Neither need we call this a third seed of Abraham any more than of old and especially seeing that Church consisteth much of his Spiritual seed as sharers in highest priviledges in special and eternal blessings though it extendeth to others as sharers in inferiour blessings both are his seed as Ishmael and Isaac were though one had higher blessings then the other Gen. 17. 20. 21. And undeniably many hundreds of years even from Abraham till the coming of Christ an Infant seed of Jews and Proselites were of Abrahams Church-seed and must be so still unless any can shew a repeal and this will hardly be found seeing Jesus Christ hath declared that of such is the Kingdom of Heaven Mat. 19. 14. Mark 10. 13 14. Luk. 18. 15. And if Infants be of the Church then are they Christs for that is his Mat. 16. 18. Rom. 16. 16. 1 Cor. 12. 27. Joh. 15. 2 6. Neither do some Characters of the Church forbid their being members of it seeing they were undoubtedly such and these Elogiums are given to it in respect of its better part or what they may ought or hopefully will be afterward as it is the Kingdom of Heaven Mat. 25. 1 2. yet some foolish Virgins there and those are golden Candlesticks Rev. 1. 12 13 20. yet some drossy and lukewarm not pure gold And further consider the visible Church was founded on the Covenant made with Abraham not only as consisting of Jews but Gentiles in the Nations Gen. 17. 4 5. behold my Covenant is with thee and thou shalt be a Father of many Nations and that Covenant extended to Infants v. 10 11 12 13. and is still continuing Rom. 4. 17 18. Gal. 3. 17. let any prove that Infants are cut out of it else they are of his Ecclesiastical seed still It is true Ceremonial observations of very antient date and Ordinances of of the Law are abrogated Heb. 9. and 10. but the Covenant with Abraham is another thing and from the date of it so long before the Law the Apostle proveth cannot be disanulled by it Gal. 3. 17. The ceasing of Circumcision doth no more abolish the Covenant with Abraham or Infants Interest therein then the abolishing of Sacrifices Passover and other Ceremonial observations doth null the Second Commandment which during their continuance commanded a worshipping God by them And also the Church before the Death of Christ and after are essentially the same Eph. 2. 14 15. Who hath made both one and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us having abolished the Law of Commandments So then Jesus Christ by his Death did not pull down one Church and erect another but equalized Jews and Gentiles made both one that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs and of the same body Eph. 3. 6. Ordinances are altered in Worship but the Church is in Essence the same And once more the same Olive-tree the Covenant with Abraham and visible Church which the Jews were broken off from for unbelief Rom. 11. 20. the same the Gentiles were graffed into v. 17. and the Jews shall again be graffed into that as into their own Olive-tree v. 23 24. and there could be no such graffing into the same if the stock the Covenant or Church were not the same And hence Abraham hath an Ecclesiastical seed the visible Church for there is no breaking off from the invisible Church and Infants being of old members of it they are so still else it were not the same and so they are visibly Christs and of Abrahams seed 5. Some Infants are visibly of the faith and so are Abrahams seed I do not say that faith seminal and habitual or actual is in all Infants Baptized or others for then either all of them must be saved which they are not or else they might loose that special faith but they are visibly interested in the Covenant or promise which is the word of faith and may bear that name and the Lord being visibly their God Gen. 17. 7. 8. they are so under the promise of after faith and repentance otherwise then others are If they have not faith for the present yet visibly they are under a promise of it it is hopeful for the future they shall have it which promise Baptism may be a sign and seal of it may seal a doctrin of faith even where a principle of it is yet wanting and by Baptism they are obliged to seek it Also by the faith of the Parents they may be deemed of the faith with them as all Jews Infants and all were the Circumcision for there are many promises given for the faith of such Parents to act upon which no unbelieving Parents can claim for their seed as that he will Circumcise the heart of their seed Deut. 30. 6. pour his spirit on them Is 44. 3. that the word shall not depart out of their mouth If. 59. 21. see also Ps 25. 13. 112. 2. Prov. 11. 21. the contrary of the seed of the wicked Ps 37. 28. but especially that great and comprehensive promise is to believers that he will be the God of their seed Gen. 17. 7 8. and these are fulfilled absolutely to the Collective body the Church though not te every individual but under limitation And Parents by rejecting the Covenant and Unbelief may forfeit this priviledge for their seed as well as for themselves as the Infant seed of the Jews were broken off by their Parents unbelief Rom. 11. 20. Else it must be said that their seed remained in Covenant after in Gospel times and if Parents forfeit there may not be an uninterrupted Succession of the Church in some of the posterity of Believers yet if the rejected seed do after personally believe they obtain the promises for themselves and seed again Act. 2. 39. In short Abraham was equally a Father of the Jews called the Circumcision by faith as he was and is a Father of the Gentiles the circumcision by faith Rom. 4. v. 10 11 12. there is no difference of his common fatherhood to both it is by faith so that the Jews were as much Abrahams seed of faith even when they were the circumcision as the Gentiles are and so the Jews Infant seed were Abrahams seed of faith externally when circumcised of old and as well then may the Infant seed of believing Gentiles be Abrahams seed of faith now and the rather because he received circumcision as a Seal of the righteousness of that faith which he had being uncircumcised v. 11. that he might be a father to believing Gentiles And observe that the Covenant was made with him and he circumcised as a visible Believer circumcision was a Seal of the righteousness of faith which is common to all Believers among Jews and Gentiles not peculiar to him Also he received Circumcision not meerly by vertue of a command or institution but as a token of the Covenant Gen. 17. 9 10 11. So as the Covenant could not be kept after circumcision was
the Gentiles have greater priviledge in Gospel times then they had before Isa 42. 6. Acts 10. 45. Rom. 11. 11 12. Gal. 3. 14. and who dare say that it is diminished let them prove it It s clear that not only the natural fleshly Seed of Abraham but those born in his house and bought with his money which were Gentiles were to be circumcised even Infants at Eight days old not of his Seed Gen. 17. v. 12 13 14. and this is an everlasting Covenant and if they were not circumcised the Covenant with Abraham was broken v. 14. and therefore those Sons of strangers Gentiles were within the Covenant made with Abraham how else could they be under circumcision the token of it and so as it was violated if it were neglected Yet these Gentiles had no right to the Land of Canaan which argueth that Abrahams Covenant was not meerly for the Land of Canaan or meerly typical as some would have it nor only for Abrahams fleshly Seed but extended to some Gentiles Indeed the Church was then Domestical in Abrahams family he would have none there but such as owned the true Religion such only were to be in his house and bought with his money as were then Church members for he commanded not only his Children but his Houshold after him Gen. 18. v. 19. and they shall keep the way of the Lord. And afterward such of the Strangers Gentiles who became Proselites and owned the Jewish religion were to be circumcised Ex. 12. v. 44 48. 49. when a stranger shall sojourn with thee and will keep the passover to the Lord let all his males be circumcised one Law shall be to him that is home-born and unto the stranger So then upon a profession of faith or true religion strangers Gentiles were in the Covenant with Abraham in that day and came under the token of it Circumcision and their Infant seed as well as upon a profession of the faith of the Gospel any are owned in Covenant now their Infant seed must be in it with them unless any can shew a repeal or that they are less priviledged then they were And methinks we have the contrary Act. 2. 39. the promise is to you your Children i. e. to the Jews to as many as the Lord our God shall call i. e. of the Gentiles answerable to the Proselites of old so Isa 56. v. 5 6. 2. The Blessings of Abraham in Gospel Times are come upon the Gentiles by Faith Gal. 3. 14. Therefore the Infant Seed of the Gentiles are in Gospel Times in the Covenant which God made with Abraham For Abraham had no other to communicate but Covenant Blessings and not the Land of Canaan for that is not given to the Gentiles and therefore the Blessings are Gen. 17. 7 8. I will be a God to thee and to thy Seed after thee in their Generations And this for many Generations did extend to Parents and their Infant Seed v. 9 10 11. So as they passed under Token of the Covenant and were intended thereby all the time of the Old Testament He speaketh indefinitely and in general of the Blessings of Abraham not a parcel of them but in the Latitude and as amply as of Old And therefore by Faith God is visibly a God to the Gentiles and to their Infant Seed unless any can prove that God hath repealed that part of the Covenant which concerns the Infant Seed in Gospel Times 3. The Infant Seed of the Jews were in the Covenant made with Abraham in Gospel Times after the Death of Christ after all Legal Observations were abolished Therefore the Infant Seed of Believing Gentiles are in the Covenant made with Abraham in Gospel Times For there is no difference between Jews and Gentiles in Gospel Times Rom. 10. 12. For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek i. e. the Gentile for the same Lord over all is Rich unto all that call upon him So Rom. 3. 22. Act. 15. 9. Putting no difference Gal. 3. 8. The Jews and Gentiles then are equal in respect of Gospel Priviledge yea there is no difference in respect of External Priviledge and Covenant Intrest for the Partition Wall is broken down that was between us and both made one Eph. 2. 14. And the same Olive Tree which the Jews are broken off from that the Gentiles are grafted into Rom. 11. v. 17 19 23 24. So that the Jews are not Priviledges above the Gentiles Now that the Infant seed of the Jews were in the Covenant made with Abraham in Gospel Times I prove 1. From Act. 3. 25. Ye are the Children of the Prophets and of the Covenants which God made with our Fathers saying unto Abraham and in thy seed shall all the Kindreds of the Earth be blessed This was after the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ after the abrogation of all Legal Sacrifices and Ceremonial Observations yet still these Jews were within the Covenant made with Abraham Children of it yea before their repentance for he saith v. 19. repent therefore c. and their being still in Covenant is used as an argument to it they were not yet cast out of that Covenant and that included not only the Parents but the Infant seed as I have proved already so Act. 2. 38 39. 2. The Jews and their Infant seed were in the Covenant made with Abraham the day before the Gospel came to them therefore they were in it in Gospel times after unless God repealed it or cast them out which let any prove who can I run it up to the Primitive times to determine this question thus In the Apostles days immediatly before their Preaching the Jews and their Infant Seed were unquestionably in the Covenant made with Abraham and under the token of it Circumcision therefore the Infant seed were in that Covenant after or else undeniably the coming of Christ and the Jews believing on him and being Baptized was exceedingly to their damage injury and disadvantage For this is to say that the day or moment before a Jew did believe and was Baptized his Infant seed were in Covenant with God the day or moment after the Infant seed was out of that Covenant Dare any say that to be out of Covenant with God or to be cast out is no damage no disadvantage is it not mentioned as a mystery to be strangers to the Covenants of promise Ephes 2. 12 it is the misery of the Jews to be broken off from being externally in Covenant and a mercy to the Gentiles to be graffed into the Olive Rom 11. v. 17 19 22 24. as promoting a partaking of the fatness of the Olive If it was a priviledge to be in that Covenant then it must needs be a loss and damage to be out of it When the question was Rom. 3. 1. What advantage then hath the Jew or what profit is there of Circumcision God by the Apostle answereth v. 2. much every way Is it not then great
is not temporary but by an everlasting Covenant and faileth not Infants Covenant Interest is no branch of those priviledges which he saith are expired but on the contrary Dr. O. mentioneth this as one promise to the Church that God will be a God to them and their seed for ever Exercit. 6. on Heb. Neither doth this make three parties in the Covenant Abraham and his seed and their Infant seed any more than it did before the coming of Christ when Parents and their Infants made one joynt Subject all along as Isaac and his Children and Jacob and his and those Circumcised Josh 5. and theirs The Jews ungroundedly claimed all promises by their being the fleshly seed of Abraham but the spiritual seed may duly claim that promise for their Children there being nothing for the nulling of it Besides Dr. O. once and again there declareth that the Church is one and the same not one Church taken away and another set up in the room the Olive-tree is the same only some branches are broken off c. Infants were of the Church shew when they were all cast out the same that the Jews were broken off from the Gentiles were graffed into Rom. 11. Let any prove that the Church-state in the Substance of it was any part of that which was abolished by the death of Christ They were added to the Church Act. 2. 47. i. e. to the Church under its new administration By breaking down the partition wall the former confinement of the Church to the Natural seed of Abraham was taken off and it hath enlargement by the access of the Gentiles but is not straitned by excluding so vast a number as all the Infant seed The degenerate obstinate unbelieving Jews were broken off for the reformation of the Church but it was not dismembred by cutting off all the Infant seed who had actually done neither good nor evil nor had their Parents rejected the Covenant Some ordinances of worship expired and new were appointed as D. O. well observeth but I cannot find that God cast out any who formerly were members of it as Infants were without a forfeiture of their privilege Obj. 5. Infants are not capable of entring Covenant with God and if they were absolutely in it then God did not perform his promise because many prove wicked and if only conditionally then it is no more to them then others and what advantage by it A. 1. Infants were of old in Covenant and so are capable Gen. 17. v. 10 11 12. Deut. 29. v. 10 11 12. ye stand this day all of you your little ones that thou shouldst enter into Covenant with the Lord thy God So then little ones are in a capacity to be engaged by Covenant for the Lord. I may ask were they absolutely in it or conditionally 2. Some answer the Infant seed of Believers are in Covenant absolutely in the Species conditionally in the individuals Cobbet Many promises run to a Collective body as the Church and are accomplished there and yet may not be made good to every member particularly as it is promised that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church Mat. 16. 18. and yet Satan may prevail against particular Members or Churches So the Covenant of not drowning the World doth not secure every particular Man from drowning 3. As to advantages there are many as a Covenant-state is a state of greater nearness unto God then others are in is declared to be a priviledge Rom. 3. 1 2. and 9 4. and it is a misery to be strangers from the Covenants of promise Eph. 2. 12. many advantages I could discover of being externally in Covenant and thus Men may be in it and may so miscarry as to be rejected as Ishmael Esau the Jews Rom. 11. and yet God not break Covenant against Infants Baptism it is objected thus Obj. 6. Faith and Repentance are required before Baptism Mark 16. 16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved Act. 2. 38. Repent and be baptized If the Jews the natural seed of Abraham might not be baptized without Faith and Repentance much less others And such affirmative Precepts have their negative and so Infants not believing or repenting may not be baptized Ans 1. I freely grant that those which believe and repent are to be baptized but I deny the consequence that therefore Infants may not be baptized Such Texts conclude affirmatively that such may they do not conclude negatively that none else may as for example it is said Act. 8. 37. If thou believest with all thy heart thou mayest i. e. be baptized This doth not conclude negatively that none else may if any will say hence none may be baptized who do not believe with all their heart then they can baptize none for they cannot know that another doth believe with all his heart and Simon Magus who did not so yet was duely baptized Act. 8. 13. If it could be proved that it is intended exclusively then 2. It importeth that none but those who believe and repent of adult ones may be baptized it is not to be understood in opposition to Infants often affirmative Commands intend only capable Subjects and the negative part extendeth no further Thus as believing and repenting are commanded before Baptism so confession with the mouth is commanded before Salvation Rom. 10. v. 9. 10. If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus thou shalt be saved and with the mouth Confession is made unto Salvation Will any hence deny that any Infants can be saved because they do not confess with their mouth the Lord Jesus It is meant of adult ones only who are capable subjects So labour by a general term is commanded before eating 2 Thes 3. 10. We command you that if any would not work neither should he eat Will any conclude thence that Infants shall not eat because they will not labour So some commands about eating the Passover as with sower herbs are intended only for capable subjects not sick Persons or Infants That of preaching the Gospel to every creature Mark. 16. 15 16. is meant not to Infants but others So as to Baptism the command to believe and repent before it concerneth capable subjects only and the negative part only saith that adult Believers and impenitent ones may not be baptized it concludeth nothing against Infant Baptism That new Institution of Baptism was firstly to be received by the adult being given to a Church where many such are found and so it was proper to preach to them believe repent and be baptized and thus we going to Turks Indians or others where Baptism hath not come we may preach in the same language believe repent and be baptized without excluding Infants from it Yea of old the Proselites and Strangers must own the Jewish Religion make a profession of Faith and Love as Isa 56. v. 3. to 8. Exod. 12. and then had Circumcision for themselves and their Infant seed 3. Faith and
Repentance were then necessary even for the Jews the natural seed of Abraham that they who were Parents may have right themselves unto Bapism and other Gospel Priviledges and so their Infant seed may have right also For as in other ages of the Church when the Lord gave forth new Revelations and Ordinances for the Tabernacle and Temple he required the receiving of them by Faith and Obedience else they were to be cut off Lev. 7 v. 20 21 25 27. and 17. 4 9. and 19. 8 and 23. v. 27 29. And after great Apostacies and Backslidings they were severely threatned if they repented not So at the dawning of the Gospel day Jesus Christ the promised Seed being actually come this made a great addition to that important Article of Faith now all were obliged under the highest penalty to the Faith of this that the Messiah was come that Jesus Christ was the Son of God Joh. 8. 24. If ye believe not that I am he ye shall die in your sins This was the Test in those times and for Unbelief the Jews the natural seed of Abraham were broken off Rom. 11. 20. On this account was the command in that day to them Believe and be baptized for by persisting in positive obstinate unbelief as to his being come there was a rejection of the Covenant and losing their own right and so their Childrens right which resulted from theirs must needs be lost also If Parents be cast out of Covenant then I plead not for their or their Infants Baptism That faith then was indispensibly necessary to the continuing their Covenant Interest as well as to their Baptism yea if circumcision on the 8th day had continued to this day yet this faith of his being come would have been necessary thenceforth in the Parents in order to their Childrens sharing in it But where the natural seed of Abraham by such faith laid hold on the Covenant and continued their Interest in it here is nothing to prove any alteration or curtailing of the Covenant so as to cut off their Infant seed from it or to exclude them from Baptism Also the natural seed of Abraham had then exceedingly corrupted themselves and hainously sinned even so as to Crucifie Christ the Prince of Life on which account he commandeth to Repent and be Baptized Act. 2. v. 36. 38. When they were under such transgressions well might they be exhorted to repentance in order to Baptism and to prevent their forfeiting all and utter rejection and the Lords saying to them Loami ye are none of my People Certainly a Church which owneth Infant Baptism having members under such a horrid offence may require a manifestation of repentance from the Parents before they do Baptize their Infants In short I have discovered that Infant Baptism followeth Parents Faith and Repentance is pre-required to Baptism of a degenerate adult seed but this is nothing against Baptizing Infants of a spiritual seed by faith § 3. Of the validity of Baptism in Infancy Some speak contemptuously of the Baptizing of Infants and undertake to Rebaptize but Pos Baptism administred in Infancy is valid is no nullity I have proved there is Scripture warrant for Infant Baptism some Infants are the proper Subjects of it and so it s no nullity Arg. 1. Our Baptism in Infancy hath all the Essentials of Gospel water Baptism therefore it is valid is no nullity For if a sin in Circumstantials and accidentals of an ordinance did null it then none were valid no person is so Baptized but some sin in it would render it a nullity seeing there is not a just man upon Earth that doth good and sinneth not Eccles 7. 20. 1 Joh. 1. 8. and the contrary is clear Zippora circumcised when Moses should have done it Ex. 4. 25. and yet it was valid for the Angel of the Lord was pacified v. 26. So the high priests were not of the right line but yearly yet Christ owneth them Joh. 11. 51. and 18 13. and I ask if a person erreth in his profession of faith and yet they Baptize him if he after be profane will they say it is a nullity will they if he repent Baptize him again Now our Baptism in Infancy hath all Essentials of water Baptism for it hath right matter and form here is right matter ex qua constat viz. Water without undue mixture here is the sign and the thing signified by it is evangelical also the right matter circaquam capable Subjects rational creatures none else can be in Covenant nor in a capacity to have the things signified the graces and benefits of the Covenant That Infants have right to it I have evidenced that they are capable is undeniable as they were of circumcision which had a spiritual signification as well as Baptism what hinders their receptivity Infants are capable of a principle of faith and repentance antecedently and of actual believing and repenting consequently and one end which Baptism obligeth to is after repentance Mat. 3. 11. Act. 19. 34. Also it hath the right form an application of water in a solemn significative way in the name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit Mat. 28. 19. we use washing tho not submersion it is such an applying of water that is the substance of the external form of Baptism and if there were a sinful defect which I think there is not in the want of sub mersion yet it can be but an accidental one and so it can never be proved that it renders it a nullity In Infant Baptism there is the Internal form consisting in the relation of the sign and thing signified and the External form the applying water in a solemn way with the words of Institution in the name of the Father which must needs be more of the substance of the ordinance then submersion can be and it is a principal part the face which is is applyed to for the noting profession as the fathers nâ—me in the forehead Rev. 14. v. 1 and so it is valid Arg. 2. Our Baptism in Infancy answereth to the Scripture signification of the word and to what is signified by that Ordinance therefore it is valid and is no nullity The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendred mergo lavo it noteth a small use of water as Luk. 16. 24. that he may dip it is not the whole finger but only the tip of it Also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mergo lavo it signifieth not necessarily to dip or plunge but as well to wash and this both in common and in sacred use it cannot be confined to submersion or overwhelming in the water and so such dipping cannot be essential to Baptism so as the not using it should render it a nullity see Mar. 7. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 except they wash they eat not Will any say except they plunged their whole bodies under water they eat not surely no but only washed their hands as v. 3. yet they the persons by that small application
Instituted without it v. 14. whilst it continued nor without Baptism now a token of the same Covenant and connected with the promise Act. 2. 38 39. in like manner and so Infants being in Covenant as Abrahams seed of faith are to be Baptized Obj. 3. There is no kind of Covenant holiness in the natural seed of Believers more than in the seed of Unbelievers now under the Gospel for no person is to be accounted common or unclean by nature more than others and so no person to be accounted clean or holy by nature more than others Act. 10. 28. God is no respecter of persons Typical Ceremonial holiness is abolished of the seed as well as of Beasts Birds Garments Temple c. A. The Typical ceremonial holiness abolished is not said to be by Nature Act. 10. 28. it was by the Law such as of Birds Beasts Garments Temple c. and this is at an end nothing now unclean or holy in that sense but that is nothing against the relative federal holiness of persons long before the Law by the Covenant with Abraham visibly having God their God and being his People Gen. 17. 7 8. otherwise then other People being separated to the Service of God and not afar off but nigh to him Ezek. 16. 8 9. Eph. 2 3 14 19. and this is not meerly by nature but as in the force of Gods Covenant Galat. 2. 15. As to Act. 10. 28. It declares that no person is common or unclean so as to bar him from the Preaching of the Gospel the Gentiles are as clean and holy now as the Jews in that respect Peter might go in to Cornelius no difference of Nation or outward state or condition to hinder it Col. 2. 11. all on equal terms and alike the means of grace may be extended to the Gentiles the offer is larger then it was not straiter here is no excluding or casting out of Infants from any priviledge Indeed the Jews of old were forbidden Marriage and Covenants with the Gentiles Deut. 7. 3. but not keeping company with them as Calvin saith we find no clear prohibition of the Jews going in to the Gentiles from the Law but from the observation of the Fathers However there can be no pretence for such uncleanness of Persons as Peter meaneth till the Law and the abolishing this by the Gospel is nothing against the federal holiness of Infants or others long before the Law by the Covenant with Abraham As to Act. 10. 34 35. it importeth that God is no respecter of persons as to acceptance with him be he Jew or Gentile of what Nation soever he may be accepted of God if he be a fearer of God and a worker of righteousness else not whatever privilege he enjoyeth Church-membership Baptism Lords Supper c. what is this against the federal holiness of their seed who are fearers of God and externally in Covenant with him 2. In Gospel times there is a relative federal holiness whereby some are differenced from other by a Separation from the world for God Rom. 11. 16. 1 Pet. 2. 9. ye are a holy Nation yea this reacheth Infants 1 Cor. 7. 14. Else were your Children unholy but now are they holy It cannot be meant of legitimation for if both the Parents be unbelievers yet the Children are legitimate Heb. 13. 4. the marriage bed is undefiled in all It is not barely a being sanctified to use for so are the unbelieving Husband or Wife to the Believer v. 14. yet are not holy Tit. 1. 15. It is not qualitative holiness if it were to be sure they may be Baptized it must then be relative or federal holiness Obj. 4. If the Children of the flesh are not the Children of God Rom. 9. 8. then Infants are not the seed of Abraham they may be by Election not by Calling Abraham hath two seeds a fleshly seed who had promises of the Land of Canaan and a spiritual seed Heirs of eternal Life the Heavenly Inheritance this was never given to the fleshly seed Ans Children of the flesh by degeneracy and a legal Birth are not the Children of God Of these he speaketh Rom. 9. v. 8 31 32. Gal. 4. v. 29 30. This is nothing against Infants Priviledge Also Children of the flesh Infants or adult are not internally and savingly the Children of God so as to inherit the Heavenly Inheritance only by fleshly descent but Infants of Believers are externally and visibly the Children of God as well as others Gen. 17. 7 10 11. Exod. 4. 22. Rom. 9. 4. To them pertaineth the Adoption and so they are externally and visibly Children if not by regeneration yet by dedication and separation for God from others This rendreth it probable and hopeful they shall afterwards share in the spiritual and eternal Blessings until they evidence the contrary by rejecting the Covenant as Ishmael and Esau did Thus the Infant seed of Believers are not the spiritual seed of Abraham only by fleshly descent but they are ecclesiastically and externally the seed of Abraham with their Parents by vertue of the Covenant But to clear this Text and Matter I shall add these things 1. Here is no repeal of any Covenant Interest which Infants undoubtedly had before the coming of Jesus Christ without which all said is nothing to the purpose it is not said those that of old were the seed of Abraham now are not so any longer but rather the contrary for till actually cast out he concludeth them highly priviledged Rom. 9. 4. Who are Israelites to whom pertaineth the Adoption and the Glory of the Covenants and the Promises So that still in Gospel times till cast out for positive Unbelief externally they had an Intrest in the Covenants and Promises as in former days and so their Infants shared with them 2. The Children of the Flesh which here are denyed to be the Children of God are an adult corrupt degenerate seed seeking Justification by a Legal Righteousness Rom. 9. v. 8 31 32. Israel which followed after Righteousness hath not attained to the Law of Righteousness Wherefore because they sought it not by Faith but as it were by the Works of the Law. Such are a fleshly seed Gal. 4. 29. and obstinately erring in such a Fundamental in matter of Faith in any Age were not the Children of God they are adult ones that thus advance their own Righteousness Infants do not so and therefore are not the Children of the flesh here intended Indeed the Parents may so forfeit their Covenant Interest and consequently their Infant seed may loose it also because their Right was by their Parents 3. The Children of the Flesh whether adult or Infants are not the Children of God spiritually or are not the spiritual seed of Abraham only by a fleshly descent so as to be Heirs of Salvation Eternal Life the Heavenly Inheritance but yet may be the seed of Abraham ecclesiastically and externally as of old and nothing is here against it Mr.