« VorigeDoorgaan »
DISPENSATION OF THE GOSPEL;
PARTICULARLY IN REGARD TO THE
BY SAMUEL AUSTIN, A. N.
“ HIS KINGDOM IS AN EVERLASTING KINGDOM."
S6 AMICUS SOCRATES, AMICUS PLATO, SED MAJOR AMICA VERITAS."
THE NEW YORK
ASTOR, LENOX AND TILIEN FOUNDATIONS.
District of Massachusetts, to wit :.
s.) Be it remembered, that on the sixteenth day w of April in the thirty first year of the Independence of the U. States of Americà, SAMUEL AUstin of said District, has deposited in this Office the title of a Book, the right whereof he claims as authors in the words following.th/wit:
6 A View of the economy of the Church of God, as it ex.
**HIS KINGDOMTISC AN EVERLASTING KINODOM.”
In conformity to the Act. of the Congress of the U.
v 2 Clerk of the District of
SEVERAL works have been published within a few grears, both in Europe, and in this Courtry, concerning the Church of God; particularly, the qualifications which are requisite for membership in it, its institutions, the persons to whom they ought to be extended, and the discipline which its
officers, and ordinary members are to maintain in it. The 'Boptist controversy, in which all these subjects are more or
less involved, has been lately revived. Books are multiplied, without bringing this controversy to a close. Difficulties still remain, to perplex the humble enquirer, and keep up the vehemence of debate. Much truth is exhibited. But a clear, consistent scheme, disembarrassed of real difficulties, seems do.be wanting. Such a scheme the Bible undoubtedly contains. To elicit this scheme is the only way to bring honest minds to an agreement. Whoever will candidly review the most ingendows Treatises which have been published in the Baptist coni troversy, will perceive that the Pædobaptists have a great pre
ponderance of evidence on their side of the question. It will, at the same time, be perceived, that they are not as united as could be wished in the principles of their theory. Some rest the evidence that the infant seed of believers are proper subjects of baptism, almost wholly upon the covenant which God established with Abraham. Others have not so much respect to this kind of argument ; but prefer to rest the defence of their opinion, and practice, upon what they apprehend to be the clearer intimations of the Gospel, and upon the re. cords of history.' Different views are entertained of the nature of the Abrahamic covenant. It is debated whether this Covenant was strictly, and properly the covenant of Grace ; what was the real import, and who were the objects of its promises. Different opinions are entertained, and contrary,