the Flesh from Abraham For if you mind it this Distinction of Seeds did take no place in the Antitype and Truth before the Law for all that long space of above four hundred Years that did precede it So that firstly they do not signifie single Persons but Peoples I say Ishmael and Isaac are not primarily and immediately the Elect and Reprobate as Elect and Reprobate are commonly taken but are Jew and Gentile The Seed which is of the Law and the Seed which is of the Faith of Abraham According to Rom. 4. 16. there are Elect and Reprobate among both Seeds Yes Ishmael and Isaac do signifie but Peoples namely Ishmael signifies the Jews who being Descendants of Abraham according to the Flesh were under the Bondage of the Law and so in the Mystery were Children of Hagar the Bond-Woman as Ishmael was in the Letter For Hagar answereth unto Sinai where the Law was given And Isaac represents the believing Gentiles who are no longer under the Bondage of the Law but under the Grace of the Promise and so in the Mystery are the Children of Sarah or of the Free Woman as being the Children of the Faith of Abraham as Others were of his Body Hagar and Sarah are the Two Covenants and Dispensations Sinai and Sion and the Jews under the Law and Gentiles under the Gospel are the Children of Them or Ishmael and Isaac So that before the Law no Distinction in the Antitype or Mystery of those Two for the Children could not be before the Mothers were And therefore what is this to the State of the Promise four hundred and thirty Years before Now in the Gospel being freed from the Law we are put again into the State of the Promise which was before Christ the Seed the Principal Object of the Promise being now come I 'le be a God to Thee and thy Seed Thus I have finished my Argument But happily in Evasion of it for it cannot be in Solution of or Satisfaction to it you will persist to say as you have already That the External Administration of the Covenant now being vastly different from what it was in Abraham's Time therefore the Incumbence is so also And that therefore though believing Gentiles who have the Benefit of Abraham's Covenant and to whom it is made are under equal Obligation to that Proper Duty and Service which is Now required of them as Abraham was to His yet it follows not that their Infant-Seed are under the same Obligation according to the Gospel-Institution till put into the same Capacity by believing with themselves But how pertinently this is said I do not see For to what Proposition in my Argument can this your Answer be adjusted and applied Besides it goes upon a Mistake much vaster than the Difference between the External Administration of the Covenant in Abraham's Time and that in Ours For I know no other Difference in respect of the Sign of it but that Circumcision then Was that Sign and that Baptism Is now Nor will any Difference in the External Administration if it should be much greater make Any as to the Argument from the Duty and Incumbence which I insisted upon which is To keep the Covenant in the Sign of it as Abraham did for this Incumbence and Duty is not bottomed and grounded on the Administration of the Covenant which is mutable and doth differ but on the Substance and Nature of it which is immutable and everlastingly the same I will be a God to Thee and to thy Seed And God being as much a God to the Seed of Abraham as he was to Abraham himself the Seed are as much obliged to the Duty Office and Incumbence arising and resulting from his being so as ever Abraham was Ay you will say The believing Gentiles on whom the Blessing and Covenant of Abraham doth descend are as much obliged to that Proper Duty and Service which is Now required of them as Abraham was to His Then Yet it follows not I use your own words that Their Infant-Seed are under the same Obligation according to the Gospel-Institution till put into the same Capacity by be ieving with themselves And indeed it follows not that the Infant-Children are under the same Obligation for They are under None The Obligation is not on the Children which are but passive But it follows well enough for the Parents that believe that the same Obligation lies on Them they being the true Seed to keep the Covenant in the Sign of it both by taking of it upon themselves and by putting of it on their Children that did of old upon Abraham for himself and his And This is the Proper Duty and Service required of them as they are Partakers of the Blessing of Abraham Nor are we to expect any New Commands in the Gospel Dispensation for Duties settled of Old on lasting and immutable Reasons The Obligation abides if the Reason of the Precept abides a Principle that is the Ground of the Apostle's Reasoning 1 Cor. 9. 8 9 10. And shall the Promise indeed abide and not the Duty which arises from it The Covenant abide and not the Restipulation without which it is not a Covenant This you dare not say Ay but you will tell me again Tho' you do acknowledge that the Proper Duty and Incumbence arising from the Covenant hath an Eternal Obligation upon all the true Heirs of Promise and in particular That such are bound by way of Restipulation not only to assign dedicate and give themselves to God but also all that is Theirs Yet that you do mean that it Must only be in the way that he himself hath appointed and who I pray ever meant otherwise and that is say you but by Prayer and Supplication for them and by Educating of them as far as they are capable in the Nurture and Admonition of the Lord and Not by the Parent 's putting on them any Sign of the Covenant as a Badge and Cognizance of God in Recognition and Testimony of his Right and Title to them But all this is but to deny the Conclusion after Concession of the Premises for I have evinced that the Proper Obligation of the Covenant and in the way that God himself hath appointed is That those with whom it is immediately made and who are first Partakers of the Benefits of it to whom God is firstly and immediately a God are not only to dedicate and give themselves and all they have to Him but to do it in this Particular way manner by keeping of the Covenant in the Sign of it I will be a God to Thee and thy Seed Thou shalt keep my Covenant therefore Thou and thy Seed So that to dedicate and give our Infant-Children to God by Prayer and Supplication and to educate and bring them up in the Fear and Admonition of the Lord which also must be done and which Abraham also did is not to answer the Obligation and Incumbence of the Covenant if we do not
Ground of their Baptism but the Parents being in Covenant the Ground of Their Holiness To be Baptized is the Children's Priviledge but it is the Parent 's Duty to Baptize them and to put the Name of God upon them in token that by their Assignment they are His. Well But you find not any Mention of Infants-Baptism in the Apostolical and Primitive Times nor any positive and literal Precept for it But do you find any mention that the Apostles themselves All of them were Baptized with Any or Any of them with the Baptism of Christ Or that Women were admitted to the Supper of the Lord Or any positive literal Precept for either And yet I hope you believe both that the Apostles were Baptized and that Women were not excluded from the Holy Communion And if you do not find in so many literal Expressions that Infants were then Baptized you may find it in sufficient Implication for you may find Whole Houses of which Ordinarily Infants are Constituent Parts affirmed to be so and that frequently and without any Exception of Infants which yet ought to have been made if it had been but for Caution on supposal that it were so dangerous a thing as you would have it be thought to understand them included Besides the Churches of Christ universally have had such a Custom and for ought appears Perpetually Sure we are from Immemorial Time which is enough to prescribe from and you cannot but know what Austin says in the Case Now Sir upon the whole I pray consider that in all the Scripture as there is no express and positive Text that Children must be Baptized so there is no express and positive Text that doth forbid their Baptizing And therefore it can be only consequence to Evidence either that they ought to be Baptized or that they ought not And let be weighed That Antipedo-baptism makes the Church of Christ but a Church Vnius Aetatis That it robs the Parent of a sensible Ground of Hope for his Child in case of Decease in Infancy which is That he hath solemnly given him to God and made him his Care And It deprives the Child of a solemn and powerful Motive when he is of Age to dedicate and give himself For this is a great One and this it deprives him of I am already solemnly given to God in Baptism by my Parents who had Right to give me I am His by their Dedication and that publickly made and attested and therefore I have Reason to become so by my Own I am not mine Own the Name of God is upon me I am marked for His and I must rob God of what is His own Already by many Rights and particularly by a Solemn Act of my Parents if I now refuse my Consent and do not also assign and dedicate and give my self to Him And let it also be weighed That Children are no more uncapable of Baptism than they were of Circumcision For if Baptism be the Sign and Seal of the Righteousness by Faith so was Circumcision If Then all were not Israel that were of Israel so it is Now all in Christ are not Christ If Then Circumcision which was of the Fathers or a Sign and Token of the Promise made to Abraham Isaac and Jacob were taken and put unto the Law Baptism which was of John the last Prophet and in use before John as a Rite of Initiating Proselytes and administred both to Male and Female Is taken by Christ and put to the Gospel And if Faith be made in the Gospel the Ground and Foundation of Baptism Believe and be Baptized It was at first the Ground and Foundation of Circumcision For Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for Righteousness and he received the Sign of Circumcision the Seal of the Righteousness by Faith which he had being yet Vncircumcized And if the Children of Abraham were Holy Ours are not Unclean In a word As heretofore there were Jews outwardly and but visibly as well as inwardly and really so now there are Christians outwardly and but visibly as well as inwardly and really And is not Baptism it self as external and visible a Thing as Circumcision Yes there is a Baptism and Regeneration of Water which is external and visible to make Christians visibly and externally as well as one of the Spirit which is Internal and Invisible to make real and true Christians The Former that initiates into the External and Visible Church The Latter into the true Assembly of the First Born And the Subjects of the Two Baptisms are no more to be confounded than the Baptisms themselves Thus I have given you all the Satisfaction that under a great variety of distractive and surprizing Accidents I was capable of giving and I have done it with the Temper and Moderation that becomes a Seeker of Truth without the Common Pomp of Figures Insolence and Triumph a Thing searce pardonable in the Heat and Fervency of a Dispute but which doth very ill become a Writer And yet if I had used any Warmness in the Argument seeing it is in the Case of Infants that cannot speak for themselves it had been somewhat Excusable and the rather for that our Saviour was so Zealous for them Himself that when some it may be of your Perswasion would not have had them brought unto Him to be Blessed it is said He was much Displeased with Them But I am not so with You for that Occasion you have given of searching out the Truth to Bowdon Septemb. 19. 81. Ian. 27. 81. Dear Sir Your Affectionate Friend and Servant R. B. The Second Letter Dear Sir YOurs of March 16th came to hand the 20th in which the Declaration you begin with That notwithstanding all that I have said your Apprehensions concerning the Matter in dispute between us are the same they were and That rather you are the more confirmed doth no whit surprize me I assure you I never had the vanity to hope to convince a Man of your Perswasion I was not the first Aggressor I well knew the Confidence that goes along with Conceits of higher Administrations and I also knew that some Dyes and Tinctures of Mind of which I took and do take That of Yours to be One are as uncapable of being washed out as Those in the Skins of Leopards and Blackamoors After a Smoothing Preface you proceed to as you call them Sober and you hope Inoffensive Reflections which yet to deserve the Epithetes you give them must have been composed of Ethicks as well as of Logick must have been Reflections on Arguments only without any squinting on Persons and must have consisted of something else than of Ambuscadoes of words of bold Assertions without Proof of Evasions in stead of direct Answers of Partial Repetitions and of Triumphs before the Victory These are the Arts and Methods of Imposture used to deceive the Vulgar but very improper in Inquiries after Truth and of no Influence no Operation in the least on
I will display the Argument it self in all its Evidence and Force as it is bottomed on that Basis And this without concerning of my self in Other Arguments insisted on by others and also touched and reflected on by you The Mistakes you are under in your Apprehensions of the Grounds of my Argument are Two and very great ones The First That you conceive me to raise my Superstructure of Infants Baptism on this Foundation That the believing Gentiles and their Posterity are in All respects to be blessed as believing Abraham was which say you is Absurd And well you may say so for indeed Abraham had peculiar Blessings appropriated to his Person as to be the Father of all the Faithful and particularly of believing Gentiles the Father of many Nations and therefore instead of Abram he was called Abraham But though All the Blessings believing Abraham had did not descend on his Spiritual Children or his Seed the believing Gentiles yet if Any Blessing of believing Abraham's did descend as That of the Promise did it must be understood that the Obligations and Duties arising from the Nature of the Blessing which did descend or that are annexed to it if there be any Such must descend too And so that the Seed in that respect in which it is equally blessed with believing Abraham must be equally obliged with him to all the Duties and Incumbencies that are the Consequents and Results of that Blessing Your Second Mistake is That you apprehend me to conceive That every Child of a believing Parent by vertue of his Birth Priviledge and as he is a Natural Descendant of such a Father or Mother is a true Child of Abraham or a Believer for that I mean or in your own words That the Natural Posterity of Believing Gentiles barely as such are all of them the Spiritual Seed of Abraham or Believers and consequently such as are entitled on the Account of being his Spiritual Seed or Believers unto Abraham 's Covenant and Blessing And in Opposition unto This you much enlarge shewing the many great Absurdities and ill Consequences of it even to Fifteen Arguments which truly as to any other who hath Sense I think and I am sure as to my self are all needless and might all have been spared Certainly I demand not half so much to enforce the Argument I used I think not every Child of a Believer to be a Believer himself in any Sense much less that Saving Grace is as Original as Sin or that it comes by Traduction All I postulate to build my Argument is That the true believing Gentile doth not forfeit by believing his natural Right to his Child but that the Children of True Believers now under the Gospel are as much theirs and in the same Right as the Natural Children of Abraham were his This is all the Question that I beg and this sure you will not deny me Only by the way I pray you to make no more of my Concession than I intend it for for when some Pious and very Learned Men have argued for Infants Baptism from the Children of Believers their being Abraham's Spiritual Seed they mean not I suppose by calling them Abraham's Spiritual Seed as I do and as you do that they are Actual Believers and consequently Children of the Faith of Abraham but only that they are Persons of a Religious Consideration and in some sense Holy and related to God And meaning but So though I acknowledge Children not to be Abraham's Seed in the Sense I mentioned as Abraham's Seed is taken for Actual Believers and you have proved by Fifteen Arguments that they are not nor can be Abraham's Seed in this Sense my Concession gives you no advantage nor do your Arguments signifie any thing against Them who using the Expression in Another Sense are nothing concerned for if They take Spiritual Seed in One Sense and You in your Arguments take it in Another you do not really oppose them though you may think you do nor are your Arguments pertinent and the Dispute between you as to that is indeed but Strife about Words Thus I have with all the Clearness and Fairness imaginable let you see your Two Mistakes about the Argument I urged and therefore seeing you do not apprehend aright the Grounds on which I go in it I am only obliged to you for your charitable Endeavours towards my Satisfaction but not in the least for any Effect of those Endeavours It now remaineth that I perform what I promised in the Second Place which is To lay out the Argument for Pedobaptism as it is founded on the Covenant or Blessing of Abraham in all its Force and Evidence which to do to some purpose I will demonstrate First That the Covenant of Abraham which is called the Blessing of Abraham or the Promise of the Spirit is still in being and is that Covenant of Grace the true believing Gentiles are under Secondly That in respect of that Covenant of Promise which is called the Blessing of Abraham and the Promise of the Spirit or the Spiritual Promise all the Seed that hath the Benefit of it are under equal Obligations to the Duty and Incumbence arising from it with Abraham himself Thirdly I will shew That the Duty and Incumbence to which Abraham was obliged arising from the Covenant or Blessing given to him was by way of Restipulation to dedicate and give himself and all his to God and in token of that Dedication of himself and of all that was his to wear himself the Signe of the Covenant and put it as a Cognizance and Badge and Mark of God upon all his that was capable of it Fourthly I will also shew That from Abraham's Dedication of himself and of all his to God there arises a Distinction of Holiness into Internal and External Absolute and Relative and that this Distinction of Holiness is Evangelical And having evidenced these Four things I will then proceed in short to form my Argument In order to the evidencing of the First Particular which is That the Covenant of Promise made to Abraham which is called the Blessing of Abraham and the Promise of the Spirit or the Spiritual and Evangelical Promise that this is still in being and is the Covenant of Grace into a Participation of which the true believing Gentiles are taken I only Premise That That is the Covenant of Grace the believing Gentiles are under Which is the true Ground and Foundation of all their Hopes and of all their Comforts and Which by having a Title to it and Interest in it doth give them a Title to and Interest in the Coelestial Inheritance the Heavenly Country the Everlasting Mansions in the Father's House and in a word to Salvation And This the mentioned Covenant the Blessing of Abraham and the Promise of the Spirit is and doth This is the true Ground and Foundation of all the Hopes of Gentile-Believers and of all their Comforts and a Title in This is the only Title they
demonstrate this it must be minded that as the Equity and Reason of the Command doth hold in Baptism as well as in Circumcision and for any other Sign and Token as well as for This and to the Seed as well as to Abraham God being as much a God to the One as to the Other So also that in the Form of the Words the Obligation imposed upon Abraham and his Seed is in the First place to keep the Sign and Token of the Covenant or to keep the Covenant in the Sign of it And but in the Second place to observe Circumcision namely but as it is that Sign So that a plain Distinction is madâ— between the Obligation to observe the Sign and Token of the Covenant or to keep the Covenant in the Sign and Token of it and to keep it in Circumcision as that Sign and Token the Former arising from the very Nature of the Covenant Thou shalt keep my Covenant therefore and therefore of as perpetual Obligation and Existence as the Covenant it self But the Latter is more positive and Secondary Wherefore tho' there be an Alteration in the Second it will not follow that there must be one in the First or that the Covenant ought not to be observed in the Sign and Token of it if for certain Reasons Circumcision be no longer but something else be that Sign and Token The taking away the Second doth not destroy the First for being before it it may be without it Thou shalt keep the Sing of the Covenant that is First Circumcision is that Sign that is Second And why One in the first Place and the Other but in the Second but to shew the Covenant must be kept in the Sign of it even when no longer Circumcision but some other thing is in the Counsel of God ordained to be that Sign And indeed it is much that the taking and the putting of the Sign of the Covenant should as it is be called keeping of the Covenant Must not we Now keep God's Covenant And to the end you may see the Harmony of the Scripture and with it the Cogency of that Illation which I make from the Form of the Words here see the like Form of Words in the Fourth Commandment in relation to the Sabbath bottoming the like Illation Remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy that is first and as it is first so it is primarily Moral and Eternal and unchangeable But the Seventh is the Sabbath of the Lord that is in the second place and is but secondary and positive What Doth the Obligation to the First and that which is Primary in the Command cease because there is an Alteration in the Second and that not the Seventh but the First Day of the Week is now the Sabbath of the Lord Who will say it So though Circumcision be no longer the Sign and Token of the Covenant but another thing be It 't will not follow the Covenant is no longer to be observed in the Sign and Token of it because not Circumcision but that other Thing is now become that Sign and Token Which you will conceive the better if you bethink that Circumcision was not abolished in the Gospel as it was of the Fathers but as it was of Moses a Distinction Christ himself makes or not as it had relation to the Covenant of Promise as the Sign of it as if in that respect it were a weak and carnal thing but as it was Adopted by the Legal Mediator and made a Sign of that Administration and Covenant in which He had to do for afterwards who so was Circumcised did become a Debtor to the whole Law and therefore if the Law did cease Circumcision could not continue But remember it was on an Evangelical and Gracious Consideration that Circumcision did become the Sign of the Legal Covenant or Administration For why was it Were there not other Matters enough to make Signs of but that Circumcision which was a Sign of the Promise must be Impropriated to be the Token of the Mosaick Covenant Why was it then Not truly as you may think to make an Alteration in the Promise in respect of the Subjects to which the Sign Thereof was to be given or of any Priviledges or first and immediate Duties and Obligations of It but to establish and confirm the Promise For Circumcision the Sign and Token of the Promise was in Divine Wisdom annexed to the Legal Covenant as the Sign and Token of That for the same Reason that Jesus Christ himself who was the Capital Seed to whom the Promise was made was made the Minister of the Legal Circumcision He was the Angel that spake with Moses in the Wilderness or that gave the Law and He in the Days of his Flesh but preached to the Jews It was for the Truth of God to Confirm the Promises to the Fathers for so saith the Apostle Rom. 15. 8. Now I say that Jesus Christ was the Minister of the Circumcision for the Truth of God to confirm the Promises unto the Fathers I say for This Reason as also which is an Amplification of it perhaps to shew that there was no Salvation and Inheritance by the Works of the Law Circumcision which had been the Sign and Token of the Promise made to Abraham was taken and applied to be the Sign and Token of the Legal Covenant which came by Moses to Become which indeed by the capable Ceremoniality of it in some respects not as it was a Sign of the Covenant for there is nothing like a Ceremony in being but that but as it was confined to one Sex and in the Execution and Performance of it to a certain Day it was very Proper and Fit The Reason I say it was applied to the Legal Covenant besides the Fitness of it was for the Truth of God to Confirm and not either to Destroy or Alter the Promise made unto the Fathers God taking the Token of the Covenant of Promise and putting it upon the Legal Covenant to be a Sign of it to shew he had his Covenant of Promise still in Remembrance For Doing so He could never look on or so much as think on the Law but He must also remember the Promise the Sign and Memorial of the Promise being thus annexed and put to the Law Thus Circumcision the first Sign and Token of Abraham's Covenant though it were Adopted into the Law of Moses and made a Sign and Token of that Covenant in which he Mediated it was So but for the same Reason that Jesus Christ himself was made the Minister of it That is not in Derogation of the Promises made to Abraham and his Seed or of any Priviledges and Duties and Incumbencies arising from Them but in Confirmation of them It was for the Faith of God to confirm the Promises to the Fathers And therefore though as Adopted into the Law of Moses and made a Part and Member thereof it must consequently be annulled and cease therewith
were afterwards to be which were signified by the Seed and afterward were typed in Isaac the Son of the Promise it being said In Isaac not in Ishmael who then was shall thy Seed be called Now though God had said in the 9th Verse Thou shalt keep my Covenant therefore that is thou shalt keep the Sign of my Covenant Thou and thy Seed after thee in their Generations to signifie that the Children of the Promise were obliged to that Duty and Incumbence arising from the Covenant as well as the Children of the Flesh Yet when he comes to institute Circumcision in Particular he saith of it indeed This is my Covenant or This is the Sign of my Covenant But he saith not This is my Covenant which Thou Thou and Thy Seed after thee in their Generations shall keep but which You You shall keep You to whom I speak Thou Abraham and thy Natural Houshold and Family Here it is You You and not the Seed the Spiritual Seed for Isaac in whom the Seed is called was not there he was yet unborn It is You He speaks to those present Thou Abraham and thy Natural Houshold and Family this is the Sign of my Covenant which You You shall keep as a Sign of that Covenant which I have made between Me and You and thy Seed after thee Me and You thee Abraham and thy Natural Houshold and Family here between Me and You and thy Seed after thee that Seed which shall be called in Isaac thy Spiritual Houshold and Seed And what was the Covenant or Sign of the Covenant which They and not the Seed were to keep then What No other Covenant or Sign than that of Circumcision This is my Covenant which you shall keep Every Man-Child among you not among the Seed but among You shall be Circumcized and you shall Circumcize the Flesh of your Fore-skin You still not the Seed And what was Circumcision for It was for a Sign and Token of the Covenant and to Whom it was to be so is clearly implied in the Limitation It shall be a Token a Sign of the Covenant between Me and You. Not Me and You and thy Seed after thee It shall be a Sign and Token of the Covenant in the Dispensation of it which now is between Me and You not in the Dispensation of it which shall be between Me and thy Seed It shall be a Token of my Covenant as it is between Me and You thee Abraham and thy Natural Houshold and Family But not as it is to be transacted between Me and thy Spiritual Seed If you say for I will say for you all I can imagine possible to be said with any Colour That the Sense should rather be this This is my Covenant which you shall keep That is which Thou Abraham and thy Seed after thee in their Generations shall keep And this shall be a Sign-and Token between Me and You that is between Me and Thee and Thy Seed after Thee in their Generations If you say This is the Sense of the Text I must be plain to tell you It cannot be so and that because he doth so plainly distinguish in It between You and the Seed This is the Covenant which you shall keep between Me and You and thy Seed after thee So that You which is so plainly Contradistinguished and opposed to the Seed cannot possibly be understood to comprehend It. And it is also considerable that he saith This is my Covenant which you shall keep between Me and You thy Seed not Between Me and Thee and thy Seed And yet it doth refer to Verse the 9th where it is said Thou shalt keep my Covenant Thou and thy Seed But here You is put instead of Thou to signifie that Thou in the 9th Verse must be understood of Abraham not Personally only but Collectively Abraham standing there for Himself and his Natural Family Thou and thy Seed is Abraham and Christ Both in the Mystery This last Consideration minds me of the Third Particular to be demonstrated which is That Another Sign besides that of Circumcision is clearly intimated in the Text we discourse on as a thing that should be afterwards And this is manifest for whereas he had said That the Seed as well as Abraham and under Abraham I have proved the Natural Off-spring and Family of Abraham comprehended was to keep the Covenant in the Sign or to keep the Sign of the Covenant in the 9th Verse and he instituted Circumcision but to be a Sign between Him and Abraham and Abraham's Natural Off-spring and Family and to be kept but by Them and not by the Spiritual Seed This is the Sign of the Covenant which you not which Thou and thy Seed shall keep and it shall be a Token of my Covenant as between Me and You not as between Me and Thee and thy Seed after thee What remaineth I say seeing the Seed is equally obliged as well as Abraham to keep the Covenant in some Sign as was proved before and that it was not to keep it in the Sign of Circumcision as is evident Now what remaineth but that there is some other Sign in which It was to keep it that should be a Token of the Covenant in that Administration of it which should be afterward between God and the Seed as Circumcision was of the same Covenant but in the Dispensation and Transaction of it then between God and Abraham's Person and Natural Houshold Circumcision was the Token of the Covenant as administred between God and Abraham and Baptism the Token of the same Covenant as administred between God and the Seed If Abraham was Circumcized Christ was Baptized Upon the whole Let us now review the Text and see it in the entire Sense And thus I Paraphrase it I will Establish my Covenant between Me and Thee and thy Seed after thee in their Generations for an Everlasting Covenant c. And therefore Thou Thou and thy Seed after thee in their Generations shall keep the Sign of my Covenant And This is the Sign of my Covenant That my Covenant which is between Me on the One Part and YOU thou Abraham and thy Natural Family and Houshold on the Other Part and thy Seed after thee on the Third Part. I say This is the Sign that YOU for your part shall keep as a Sign of this Covenant which is between Me and YOU and thy Seed after thee Every Man-Child among You shall be Circumcized and You shall Circumcize the Flesh of Your Fore-skin And this Circumcision shall be a Special and Particular Sign and Token of the Covenant as it is between Me and YOU between Me and Thee Abraham and thy Natural Houshold But as for the Seed no mention of It when he saith This shall be a Sign of the Covenant c. which sufficiently implieth another Administration to be with That afterward And I pray you mark that where he calleth Circumcision the Covenant Vers. 10. he saith You shall keep
it between Me and You and thy Seed because the Covenant of which Circumcision was a Sign was a Covenant between God and the Seed too as well as between God and Abraham and his Natural Family But when he saith expresly It shall be a Sign and Token then he restrains it It shall be a Sign of the Covenant between Me and You Implying that though the Covenant be also with the Seed and Circumcision was a Sign of that Covenant yet it was specially and particularly a Sign of it as transacted between God and Abraham's Natural Person and Family and so a special and particular Sign of that Oeconomy in the Natural Houshold It shall be a Sign between Me and You and not between Me and You and thy Seed And so much for the First Objection What you next offer in Objection to my Argument is That it follows not that because the Substance of the Covenant on God's Part is Immutably and Vnchangeably the same that therefore the Duty and Incumbence is also so on ours For seeing God hath Absolute Soveraignty in and over all his Creatures and hath unlimited and boundless Right as to command so to suspend and alter the Instances and Duties of their Obedience both as and when he pleases that may be the Duty of his People at one time You should have added to make it pertinent By vertue of the same Covenant and Edict and in the same Respect which is not so at another This you Confirm because else you see not how it should come to pass that for at least two thousand Years before the Time of Abraham no such Duty or Incumbence did lie on the Patriarchs particularly not on Adam on Abel on Enoch on Noah or on the other Antediluvian Fathers of whom we do not read that any of them were Signed or that they were obliged to any Sign though you say It cannot be denied that they were in the Covenant of Grace and saved by It as much as Abraham himself or any of His. So that here is an Objection and an Enforcement and Confirmation of that Objection As to the Objection viz. That it will not follow that because the Substance of the Covenant on God 's Part is immutably and everlastingly the same therefore the Duty and Incumbence on ours is also such I answer It will follow well enough if the Duty and Incumbence on our Part be founded on the Substance of the Covenant which is on God's Part as the Duty and Incumbence in dispute between us is It being I will Establish my Covenant between Me and Thee and thy Seed after thee in their Generations for an Everlasting Covenant to be a God to thee and to thy Seed after thee c. And God said unto Abraham Thou shalt keep my Covenant therefore thou and thy Seed after thee in their Generations For though Almighty God be absolute Soveraign over all our Persons and also over all his own Transactions and Methods so as he may make at one time to be our Duty that which he doth not another and may transact and deal in way of Covenant with some when yet he hath not pleas'd to do so with others Yet if at any time or with any Persons he pleases to transact in way of Covenant and to confirm that Transaction by his Word and Oath the two immutable things in which it is impossible that he should Lye and also to bottom the Duty and Incumbence to which he doth oblige by vertue of that Covenant on that which is unchangably and immutably confirmed in it We can no more without a Blasphemous Imputation to him of Inconstancy and Weakness introduce him making an Alteration in the Duty than in the Promise it self seeing the Obligation to the Duty is a necessary result and emanation of the Reason of it and consequently is uncapable of being changed without a change of the Covenant the unchangable Promise of God to Abraham and to his Seed is the Foundation of the Duty lying on Abraham and on his Seed and the same Covenant as the same must alwayes have the same effects and make the same Duties Ay but then how came it to pass that Adam Abel Enoch and others the most Antient Fathers who were under the Covenant of Grace as well as Abraham and his descendants God being a God to them as well as to him did not keep the Covenant in the sign thereof if the Duty to keep the Covenant in the sign thereof be Everlastingly the same and of an unchangable nature This is your Confirmation But to manifest the Invalidity of all is said by way of Confirmation I need but to demonstrate First That though all the Fathers were saved on the account of Iesus Christ and by vertue of the Eternal Compact and Agreement between God and him he being the Everlasting Father yet contrary to what you do suppose it did not please God at least not in the Account of the Scripture to Transact with all or any of them in way of Covenant for Grace Eternal Life and Salvation before he did so with Abraham Secondly That if he had been pleased to transact with all or any of them in way of Covenant for those ends yet that Transaction could not be the Covenant of Abraham and therefore seeing the believing Gentiles do not claim the Inheritance Eternal Life and Salvation from by and under Adam Abel Enoch Noah or any other Covenanted Person or Persons before Abraham if there were any such but only from by and under Abraham nor by vertue of any other Covenant whatever made with all or any of them but only by vertue of Abrahams It is certain that the Termes which it pleased God to go upon with them in any transaction he had with them be they what they will are in account of Scripture as Little to us as those he went upon with Abraham are much And Thirdly That the Obligation to keep the Covenant Gen. 17. in the sign thereof though it were not and indeed could not be observed by all or any of the Antients before Abraham yet notwithstanding that it is in a Scriptural sence and consequently properly enough called a Duty and Obligation of immutable and unchangable nature and Everlastingly the same The first Proposition viz. That though all that ever were saved were saved by vertue of the Atonement and Propitiation made by the Blessed Jesus He being in the efficacy and vertue of his Merits and Passion the Lamb slain even from the Foundation of the World yet that at least in the Account of Holy Scripture it did not please God to transact with all or any of the antient either the Antediluvian or Postdiluvian Fathers in way of Covenant for Grace Eternal Life and Salvation before Abraham is a manifest Verity For though all the Fathers that were saved were so by some degree and kind of Faith and were so by Jesus Christ and through the Eternal Covenant as Divines call it of Redemption
do it also Solemnly by keeping of the Covenant in the Sign thereof our selves and by putting of it also on Them God loves Solemnity it makes for his External Glory He will be Owned to be our Lord and Owner and the Lord and Owner of our Children by our taking of his Name upon us our selves and by putting of it on them And whereas you have said with a Modesty as great as the Truth of what you say That if my Argument be truly stated and as without wresting it ought the proper Language of it will be this That Abraham being in Covenant was to be Circumcized both himself and Half his Family the same Covenant descends on believing Gentiles Therefore they are to be signed and the Whole of theirs But whether such an Argument as this This being you say the True State of the Case be convincing or no you refer to my Second Thoughts I answer That I have Reason to be at the utmost Degree of Despair of ever receiving of any good Answers from You as long as from what Cause I now enquire not you understand an Argument no better For Mine even in Your Terms of Half and Whole would run thus If Abraham and all his Seed must keep the Covenant in the Sign of it by taking it themselves and putting it on all theirs that are capable of it Then though Abraham and but Half his Family for so you compute it did keep it in the Sign thereof as long as Circumcision was that Sign yet the Seed of Abraham the true Believing Gentile and the Whole of theirs must keep it now Now that Baptism is the Sign the Sequel is evident For as but Half of Abraham's Family was capable of Circumcision the Sign of the Covenant Then All the Off-spring of the Believing Seed of Abraham are Capable of Baptism which is the Sign of it Now. And observe it I argue not from Circumcision as it is Circumcision to Baptism but I argue that because the Children of Abraham by vertue of the Covenant were signed with the Sign of it which then was Circumcision Therefore the Children of the Seed by vertue of the same Covenant must be signed with the Sign of it too which now is Baptism For the Immediate Obligation is not to keep the Covenant either in Baptism or in Circumcision but in the Sign of it Now the Sign of Old was Circumcision and the Sign Now is Baptism It is true had it pleased God to have abolished Circumcision the Sign before and not to have instituted Baptism which is the Sign now it would have been a high Presumption in any Person to go about to make One But when the Covenant remains and the Proper Obligation of the Covenant is to keep it in the Sign thereof and God though he hath taken away One Sign yet hath pleased to Institute Another What can be plainer than that as to be in Covenant is our Priviledge so that to observe and keep it in the present Sign thereof is our Duty Thus you have my Second Thoughts and make the most of them So much by way of Obviation to what you do object to my Argument I am now to reply to Yours and it is ad Hominem viz. Either the Children of Believers are in Covenant with their Parents or they are not If they are in Covenant as you say I affirm they are because I said the Children of Believers are Holy not without God in Covenant but given to God in Covenant then say you They are the Spiritual Seed and as such entituled to the Covenant and Blessing of Abraham which I formerly denied and which cannot be for fifteen Reasons But on the contrary if I say the Children of Believers are not the Spiritual Seed of Abraham and consequently such as are not You should have added On that Account any wise intituled unto Abraham's Covenant and Blessing then neither can they justly pretend to any Covenant Holiness by Vertue of their Birth Priviledge which yet You say but Mistakingly I make the Ground of their Admission to Baptism when I say That God becometh not related unto any nor is any related unto God in Scripture so as to be stiled Holy but in and through the Covenant Thus I am in a Dilemma and driven from Corner to Corner but safe in none But pray consider that I never said either directly or in consequence That the Children of Believers are Immediately and firstly in the Covenant of Promise and as their Parents are I only said and still do that they are dedicated and given by their Parents to God who is in Covenant with those Parents And yet for all this even in my Opinion They may pretend if that must be the word to Some Holiness by vertue of the Covenant of Promise and This too though they be not Abraham's Spiritual Seed For though they be not themselves the Spiritual Seed of Abraham yet being the Children of those that are they become thereby intituled to the Priviledge of being Dedicated and Sacred to God by vertue of the Covenant in the Same Right and all as much as the Slaves and Natural Children of Abraham were Abraham's Natural Children and Slaves were intituled on His Account and the Children of Believers are intituled on Theirs The true Spiritual Seed of Abraham are obliged to dedicate their Children not as His but as Theirs they give Theirs as he gave His. I pray were not the Natural Seed of Abraham and his Slaves also some way Holy in and through the Covenant by vertue of the Dedication and Signing which That obliged to And as His Children and Slaves were some way Holy so are Ours also And in this Sense of Federal Holiness as it is a Relative and External Holiness do I ascribe it to our Children in and through the Covenant namely as This obliges the Parent to assign and dedicate them and they accordingly are dedicated And to be Federally Holy in this Sense they need not sure be the true Spiritual Seed of Abraham seeing All even the Natural Children of Abraham though so Holy were not all accounted for Seed In fine Observe that if by vertue of the Dedication required of Abraham by the Covenant made with him his Children were Members of the Church Then Old-Testament-Church you call it it will follow that by vertue of the same Covenant making the same Obligation and Incumbence of Dedication if It be still in force as I have evinced it to be the Children of the Seed continue Members still even in the New-Testament-Church And well they may not only for that the Church is One and the same though the Testaments be not but for that Children were not only Members of the Jewish or Legal Church but of the Gospel-Church for above four hundred Years before the Law For it was Gospel that was Preached to Abraham Gal. 3. 8. And therefore Circumcision was at first a Gospel-Sign And remember I make not the Childrens being in Covenant the