be a Covenant of Works or that the Covenant of Circumcision was indeed such a Covenant as I have affirmed it to be to wit no other than a Covenant of Works I know very well that Mr. Whiston endeavours to shift off the force of Gal. 5. 3. concerning the Obligation on all that were Circumcised to do the whole Law in his Answer to one of Mr. Grantham's Arguments by telling us That the Law was mis-interpreted and mis-understood by the Jews as though it had been a Law through their meer keeping of which they should be saved without the Mediation of Christ But saith he Circumcision never bound any Man so to keep the Law No! say I doth not Moses himself describe the Righteousness of the Law unto which Circumcision was Annexed after this very sort That the Man that doth these things shall live by them and that in a way of plain Contradiction or Opposition to the Righteousness of Faith which was to believe in Christ unto Life and Salvation Rom. 10. 5 6 c. Yea doth not God himself declare unto the Jews the Nature of the Law to be such Lev. 18. 5. Ye shall therefore keep my Judgments and my Statutes which if a Man do he shall live in them So that the Jews were right enough in their Notion concerning the Law in reference to the true Nature of it as it required perfect sinless Obedience in order to Life promising Life thereon if they could perform it pronouncing a Curse upon the least Disobedience For Paul doth plainly acknowledg it to be such Gal. 3. 10 12. And God himself by the Mouth of his Servant Moses as plainly expresseth it so to be in the very first Sanction of it Lev. 18. 5. Deut. 27. 26. which could not be because the Jews had Mis-interpreted it For how could they Mis-interpret it before it had a Being or before it was Instituted 'T is evident therefore that such was the nature of that Covenant in it self considered when it was first promulged And 't is as plain that such was the true nature of the Covenant of Circumcision also For can it be rationally imagined that when the Apostle expresseth himself with that vehemence as he doth Gal. 5. 2 3. For I testify again to every Man that is Circumcised that he is a Debtor to do the whole Law That he thus expresseth himself only to shew the Sence of the Jewish Teachers or the Opinion that they had concerning the Nature of Circumcision It is plain that he expresseth it as his own Sence in reference to the true nature of that Covenant From whence therefore the Conclusion is evident that it could be no other than a Covenant of Works as that at Sinai was Proceed we then to the second Argument which Mr. Whiston saith is of a like validity with the first And if so say I we need desire no more For Mr. Whiston himself according to his own forementioned Concession unless he will shut his Eyes must needs allow the validity of the first My 2. Argument then as he states it is this That Covenant in which Faith was not reckoned to Abraham for righteousness could never be a Covenant of Faith Here Mr. Whiston stops without reciting my minor Proposition at all first or last nor the Proof supporting it Contenting himself onely to give some dark and general glances at it The Argument then as I stated it runs thus That Covenant in which Faith was not reckoned to Abraham for righteousness could never be a Covenant of Faith But the Scripture is express that Faith was not reckoned to Abraham for righteousness when he was in Circumcision but in uncircumcision therefore the Covenant of Circumcision could never be a Covenant of Faith The minor Proposition carries with it its own evidence containing onely the words of the Text to which it referres Rom. 4. 9 10. Now what doth Mr. Whiston reply in the dark without once mentioning what it is that he gives Answer to Strange Confidence saith he for Mr. Cary to take this to be an Irresistible Argument Not to spend time saith he in shewing the Insufficiency of his Proof that speaking of Circumcision when his Argument speaks of the Covenant and sure there is a wide difference between the Covenant and Circumcision the token of it But Sir If this be all you have to say by way of opposition thereunto for ought I can yet see it may prove as lusty an Argument as its fellow which together with this you have drawn forth to try your strength and valour upon His Proof say you speaks of Circumcision when his Argument speaks of the Covenant and sure there is a wide difference between the Covenant and Circumcision the token of it But Sir do you not know that in the 17 th Gen. 9. God said unto Abraham Thou shalt keep my Covenant therefore Thou and thy Seed after thee in their Generations which himself is pleased to explain vers 10. This is my Covenant which ye shall keep every Man child among you shall be Circumcised And how dare you then to say that sure there is a Wide difference between the Covenant and Circumcision the Token of it I know very well that those words This is my Covenant is as much as to say This is the Sign or Token of my Covenant And so it is afterward explained vers 11. Ye shall Circumeise the flesh of your foreskin and it shall be a Token of the Covenant betwixt me and you But you see by this that these two phrases My Covenant and the Token thereof are in God's account Convertible terms and therefore sure there can be no such wide difference as you would suppose between them Besides Doth not Stephen Act. 7. 8. Expresly call this Covenant the Covenant of Circumcision the Sign of Circumcision being that which gives the Denomination to the Covenant it self And is it therefore so ridiculous a thing as you would make it when the Apostle tells us That Faith was not reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness when he was in Circumcision but in uncircumcision To affirm that these words must needs be understood of the Covenant of Circumcision If not what was it then I ask you that Paul there means when he speaks of Abraham's being in Circumcicion You will tell me it may be that by it we are to understand his being Circumcised Very good But then I ask you again How came he to be Circumcised Or upon what account was he Circumcised Sir whatever your Answer may be the Scripture will tell you that he was Circumcised by the Command of God and that as a Token of the Covenant he then made with him and if so no wonder if we understand the words before us that Faith was not reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness when he was in Circumcision that is in or by vertue of that Covenant For he had it so reckoned to him long before his Circumcision And so the Apostle expresly tells us in
gives the appellation of a Covenant much less of the First or Old Covenant to that Covenant Transaction So that the Silence of the Scripture as to this express term of the Old Covenant in reference to the Covenant of Circumcision is no just Argument that therefore it is not So. And if no other reason can be assigned why the Sinai Covenant is called in Scripture the Frst or Old Covenant but because of its Affinity with that made with our first Parent Since it was not the first Covenant that God ever made with Men in respect of time an express Covenant having been made with Abraham and with Noah also long before why may not the Covenant of Circumcision also pass under the Denomination of the First or Old Covenant because of its Affinity with that at Sinai the same mercies being promised and the same duties commanded in the one that were in the other which hath expresly the title of the First or Old Covenant given to it in the Scripture Argum. 2. The Law or the Old Covenant was ordained by Angels in the hand of a humane Mediatour a Mediatour that was a meer Man But this Covenant established with Abraham was not ordained by Angels in the hand of a Humane Mediatour Therefore this Covenant was not the Law or the Old Covenant Reply By the same Rule and for the same Reason you may as well deny that the Covenant of Works made with our first Parent was the Old or the first Covenant because it was not ordained by Angels in the hand of a Humane Mediatour as the Sinai Covenant was Argum. 3. The Law or Old Covenant was given 430 Years after the Covenant of Grace was entred with Abraham But this Covenant entred with Abraham was not entred 430 Years after the Covenant of Grace was entred with him Therefore this Covenant cannot be the Law or Old Covenant The Major say you is evident from Gal. 3. 17. The Minor from the History of God's Covenant transactions with Abraham Reply Though the Covenant of Works which was given by Moses at Mount Sinai was 430 Years after the Covenant of Grace was entred with Abraham Gen. 12. Yet it follows not that there was therefore no other Edition thereof ever extant in the World you your self cannot but acknowledg that it was first made with Adam in innocency And if so why there might not be another Edition thereof besides that given at Sinai Neither the Scripture by you now mentioned nor any other says any thing to the contrary Argum. 4. God himself expresly denies â—…hat this Covenant established with Abraham was the Old Covenant Therefore c. That God expresly denies the Covenant established with Abraham to be the Old Covenant is evident Deut. â—… 2 3. Where saith Moses speaking by the Spirit of God The Lord our God made a Covenant with us in Horeb. The Lord made not this Covenant with our Fathers Now that under â—…his term Fathers we must necessarily include Abraham cannot be denied whence it is evident that the Covenant made in Horeb that is at Mount Sinai was not made with Abraham Reply Either the Covenant which Moses here speaks of which God made with Israel in Horeb that is at Mount Sinai was a Covenant of Grace that is a Gospel Covenant as Mr. Flavell Mr. Roberts Mr. Sedgwick and many others affirm it was or a Covenant of Works If it was a Gospel Covenant How will you resolve the Point when Moses tells you here expressly That the Lord made not this Covenant with our Fathers Will you say or can it be immagined that God never made any Gospel Covenant with Abraham Isaac or Jacob or the rest of the Fathers How then were they Saved If it was a Covenant of Works as you seem to grant it was the same difficulty occures on the other hand For can you say that God never made any Covenant of Works with Abraham and the rest of the Fathers Was there not a Covenant of Works made with our first Father and in him with all his Posterity Were not Abraham Isaac and Jacob children of wrath by nature as well as others and consequently then under the First or Old Covenant Wherefore when Moses says That the Lord made not this Covenant with our Fathers speaking of the Sinai Covenant it cannot be understood Absolutely as if therefore they had never been under the Old Covenant for it is plain that they had as being of Adam's Posterity And it is as plain that the first lines even of the Covenant at Mount Sinai were first drawn in the establishment of the Covenant of Circumcision There was the first draught thereof and then God first began to deal with even Abraham himself in order to the establishment of that Covenant he intended afterward in a more formal express manner to accomplish though it was not as yet Compleated So that Moses might justly enough say speaking of the Sinai Covenant The Lord made not this Covenant with our Fathers that is in the same manner and Circumstances as it is now made with us The Lord never appeared till now with such dreadful Majesty with such Thundrings Blackness Darkness and Tempect God never discovered himself till now with the Sound of a Trumpet and the Voice of Words which voice they that heard entreated that the Word should not be spoken to them any more It cannot be denied but that God had before made the same Covenant of Works with them in Adam for the Substance thereof And it is as plain that the first lines even of the Sinai Covenant it self had been drawn in the Covenant of Circumcision But it was not then Compleated there were many Ceremonies Statutes and Judgments to be added thereunto which the Fathers knew nothing of The same Covenant for the Substance thereof had been before made with them though not in the same manner and with such circumstances as it had been now Performed So that this Scripture makes nothing to your purpose at all No more doth that which follows when you tell us That that which may yet further confirm us is this That the Lord himself expresly distinguisheth that Covenant made with Abraham from that Covenant made at Sinai Deut. 29. 1. These are the Words of the Covenant which the Lord Commanded Moses to make with the Children of Israel in the Land of Moab beside the Covenant which he made with them in Horeb. But how doth it appear by this that the Lord himself distinguisheth the Covenant made with Abraham from that made with Abraham from that made at Mount Sinai Why yes saith Mr. Whiston because the Covenant here spoken of wich God made with Israel in the Land of Moab is Abraham's Covenant So saith he it is expresly declared vers 13. Now this Covenant is expresly declared to be another Covenant besides that made in Horeb vers 1. And therefore they could not be one and the same Covenant But then Mr. Whiston should have
this Grace he gave in Paul From all which it is evident that the principal Grace of the Covenant or God's putting his Laws in our Hearts which is influential to all the rest can depend on no condition on our Part. These things then being thus premised the Answer which I shall return unto the forementioned Argument is this First That it is evident that unto a full and compleat enjoyment of all the Promises of the Covenant Faith on our part from which Evangelical Repentance is inseparable is required But then it must withal be considered that these also are wrought in us given to us and bestowed upon us by vertue of that Promise and Grace of the Covenant that depends on no Condition in us which renders it wholly free and absolute from the Foundation to the Topstone thereof Whereas therefore you are pleased to tell me That there is something as an Act required of us in point of Duty which is Antecedent to the Benefit of the Promise If you intend hereby that Faith from which Evangelical Repentance and Good Works are inseparable is such a Condition of the Covenant as to be by us performed Antecedently unto the participation of any Grace Mercy or Benefit of it as your words imply for you admit of no Benefit from the Covenant till this be performed It is most untrue and as I have already told you 't is not onely contrary to the express Testimonies of Scripture but destructive of the Nature of the Covenant it self For if so Men must do all those things before they receive the Remission of Sins Yea while they are as yet dead in Trespasses and Sins Yea then must they do them whilst they are under the Law and the Curse of it For so are all Men whose Sins are not pardoned But this is to make Obedience unto the Law and that to be performed by Men whilst under the Curse of it to be a Condition of Gospel Mercy which is to overthrow both the Law and the Gospel How notoriously false and absurd is that Doctrin which asserteth the possibility of Believing without the efficacy of Supernatural Grace saith Mr. Flavell himself p. 395. of his forementioned Book entituled The method of Grace the desire of Self-sufficiency saith he was the ruin of Aadam and the conceit of Self-sufficiency is the ruin of multitudes of his Posterity This Doctrin saith he is not only contradictory to the current stream of Scripture Phil. 2. 13. 1 Jo. 1. 13. with many other Scriptures but it is also contradictory to the common Sense and Experience of Believers yet saith he the Pride of Nature will strive to maintain what Scripture and Experience plainly contradict and overthrow I shall need to make no other Descant upon these words of his but this If that Doctrin is notoriously false and absurd which asserteth the possibility of Believing without the efficacy of Supernatural Grace Then so is that Doctrin which asserteth that Faith is required of us in point of Duty antecedent to the benefit of the Promise Secondly If Jesus Christ fulfilled the Law and purchased Heaven and Happiness for Men as all true Protestants hitherto have taught then nothing can remain but to declare this to them to incline them to believe and accept it and to prescribe in what way and by what means they shall finally come to inherit Eternal Life To affirm therefore that Faith and Repentance are the Conditions of the New Covenant required of us in point of Duty antecedent to any Benefit of the Promise doth necessarily suppose that Christ hath not done all for us nor purchased a right to Life for any but onely made way that they may have it upon certain terms or as some say He hath merited that we might merit But the Conditions of the Covenant are not to be performed by the Head and Members both The Scriptures do assure us That when the fulness of time was come God sent forth his Son made of a Woman made under the Law to redeem them that were under the Law that we might receive the Adoption of Sons Gal. 4. 4. Christ therefore having in our stead performed the Conditions of Life there remains nothing but a Promise and the Obedience of Children as the Fruit and Effect thereof to them that believe in him together with means of obtaining the full possession which here we want Well but as under the Old Covenant Man was bid to do this and live So under this New Covenant he is commanded to Believe and live And as Death was threatened to the failure of Obedience to the Law So it is now threatened to the want of Faith under the Gospel Faith being the Condition on which the consequent Benefits of Life and Salvation are suspended Mar. 16. 15 16. Go preach the Gospel He that believeth and is Baptized shall be saved He that believeth not shall be damned Jo. 3. 36. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting Life and he that believeth not shall not see Life Where Faith seemeth to be put into the room of perfect Obedience and therfore to be as proper a Condition of Life as that was So Rom. 10. 9. That if thou shalt consess with thy Mouth and believe in thine Heart thou shalt be saved Mat. 18. 3. Except ye be converted and become as little Children ye shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven Mar. 11. 26. But if ye forgive not neither will your Heavenly Father forgive you With multitudes more saith Mr. Flavell of such kind of Expressions which are all Conditional Particles inserted into the Grants of Benefits it being not possible to put words into a frame more lively expressive of a Condition than these are Reply First whereas it is supposed that Faith under the Gospel seemeth to be put into the room of Perfect Obedience unto the Law and therefore to be as proper a Condition of Life as that was This cannot be for as much as it is Christ's Perfect Obedience onely which is put into the room of ours to justify and save us as our own should have done had we been able to perform it And so his Sufferings take away the Curse which our Disobedience brought upon us Secondly It must also be observed that God having promised Salvation upon the account of his Sons satisfaction to all that come to him or believe in him Faith is therefore no other than a Coming Believing or Trusting in this Promise of God and so in the Righteousness of Christ exhibited in the Promise whereby it is applied unto us Wherefore Faith is not properly put into the room of Perfect Obedience nor doth it what Perfect Obedience was to do which was to be the Condition of Life For though that was to be our Righteousness under the Law yet it is evident that Faith on the other hand is appointed onely as an Instrument to receive and apply the Righteousness of Christ which is the alone matter of our Justification before God
to Christ's Authority But as for such as profess that they are not without Law to God but under the Law to Christ as Paul did and accordingly make it their business to walk Holily and Unblameably in Obedience to all God's Commands it must needs proceed from Satan's Influence for any of their Brethren to Slur them as Antinomians But the comfort is it is not their Lot alone The Blessed Apostle Paul himself was so stigmatized by those he had then to do with as evidently appears from Rom. 3. 8 31. 6. 1 2. And if he was so reproached no wonder if the Followers of him and of Christ in respect of that truly Evangelical Doctrin by them Preached be so served also I come now to your Fifth and Last Argument whereby you pretend to prove the Conditionality of the New Covenant which I find thus formed Printed Reply P. 78. Arg. 5. If the Covenant of Grace be altogether Absolute and Unconditional requiring nothing to be done on our part to Entitle us to its Benefits then it cannot be Man's Duty in entring Covenant with God to deliberate the Terms count the Cost or give his Consent by Word or Writing explicitly to the Terms of this Covenant But it is Man's Duty in entring Covenant with God to deliberate the Terms and count the Cost Luke 14. 26 to 34. and explicitly to give his Consent thereto either by Word or Writing Ergo Reply Sir By way of Answer hereunto I must tell you that the Scriptures do make a plain distinction betwixt that New and Everlasting Covenant which God hath been pleased to make with Sinners in Jesus Christ whereof we have been all this while discoursing which is the sole Foundation of all our Hopes and Blessedness and the return of that sincere and dutiful Obedience which he requireth of us by way of Answer thereunto 'T is true there are many things which though Promised in the Covenant and wrought in us by the Grace of God are yet Duties Indispensibly required of us in order to the Participation or Enjoyment of the full end of the Covenant in Glory And in respect hereof we are indeed to deliberate the Terms to sit down and count the Cost and to give up our selves solemnly to him with sincere Resolutions and Promises of all Faithful Obedience to the end of our Lives For hereunto the Scriptures by you alledged and many more do oblige us But then I thought you had understood that there is a vast difference betwixt God's Covenant with us and our Covenant with God If not the Scriptures will inform you And in this respect in the first place I beseech you to cast your Eye upon what God speaks to Israel of old Ezek. 16. 59 60 61. For thus saith the Lord God I will even deal with thee as thou hast done which hast despised the Oath in breaking the Covenant which must of necessity be understood of the Sinai Covenant nevertheless I will remember my Covenant with thee in the Days of thy Youth And I will Establish unto thee an Everlasting Covenant Then shalt thou remember thy ways and be ashamed when thou shalt receive thy Sisters thine Elder and thy Younger and I will give them unto thee for Daughters but not by thy Covenant And I will Establish my Covenant with thee and thou shalt know that I am the Lord. Here you see is a plain notice given us of a twofold Covenant betwixt God and them the one properly theirs the other Gods the one a Covenant that might be broken as it was the other that which should endure for ever the one respecting their Duty to God the other God's Promise to them And this is the Covenant saith God that I will Establish If this do not sufficiently Instruct you in this Important Point I beseech you look into the 89 Psalm and there you shall find it fully cleared up Vers. 30. If his Children forsake my Law and walk not in my Judgments if they break my Statutes and keep not my commandments then will I visit their Transgression with the Rod and their Iniquity with Stripes Nevertheless my Loving Kindness will I not utterly take from him nor suffer my Faithfulness to fail My Covenant will I not break nor alter the thing that is gone out of my Lips Where we find a plain distinction made betwixt God's Covenant with them and their Duty to God My Covenant saith God will I not break though you fail in your Duty to me Alas Sir Is it not Obvious to our most constant Experience that both you and I and all of us the more is our Misery do every Day more or less break our own Vows Covenants and Resolutions by our Daily Transgressions And what shall relieve us under the guilt of such Daily Covenant Breaches But that which the Lord himself directs us to Though it be thus and thus with you saith he though you forsake my Law and walk not in my Judgments though you break my Statutes and keep not my Commandments yet My Covenant will I not break nor alter the thing that is gone out of my Lips It shall be Established for ever as the Moon and as a Faithful Witness in Heaven And indeed this was that alone which the Sweet Singer of Israel himself found Relief in at last when he drew near unto his last Moments We know that in many places of the Psalms he doth frequently Appeal unto God concerning his Integrity and the cleanness of his Heart and Hands his Vows Resolutions and Performances But what were the last Words of the Son of Jesse Or what does he take Comfort in when he comes to the winding up of his Days Doth he insist upon his own Covenant Engagements and the Faithfulness of their Performance Not at all What then Although my House be not so with God yet he hath made with me an Everlasting Covenant ordered in all things and sure For this is all my Salvation and all my Desire although he make it not to grow 2 Sam. 23. 5. Sir I must tell you that the want of a due Observation of this plain Scripture distinction betwixt God's Free and Absolute Covenant which he hath been pleased to make with Sinners in Jesus Christ which as I have told you is the Foundation of all our Blessedness And our Covenants with God by way of return thereunto is the true reason of all your Mistakes about the true Nature of the Gospel Covenant while you Jumble and confound together that which the Scriptures do so plainly distinguish 'T is true there are many things to be Observed on our part and many Duties to be Performed But we cannot say that our Hearts or Houses our Lives or Ways are so with God as they ought to have been Were there not therefore a Free Absolute and Everlasting Covenant that God hath made with us in Jesus Christ a well ordered sure and unchangeable Covenant which cannot be broken wherein is contained all our Salvation
Seed after him in their Generations upon Condition that He and His were Circumcised and fulfilled the whole Law was a more compleat Covenant Transaction than the forementioned and fore-established Covenant wherein God freely Promised to Bless him and all Nations in him wherein not only the Elect of his own Posterity were so deeply and dearly concerned but those among all the Nations of the Earth besides Or will you say that a Covenant that might be broken as the Covenant of Circumcision and that at Sinai was and the Mercies therein contained forfeited as they were did add any thing of Perfection to that fore-established Covenant which could never be broken The Law saith the Apostle made nothing Perfect but the bringing in of a better hope did by the which we draw nigh unto God Heb. 7. 19. You are utterly Mistaken therefore Sir if you imagine that the Covenant of Circumcision or the Sinai Covenant which followed after did add any Compleatment unto the forementioned Gospel Covenant Indeed these were so far from adding any Compleatment thereunto that the Apostle expressly affirms in the forementioned Gal. 3. 18. that if the Inheritance be of the Law it is no more of Promise but saith he God gave it to Abraham by Promise The fear on the other side was lest the Law wherein the Covenant of Circumcision was comprehended should Peradventure have had so much Power and Efficacy as to disannul the forementioned Gospel Covenant which the Apostle carefully guards against Vers. 17. rather than that there was any shadow of pretence to affirm that it added ought unto the Compleatment or Security thereof Wherefore then serveth the Law saith the Apostle in the next following words It was added saith he because of Transgressions till the Seed should come to whom the Promise was made Mr. Flavell indeed tells me that the Law was Published with Evangelical Purposes as being of the same Piece and Complexion with the Promise The Vanity of which Notion I have already detected in my foregoing Discourse where I have proved that the Law was so far from adding any Compleatment thereunto that it was added as an Appendix rather to the First Covenant of Works to reinforce that the more effectually thereby to Convince Men of their need of a Saviour and force them to the Promise for relief Besides If God in those Covenant Transactions with Abraham Recorded Gen. 12. did not as you say make or establish the Covenant of Grace with him that is he did not then Compleat it till the Covenant of Circumcision was added then the Apostle would not have spoken as he doth Gal. 3. 8. but rather thus That the Scripture fore-seeing that God would Justifie the Heathen through Faith Preached before the Gospel unto Abraham saying I will be a God to thee and to thy Seed after thee in their Generations provided that thou and they be Circumcised and keep the whole Law But as there is not a word of this Nature in all the New-Testament besides so this would have been Contradictory to the whole of what he had said before as well as also of what follows after For saith he Vers. 2. this only would I learn of you Received ye the Spirit by the Works of the Law or by the Hearing of Faith Are ye so foolish having begun in the Spirit are you now made Perfect by the Flesh He therefore that Ministreth to you the Spirit and worketh Miracles among you doth he it by the Works of the Law or by the hearing of Faith Even as Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for Righteousness Know ye therefore that they which are of Faith the same are the Children of Abraham From whence he proceeds Vers. 8. to inform us That the Scripture foreseeing that God would Justifie the Heathen through Faith Preached before the Gospel unto Abraham saying In thee shall all Nations be Blessed So then saith he they which be of Faith are Blessed with Faithful Abraham For as many as are of the Works of the Law are under the Curse c. From all which it is Evident that the forementioned Gospel Covenant which God made with Abraham Gen. 12. 2 3. was so far from being Compleated by the Law or by the Covenant of Circumcision which was Annexed thereunto that those Covenants rather brought them under the Curse through their Weakness or Disobedience thereunto which Christ by his Blood and Sufferings hath delivered us from 'T is true the Gospel Covenant mentioned Gen. 12. 2 3. was afterwards further Explained and Re-inforced Gen. 22. 18. where the Lord tells Abraham That in his Seed should all the Nations of the Earth be Blessed And thy Seed shall Possess the Gate of his Enemies Plainly speaking of Christ the Promised Seed through whom these Gospel Blessings were to be derived unto all that were the Proper Subjects of them Before it was only In thee shall all Nations be Blessed Now God plainly tells him what he then meant In thee that is in thy Seed So that the Gospel Covenant was Compleat enough before for the Substance of it it only needed Explanation as to the manner how those Gospel Blessings were to be derived The like may be Observed in reference to what God tells Abraham Gen. 15. 5. So shall thy Seed be And Gen. 17. 4 5. As for me behold my Covenant is with thee and thou shalt be a Father of many Nations neither shall thy Name any more be called Abram but thy Name shall be called Abraham For a Father of many Nationy have I made thee All which were but further Explanations of the Gospel Covenant which for the substance thereof he had before Established with him when God told him in the forementioned Gen. 12. 3. I will make of thee a great Nation and I will Bless thee and make thy Name Great and thou shalt be a Blessing And I will Bless them that Bless thee and Curse him that Curseth thee And in thee shall all the Families of the Earth be Blessed But that God in this Covenant Transaction with Abraham Recorded Gen. 12. did solemnly Confirm or Establish his Covenant with him Mr. Whiston absolutely denies P. 95. of his Answer to Mr. Cox And on the contrary affirms that in those Transactions of God with Abraham he did not then make any Covenant at all with him and consequently not the Covenant of Grace And he offers a Three-fold Argument to prove the Negative Argum. 1. Where we have neither the Name of a Covenant nor the thing it self there no Covenant consequently not the Covenant of Grace was made But in these Transactions of God with Araham we have neither the Name of a Covenant nor the thing it self Therefore c. Reply First That it hath the Name of a Covenant I have already proved from Gal. 3. where the same that the Apostle calls the Gospel Preached unto Abraham Vers. 8. he calls the Covenant Confirmed before of God in Christ Vers. 17. Besides that
it hath the Name of a Covenant is Evident from Peter's Words Acts 3. 25. Ye are the Children of the Prophets and of the Covenant which God made with our Fathers saying unto Abraham And in thy Seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be Blessed And if this Gospel Promise Recorded Gen. 22. 17. was a Covenant in Peter's account though Moses calls it not so Why not that Recorded Gen. 12. also since the latter is a plain repetition of the former the Word Seed only being added for the further Explanation thereof Answer to Mr. Cox P. 95. But if it have the Name where is the thing Here are 't is true saith Mr. Whiston some Absolute Promises made to Abraham Personally considered but not any to his Seed whether Natural or Spiritual conveying unto them any particular good Neither is there here any Restipulation required as there is in the Covenant of Grace as in all other Covenants where that Term is used in a proper sense Reply Some Absolute Promises Why will Mr. Whiston deny that the Scripture any where gives the Denomination of a Covenant to some Absolute Promises where no Restipulation is required What will he then say to those before mentioned Gen. 22. 16 17. which nevertheless Peter expressly calls a Covenant Nay what will he then say to God's Covenant with the Day and Night mentioned Jer. 33. 20 25. where that Term is used for such a free Purpose of God with respect unto such things which in their own Nature are uncapable of being obliged by any Moral Condition or Restipulation And so he says that he made his Covenant not to destroy the World by Water any more with every Living Creature Gen. 9. 10 11. It cannot therefore be justly infered that because there is no Restipulation required Gen. 12. it may not therefore be duly called a Covenant But for Mr. Whiston's further Conviction herein I shall refer him to Gen. 15. 18. where this Term of a Covenant is by God himself applied unto a meer Gratuitous Promise In that Day did God make a Covenant with Abraham saying unto thy Seed will I give this Land By the way I desire Mr. Flavell to take notice that what he denies his Friend Mr. Whiston here plainly grants and positively asserts viz. That the Promises mentioned Gen. 12. 2 3. are Absolute Promises without any Restipulation But saith Mr. Whiston Here are 't is true some Absolute Promises made to Abraham Personally considered but not any made to his Seed whether Natural or Spiritual conveying to them any particular good No! say I what is the meaning then of that Promise I will make of thee a great Nation How could God make of Abraham a great Nation but with reference to his Seed whether Natural or Spiritual or both And when God Promiseth to Bless him and to make him a Blessing and that in him should all the Families of the Earth be Blessed Are there not here many particular Blessings and those great enough and good enough Promised to him and them Are they not sufficiently Blessed whom God thus Promiseth to Bless Yea are they not Spiritually Blessed since we are expressly told That the Scripture foreseeing that God would Justifie the Heathen through Faith Preached before the Gospel unto Abraham saying in thee shall all Nations be Blessed Was not Justification by Faith a Spiritual as well as a Particular Blessing to those that should be the Proper Subjects thereof Argum. 2. If the Covenant of Grace were at this time entred with Abraham and this be a distinct Covenant from that mentioned Gen. 17. 7. then there were Two distinct Covenants of Grace entred with Abraham But there were not Two distinct Covenants of Grace entred with Abraham Therefore at this time the Covenant of Grace was not entred with him Reply Though the Covenant mentioned Gen. 12. 2 3. was indeed a distinct Covenant from that mentioned Gen. 17. 7. It doth not therefore follow that these were Two distinct Covenants of Grace For I have already proved that they were Essentially or Specifically different the one being a Covenant of Grace the other of Works Argum. 3. The Covenant of Grace was made with Abraham as Actually Constituted the Father of the Faithful But at the time of this Transaction of God with him he was not Actually Constituted in that Relation Therefore at that time the Covenant of Grace was not entred with him Reply Will Mr. Whiston say that because in the Renovation of the Promise Gen. 3. 15. wherein the Essence of the Covenant of Grace was contained God did oft times make other Additions to it as unto Abraham and David that therefore at that time the Covenant of Grace was not entred with our first Parent Yea was it not that which both he and all the Faithful lived upon and were saved by till Abraham's time as dark and seemingly Imperfect as it was Besides I have before proved that though the Gospel Covenant mentioned Gen. 12. 2 3. was afterward further Explained and Re-inforced yet it was then as compleat as compleat could be for the substance thereof it only needed Explanation as to the manner how the Gospel Blessings therein contained should be derived which the after Repetitions of the same Gospel Covenant do more particularly and plainly declare And in particular as to Abraham's being the Father of the Faithful Mr. Whiston himself cannot but confess P. 97. that God did indeed intimate unto Abraham Gen. 12. that he should be for the future Constituted in that Relation But saith he he did not then Actually Constitute him in it If so say I that is enough God's Intimations are sufficient Constitutions we need desire no more to Constitute a Covenant of Grace And so much for Mr. Whiston's first Proposition Proceed we then to the Examination of his Second Prop. 2. That that Covenant established with Abraham and his Seed in their Generations Gen. 17. 7. is the Covenant of Grace or that Gracious Covenant confirmed in Christ according unto which all the elect always have been still are and yet shall be saved This he saith he shall speak to both Negatively and Positively First Negatively That this Covenant was not the Old Covenant or the same with that entred with the People of Israel at Mount Sinai Argum. 1. If the Scripture continually declares that the Covenant made at Mount Sinai was the Old Covenant and no where declares that this Covenant made with Abraham was so Then that Covenant made at Sinai and not this made with Abraham was the Old Covenant But the antecedent is true therefore the consequent Reply Mr. Whiston knows well enough that the Covenant of Works made with our first Parent is generally acknowledged to be the First or Old Covenant And why is it called the First or Old Covenant but because it was the first Covenant Transaction that ever passed between God and Man Though the Scripture no where declares this in express terms or