them the same Secondly All the Arguments which the Anabaptists draw from Scripture against Infants Church-membership and Baptism do strike at the Grace and Wisdom of God in his Covenant with Abraham and his Seed and his Constitution of the Church of the Jews as if the Lord had not done wisely but they will teach him how to Constitute Churches better We shall hear their Arguments anon Thirdly The holy Page tells us how much weight the Jews and false Teachers put upon Circumcision what a stir it made in the Churches while the Apostles laboured to remove it though it was a painfull bloody Ordinance We read Acts 21.21 This was the great Objection against Paul and this was 21 years after Paul's Conversion I am apt to think till the Temple the head of all the Ceremonies was utterly demolished the believing Jews did Circumcise their Children But had Paul told them the Reason was that Christ is come and now the Covenant with Abraham as to his Seed is repealed and their Seed are all cast out of the Church and therefore they must not Circumcise their Children Should we not have read the Jews Clamours and Out-cries against the Apostles in the Acts and in every Epistle and what a bar had this been against the reception of the Gospel I appeal to the Consciences of the Anabaptists But though we read of Circumcision in several places both in the Acts and the Epistles there is not one word of this Fourthly God did expresly repeal his Covenant with Israel made at Mount Sinai Heb. 8.13 That which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away This Covenant of God with Abraham and his Seed is a Covenant much noted in the Scripture and long before Sinai-Covenant Now if the Lord doth indeed repeal this Covenant with Abraham why should we not expect clear Scripture-ground The Jews quarrelled with the Apostles because they changed the Customs of Moses Acts 6.14 chap. 21. v. 21. but if they had taught the nulling of the Covenant of God with Abraham their Father too the Apostles should have heard of it with both ears and we should have read it God tells them when he repealed that Covenant He would make a new Covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah are not Children a part of the House They were so when God made that Covenant with the House of Israel Deut. 29.10 11 12. then they are in the House still then they are capable of the Grace of the new Covenant with their Parents then the want of actual Faith doth not exclude them from Baptism Fifthly God tells Abraham he will establish his Covenant and it shall be an ever lasting Covenant Gen. 17.7 If God establish it must stand If he saith it is everlasting the Entail is not cut off Nor do I doubt in the least but as when they rejected Christ and said Let his blood be upon us and our children Mat. 27.25 God did cast away Parents and Children so when God receives them again Rom. 11.15.26 the Parents shall not be received and Children remain cast out but they shall come in with their Parents If they say the word Everlasting is spoken of their possession of Canaan verse 8. and Circumcision v. 13. Ans I know well how the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for ever or everlasting is taken in Scripture but it doth not at all hinder the Argument 1. For in this Covenant is nothing Typical it is pure Grace and we have other Scriptures in the Gospel will confirm it 2. As to Circumcision it was a bloody Ordinance as was the Passeover all Ordinances so till Christ came with his Blood fulfilling all removed them No more blood in any Ordinance after Christ Zipporah calls Moses a bloody Husband at the Circumcising of her Son Exod. 4.25 26. At this time when the Jews circumcise their Children they say they may do it from Sun-rising to Sun-setting any hour on the Eighth day but they choose the Morning because the Child then being empty it will not bleed so much The Mohet or he that circumciseth sucks the Wound three times and use other means to stop the blood but no bloody Ordinance now Buxt Synor Isid p. 81.86 3. For the Land of Canaan that was conditional their abiding in it but however though they are now cast out of possession yet they have jus ad rem a just Title to it at this day Hence Ezek. 37.14.21 Ezek. 36.24 Three times the Lord promised to bring them into their own Land ver 28. the Promise runs for them It is their own then now to depart from the literal sense without some eminent absurdity that will follow upon the literal sense we ought not 6ly If God will not bring an unclean Creature forbidden into a believing Jew's House without an express word to warrant it will God cast a holy Seed out of his House and not give as clear a ground to the believing Parent to know his mind The unclean Creatures signifying the Heathen of several sorts the Hebrews say Babylonians Medes Persians Greeks Romans not eat that is not to have communion Acts 10.28 Compare Levit. 11.5 6 7. with Acts 10.11 12 13 15. and must now the holy Seed be cast out of the Church and looked upon as the Swine were then We must have clearer grounds and Texts than ever yet the Anabaptists have brought I say as strong as express Scriptures 7ly The New Testament doth give us clear Texts to prove the Church-membership of believing Parents you cannot give us clearer Texts for their unchurching unless you give us express Scriptures 8ly Let me take up one of Mr. Baxter's Arguments and improve it my way If God hath repeled his Covenant and cast the Seed of the believing Jews out of the Church then it was either in justice or in mercy But neither this nor that therefore not cast out c. thus Mr. Baxter For the first not in justice I prove thus Let Parents be never such sound Believers walk in the steps of their Father Abraham keep close in the Covenant yet the Anabaptists cast out all their Seed but this cannot be in justice for the Text saith Psal 25.10 All the paths of the Lord are mercy and truth unto such as keep his Covenant But these Jews believing Parents do so yet God repeals his Covenant with their Seed and cast them out of the Church 2. In mercy the Lord doth it not For then God gives a greater mercy in the room of that which in mercy he takes away saith Mr. Baxter This is true what Mr. Baxter saith I prove what he saith the believing Jew shall say though God hath repealed his Covenant with my Seed and cast them out

Christ obliging all that professed Faith in him to practise to hear what he would say to them judging it a silly act in him to come to oppose me in Infant-Baptism who had renounced Water-Baptism altogether but that day which he said he would come he did not About three Weeks after he did and this was all he had against me what concerned others I regard not Where did Christ give command to Baptise Infants To this I had spoken several times before that this was no New thing to the Congregation There was no such express command in those words I granted but there was a command to Baptise Infants implyed included in that command of Christ to his Apostles to Baptise Disciples Matth. 28.19 I framed my Argument but the Man could not tell which Proposition to deny but after some words little to the purpose civilly departed They who desire the Reformation of the Church do not say every thing must be expresly set down in Scripture but if it be contained in the Scripture and by necessary consequence deducted from thence we are bound to believe or practise it Our Lord taught us this in proving the Resurrection against the Sadduces A Point of infinite more consequence then the Baptising of an Infant For if there be no Resurrection to what purpose is our Religion But according to the Anabaptists Argument that Call for an express command to baptise Infants and therefore reject it our Lord did not prove the Resurrection I will personate a Sadduce and take their Argument the Question is Shall there be a Resurrection of the Dead The Sadduce denies it our Lord affirms it and proves it from Exod. 3.6 I am the God of Abraham c. Matth. 22.29.31 v. But what is this to the proof of the Question Doth God say expresly to Moses there shall be a Resurrection of the Dead if so then we will believe it else not Thus the Anabaptist Doth Christ expresly command the Apostles to Ba●tise Infants then we will Practise it else we Condemn it But tho' God did not expresly say there shall be a Resurrection yet he said that which by necessary Consequence will force it For tho' Jacob who died last of the three had been dead two hundred years when God spake those words yet he saith he is their God but he is not the God of the dead but of the living Mark 12.28 The people said He answer'd them well and 22 Matth. 33. They were astonished at it Yet I may say the necessity of this Consequence from that Antecedent is nothing so obvious and clear to many even good Christians as the Consequence of Infants of Believing-Parents being under Abrahams Covenant and Church-Members with their Parents But what mischief this Principle and Practice hath done and how it hath served the Devils Design we are sad Witnesses Fourthly Tho' I do not put so much stress upon this because the Argument of the Anabaptist cast out all the Posterity of the soundest Believers and holy Men as well as the most wicked out of the Church yet I believe this hath helped on with the rest to see what ignorant and debauched persons because it is the Mode of the Nation require Baptism for their Children and it is Administred to them The Anabaptists Principle is That Regenerate Persons are the only Subject of Baptism but how far is this Practice from their Principle This doth a little confirm me in it because that Man whom I mentioned in my first Page with whom we held Communion when those who are esteemed godly and he did think so had Children to be baptized he desired he might know it and would be present at the Administration though he was not clear for Infant-Baptism This I will say I had rather baptize the Children of some Heathen than of many who are called Christians their Ignorance is not more nor Conversations worse and yet these Christians have lived long under Gospel-light Had they but the knowledge required in the Catechism in the Common-Prayer-book and Conversations as civil as some Indians I have known it were tolerable but when men are asked Quest What is God Ans A good old man Qu. What is Jesus Christ Ans A courteous young Gentleman Quest How many Gods are there Ans Ten. Qu. How many Commandments are there Ans Two Qu. Which is the first Ans Salvation What the second was he forgot that stood by and shewed the three last Questions the first two were another person 's and professed to my Father-in-law when he came to have his Child baptized That he answered him as well as he could For want of Catechising and good Discipline in Church and State Into what a miserable condition is this Nation fallen That this hath helped on among these who are godly Anabaptists I do not much doubt Fifthly I cannot exclude the holy and just government of God When people come to be glutted with the precious Gospel-truths the life of a Christian these are stale and common new things would be welcome I doubt not to say God may permit some of his own dear people to fall into some Errour which in them he overlooks and pardons when others shall take up that Errour and bear up themselves in it because such godly men were of that Opinion and that Errour to them shall be an inlet to other Errours and so fall from one to another filling their heads with notions and spending time in dispute about slight matters and ruine their Souls at last I thought it was a smart and terrible speech of Tertullian Nec periclitor dicere c. Nor do I think it any danger to say The very Scriptures themselves to be so ordered or disposed by the will of God that they should minister matter to Hereticks when I read there must be Heresie 1 Cor. 11.19 which without the Scriptures could not be De prescrip adv Haeret. p. 86. And here I cannot but observe the judgment of God I can call it no other That two great Corporations I know where there were great Assemblies of Anabaptists It is the same in many other places in England the greatest number of them turned Quakers the Anabaptists Society dwindle almost to nothing Thus they who threw off Infant-Baptism throw off the Ordinance of Baptism it self the Lord's Supper and the great gospel-Gospel-truth setting up Self and a Heathenish morality being now fallen into the Mare mortuum from which few or none return Sixthly Another thing which hath prevailed to draw away some honest meaning persons not able to judge have been the great stress and absolute necessity the Anabaptists put upon Baptism and their Baptism for so they style themselves the Baptized Congregations and none baptized but themselves which strikes divers good Christians with fear and what great good things they may expect who do come into their way being Rebaptized from Mark 16. This Text Peter de Bruis a Waldensian in great esteem with my Author for his judgment against