Selected quad for the lemma: grace_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
grace_n	adam_n	covenant_n	fall_n	2,656	5	9.6090	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47605	The rector rectified and corrected, or, Infant-baptism unlawful being a sober answer to a late pamphlet entituled An argumentative and practical discourse of infant-baptism, published by Mr. William Burkit, rector of Mildin in Suffolk : wherein all his arguments for pedo-baptism are refuted and the necessity of immersion, i.e. dipping, is evidenced, and the people falsly called Anabaptists are cleared from those unjust reproaches and calumnies cast upon them : together with a reply to the Athenian gazette added to their 5th volume about infant-baptism : with some remarks upon Mr. John Flavel's last book in answer to Mr. Philip Cary / by Benjamin Keach.	Keach, Benjamin, 1640-1704.	1692 (1692)	Wing K84; ESTC R27451	144,738	231

new Covenant which God would make with the House of Israel which should not be according to the old he goes on and tells us what God would do in that Covenant-day that he would put his Law into their inward parts and write it in their Hearts And they shall teach no more every Man his Neighbour and every Man his Brother saying Know the Lord for they shall all know-me from the least of them unto the greatest of them saith the Lord c. And indeed in this very respect the Gospel-Covenant is not according to the old as the Lord said it should not be as well as in divers other cases for many of those who were in the old Covenant to which Circumcision did appertain were Infants tho all of them were not taken in by Circumcision for Female Infants were received into that old Covenant without it Now these Children who were taken into that Covenant did not know the Lord. Infants having no Understanding know not their right Hand from their left it is therefore impossible they should know the Lord and therefore also there was a necessity after they were in that Covenant that they should be taught to know the Lord First that God is and what a God he is and so to know him as to fear him and serve him in Sincerity But in the Gospel-Covenant God promised it should be otherwise all who were received into that Covenant should be Adult Persons or such who did know the Lord which plainly implies no ignorant Infant should be taken into that Covenant and be a Member of that Church-State for if so then it would follow such would have the like need to be taught to know the Lord as they had in the old Covenant Church-State And remakable it is that this Text doth clearly intimate that all who should be taken into the Gospel-Covenant or Gospel-Church should be discipled or taught first to know God for to be taught or discipled is all one and the same thing which agrees with Christ's great Commission Matth. 28.19 20. where he gave Directions who or what kind of Persons they were to be that he would have his Apostles receive into his Gospel-Church and that they should be all of them first taught or made Disciples and as such be baptized is clearly declared Now that this Text in Jer. 31. refers to the Gospel-Covenant is evident see Heb. 8.7 8 9 10. That Covenant that was a part or branch of the old Covenant or Covenant of Works was not a Covenant of Grace or Gospel-Covenant But the Covenant of Circumcision was a part or branch of the old Covenant or Covenant of Works Ergo The Covenant of Circumcision was not a Covenant of Grace or Gospel-Covenant The Major cannot be denied The Minor is easily proved That which bound or obliged all those who were under it or did it to keep the whole Law and was also abrogated or taken away by Christ with all the other Rites and Shadows of the old Covenant was a part or branch of the said old Covenant But Circumcision bound or obliged all who were circumcised to keep the whole Law and also the same Rite of Circumcision was abrogated with all other Rites and Shadows of the old Covenant by Christ Ergo Circumcision was a part or branch of the old Covenant See Gal. 5 〈◊〉 testify to every Man that is circumcised that he is a Debtor to keep the whole Law That Covenant which was in its nature and quality as much a Covenant of Works as the Covenant made with Adam or the sinai-Sinai-Covenant sinai- was not a Covenant of Grace or gospel-Gospel-Covenant whereof Christ is the Mediator But the Covenant of Circumcision was in its nature and quality as much a Covenant of Works as that Covenant made with Adam or the sinai-Sinai-Covenant Ergo The Covenant of Circumcision wa● not a Covenant of Grace or gospel-Gospel-Covenant Read Reverend Mr. Philip Cary's Desence and Proof of the substance of this Argument in his just Reply to Mr. John Flavel p. 59 60. Thus he says and doubeless speaks the truth viz. That Adam's Covenant was a Covenant of Works cannot rationally be denied for as much as Life was implicitly promised unto him upon his Obedience and Death was explicitly threatn'd in case of his Disobedience upon these terms he was to stand or fall And that the Sinai-Covenant was of the same nature he hath in the said Treatise clearly proved both of them requiring perfect Obedience and neither of them admitting of Faith in a Redeemer the Sinai-Covenant commanded perfect Obedience under the pain of a Curse Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that is written in the Book of the Law to do them Gal. 3. 10. It accepted as he shews of no short Endeavours nor gave any Strength and is called a Ministration of Death and of Condemnation 2 Cor. 3. And moreover 't is called in express terms the old Covenant which God made with the Children of Israel when he brought them up out of the Land of Egypt Heb. 8.9 Also the new Covenant is said to be directly contrary unto it or not according to it but opposed thereto and that there was no Righteousness by it nor Life for as the Apostle shews if there had Christ is dead in vain and besides the Apostle says 't is done away Now all these things being considered Mr. Flavel 't is evident doth but beat the Air and darken Counsel and all that he hath said in his last Book in answer to that worthy Gentleman Mr. Cary deserves no further Answer Now saith he that the Covenant of Circumcision is of the same stamp is evident for tho God promised to be a God to Abraham and to his Seed Gen. 17. 7 8. as he did also in the Sinai-Covenant to the same People in the Wilderness yet still it was upon condition of Obedience with an answerable threatning in case of Disobedince ver 9 10. Thou shalt keep my Covenant therefore thou and thy Seed after thee in their Generations This is my Covenant which ye shall keep between me and you and thy Seed after thee Every Man-Child shall be circumcised And ver 14. The uncircumcised Male-Child whose Flesh of his sore-Skin is not circumcised that Soul shall be cut off from his People he hath broken my Covenant The same terms saith he with the former Besides 't is evident that Circumcision indi●pensibly obliged all that were under it to a perfect universal Obedience to the whole revealed Will of God as I hinted before Gal. 5.3 And as the Terms were the same so were the Promises that which was the great Promise of the Covenant of Circumcision was the Land of Canaan and God to be their God in fulfilling that earthly Promise to Abraham's Natural Seed upon the Condition of the keeping that Covenant on their parts That which Mr. Flavel hath said in his last Reply in his Book called A succinct and seasonable

Discourse to Mr. Cary is mainly to prove that there is but one Covenant of Works pag. 217 218 c. To which I answer by way of Concession yet must say that Covenant had several Ministrations and Additions as had also the Covenant of Grace because the Covenant of Works was made with Adam by which he stood in the time of his Innocency justified and accepted by virtue thereof Could not God give forth a second Ministration or Transcript of his Righteous and Holy Law though not to Justification yet to aggravate his Sin and so to his just Condemnation And doth not St. Paul assert the same thing Rom. 3.19 20. compared with Rom. 7.13 That Sin by the Commandment or Law might become exceeding sinful So Gal. 3.19 Nay I will affirm always generally when the Scriptures of the New-Testament speak of the Old Covenant or first Covenant or Covenant of Works it passes by in silence the Covenant made with Adam and more immediately and directly applies it to the sinai-Sinai-Covenant and to the Covenant of Cirrumcision as all careful Readers who read the Epistles to the Romans Galathians and to the Hebrews may clearly find But to proceed Though we say there is but one Covenant of Grace yet it is evident there were several distinct Ministrations or Additions of it yet we say the Promise of the Gospel or gospel-Gospel-Covenant was the same in all Ages in respect of things promised with the Nature and Quality thereof which is a free and absolute Covenant without Works or any Conditions or foreseen Acts of Righteousness or any thing to be done by the Creature Rom. 4. 5. The Substance and essential Part of this Covenant is Christ Faith a new Heart Regeneration Remission of Sins Sanctification Perseverance and everlasting Life Yet this Evangelical Covenant had divers Forms or Transcripts of it which signified those things and various Sanctions by which it was given forth and confirmed To Adam the Promise was made under the name of the Seed of the Woman bruising the Head of the Serpent to Enoch Noah c. In other Forms to Abraham under the name of his Seed in whom all the Nations of the Earth should be blessed To Moses by the name of a great Prophet of his Brethren like unto him and it was also signified to him under dark Shadows and Sacrifices Unto David under the name of a Successor in his Kingdom In the New-Testament in plain words We all with open Face beholding as in a Glass the Glory of the Lord c. 2 Cor. 3.18 But now because there were so many Additions of the Gospel Promise and New-Covenant are there so many New Covenants this being so Mr. Flavel hath done nothing to remove Mr. Cary's Arguments but they stand as a Rock Take another of them That Covenant in which Faith was not reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness could not be a Gospel-Cov●●●n● or a Covenant of Grace But the Scripture is express that Faith was not reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness when he was Circumcised but in Uncircumcision Rom. 4 9 10. Ergo The Covenant of Circumcision was not a Gospel-Covenant or a Covenant of Grace That Law or Covenant which is contradistinguished or opposed unto the Righteousness of Faith could not be a Covenant of Faith or a Gospel-Covenant But the Law or Covenant of Circumcision is by the Apostle plainly opposed to or contradistinguished unto the Righteousness of Faith Rom. ● 1● Ergo The Law or Covenant of Circu●●ision was not a Gospel-Covenant And from hence Mr. Cary argues thus By the way saith he let it be observed in reference to the two foregoing Arguments which I have already proved that that Covenant that is not of Faith must needs be a Covenant of Works there b●ing no Medium betwixt them and consequently must be the same for substance with that made with Adam and that on Mount Sinai with the Children of Israel That Covenant that is plainly represented to us in Scripture as a 〈◊〉 Covenant in and by which there was imposed such a Yoke upon the Necks of the Jews which neither those in the Apostles ●●me nor their Fathers were able to bear could be no other than a Covenant of Works and not of Grace But the Scriptures do plainly represent such was the Nature of the Covenant of Circumcision Acts 15.10 Gal. 5.1 2 3. Ergo The Covenant of Circumcision was not a Gospel-Covenant but a Covenant of Works Thus Mr. Cary argues also And thus we have proved from God's Word and sound Arguments that the Covenant of Circumcision was not a Gospel-Covenant Object But lest any should think that we shut out all dying Infants from having any Benefit by Christ I answer I doubt not but God might comprehend them in that glorious Covenant or Compact made between him and our Surety in the Covenant of Redemption but as I said before Secret things belong to God But let me here add one word or two further i. e. Circumcision you say was a Priviledg so we say too but not such a Priviledg as you do imagine 1. It doth profit as a Priviledg because it was given as a Token or Sign to Abraham's natural Seed that they should have the Land of Canaan for an everlasting possession 2. As a Token or Sign to them of the giving forth of the Law on Mount Sinai He dealt his Laws and Statutes to Israel he did not do so to any other Nation This Rite therefore could not be a Gospel-Rite nor the Covenant it was a sign of a Gospel-Covenant in which the Gentile Christians are concerned And thus the Apostle argues Rom. 3. 1. What Advantage then hath th● Jew or what Profit is there in Circumcision ver 2. Much every way chiefly because unto them were committed the Oracles of God You may soon know the Nature of that Covenant made with Abraham's natural Seed and of Circumcision which was a Sign of it The chiefest Priviledg which attended it was the giving to them i. e. the People of Israel the Law of the Ten Commandements 3. Circumcision by the Doctrine of St. Paul was a Priviledg if they kept the Law 〈◊〉 for Circumcision verily profiteth if thou keep the Law but if thou break the Law thy Circum●ision is made Vncircumcision or a Nullity and profiteth thee nothing that is if thou keep not the Law perfectly And thus speak our late Annotators on the place If thou Jew keep the Law perfectly to which Circumcision obligeth Gal. 5.3 If otherwise thou transgressest the Law thy Circumcision avails thee nothing it gives thee no Priviledg above the Uncircumcised What is now become this being so of that mighty Priviledg Abraham's Infant 〈◊〉 as such had by Circumcision if the chief Profit or Priviledg was because unto them the Law should be given which could not give Life but was a Covenant of Works then the chiefest Profit lay not in it as it was an Ordinance of Initiation

other ways than by a Mediator c. Answ 1. I have proved that Covenant made with Abraham was a mixt Covenant and I deny not but the Covenant of Grace made in Christ was promised to Abraham which takes in only the true Spiritual Seed and to all those God is in a special manner become a God unto 2. Evident it is all manner of God's Covenanting Transactions since the Fall of what nature soever have been no other ways than through the interposition of a Mediator as that with Noah about the Flood c. Gen. 9.8 9. in that God shewed himself to be the God of the Old World and so he is by Creation and Providence c. Yet it doth not follow that Covenant was the Covenant of Grace or that God hath received them into special favour with himself So when God gave out that fiery Law on Mount Sinai he told them Exod. 20.2 I am the Lord your God c. This was the very Introduction to that part of the Law which was written in Stone which nevertheless the Apostle expressly calls it A Ministration of Death and Condemnation 2 Cor. 3.7 8. and that it killed and could not give Life Now must this be a Covenant of Faith or Grace How is it then that the Apostle Paul says The Law is not of Faith also the Covenant of Grace giveth Life But I argue thus The Law could not give Life Ergo The Law was not a Covenant of Grace And so much to your first Note or Observation 2. Your second Observation is The Duration and Continuance of this Covenant made with Abraham the Lord calls it an Everlasting Covenant c. Answ You might have left out this only it helps to add to the number you have answered this your self in saying The Hebrew word for Everlasting sometimes signifies no more than a long continuance of Time Sir We know it very well and those Mosaical Rites that ended in Christ are said to be for Everlasting But when the Lord saith he will be a Person 's God for ever and ever or everlastingly it denotes his being so to all Eternity But God never said he would be the God everlastingly or to all Eternity to all who were concern'd in the Covenant of Circumcision Nor was he Ishmael's God so though Circumcised and has he not cast off that whole Nation of the Jews with whom he made that Covenant and is not so their God now though he is I confess to all Eternity or everlastingly the God of all Abraham's Spiritual Seed viz. all true Believers in Christ 3. Your third and last Argument or Note to prove the Covenant of Circumcision a Covenant of Grace is taken from the Benefits and Blessings conveyed by it To be a God unto him and to his Seed and that everlastingly is a most comprehensive Gospel-Blessing for hereby God gives a Person an Interest in all that he is and in all that he has so far as can be communicated to a Creature This Blessing promised to Abraham comprehends Christ Grace Holiness here and Glory and Happiness hereafter And accordingly we find the Apostle Heb. 8. uses the same Expression with this of God's to Abraham I will be to them a God and they shall be to me a People Answ This is idem bis idem culpandum est the same again which is already answered Sir Is God everlastingly a God to Abraham and to all his fleshly Seed and to Believers who are the Spiritual Seed of Abraham and to all their fleshly Seed I say is this so Does God give himself all he is and all he has to every Believer and to all his fleshly Seed Have all their Children or every one of them Christ Grace Holiness here and Glory and eternal Happiness hereafter Or are you not to be justly blamed thus to jumble things confusedly together 'T is true the Covenant of Grace made with Abraham and all his true Spiritual Seed who are the Elect have Interest in all God is and has so far as it can be communicated to Creatures and we know they have Christ as well as are Christ's as Paul notes Gal. 4. and Grace here and shall have Glory hereafter But a multitude of Abraham's natural Off-spring and the natural Off-spring of Believers have neither Christ nor Grace nor shall be saved but perish eternally Therefore this may serve for an Answer with what I have proved before touching the Nature of that two-fold Covenant made with Abraham To what you speak in the second place pag. 12 13. as also in your third Reply viz. If the Covenant which God made with Abraham be one and the same with the Covenant of Grace then our Infant-Seed have right to Baptism Answ You had this before and I have already answered it only I shall add a Passage or two of Martin Luther Paul therefore concludeth with this Sentence saith he They which are of Faith are the Children of Abraham That corporal Birth or carnal Seed make not the Children of Abraham before God As if he would say There is none before God accounted as the Child of this Abraham who is the Servant of God whom God hath chosen and made Righteous by Faith thrô carnal Generation but such Children must be given before God as he was a Father but he was a Father of Faith was justified and pleased God not because he could beget Children after the Flesh not because he had Circumcision under the Law but because he believed in God He therefore that will be a Child of the believing Abraham must also himself believe or else he is not a Child of the Elect the believing and the justified Abraham but only the begetting Abraham which is nothing else but a Man conceived born and wrap'd in Sin without the forgiveness of Sins without Faith without the Holy Ghost as another Man is and therefore condemned Such also are the Children carnally begotten of him having nothing in them like unto their Father but Flesh and Blood Sin and Death therefore these are also damned This glorious boasting then we are the Seed of Abraham is to no purpose Thus far and much more to the same purpose he excellently dilates upon Mr. Perkins on the Galatians concerning the Covenant made with Abraham The Seed of Abraham saith he is the Seed not of the Flesh but of the Promise And this Seed is first Christ and then all that believe in Christ for all these are given to Abraham by Promise and Election of God Moreover this Seed is not many as Paul observeth but one It is objected That the word Seed is a Name collective and signifies the whole Posterity of Abraham Answ It doth sometimes saith he but not always for Eve saith of S●th God hath given me another Seed Again he saith this one particular Seed of Abraham is Christ Jesus here by the name Christ first and principally the Mediator and then secondly all Jews and

declared all things plainly from the Father and was faithful as a Son over his own House 2. That which is not contained in his last Will and Testament in this and other matters is sufficient to declare his Mind and Will in the Negative And so you know 't is in all last Wills and Testaments among Men if it be not expressed in the Affirmative it needs not be expressed in the Negative and if not because 't is not forbidden it may be done so may a hundred things more nay many Jewish Rites and Popish Innovations too for where are they forbid The sum therefore of our Answer to all you say upon this account is this The Privileges which are Rites Ordinances or Sacraments are not so many as you would have or so many as the Jews of old had nor are they to be administred according as you fancy or approve of or according to your Reasonings but according to God's express Appointment Rightly doth Mr. Ball in his forementioned Book speak Posit 3 4. p. 38. But in whatsoever Circumcision and Baptism do agree or differ we must look to the Institution and neither stretch it wider nor draw it narrower than the Lord had made it for he is the Instituter of the Sacraments according to his good Pleasure and it is our part to learn of him both to whom how and to what end the Sacraments are to be administered how they agree and wherein they differ in all which we must affirm nothing but what God hath taught us and as he hath taught us Were it not thus how could we deny or oppose the Papists seven Sacraments or condemn Salt Oil Spittle to be used in Baptism which they use in it seeing these are not forbid But well saith Tertullian Is it lawful because it is not forbidden 't is therefore not lawful because 't is not commanded You say Pag. 10. before you end this Argument Let me suggest one thing more to your Considerations namely What a mighty Stumbling-Block this Doctrine of the Anabaptists lays in the way of the Jews Conversion to Christianity Will this say you encourage a Jew's Conversion to embrace the Religion of Jesus to tell him of the high and glorious Privileges that he shall be interested in himself upon his believing on him but for his Children they are cast out Answ Did this stumble them in the Apostolical Days who were told that Circumcision availed nothing nor Vncircumcision the truth is if Circumcision availed nothing but was a Yoke of Bondage then why should that stumble them It might be a greater Stumbling-block in their way to tell them their Church-State and all their Privileges are now gone and now they must not look upon themselves better than the Gentiles no more Scepter in Judah no Land of Canaan no Temple no High-Priest the Levites Sons as such now no more Ministers no Succession of Priest-hood What of all this when they hear of better Privileges for them And that their Infants who die may go to Heaven tho not circumcised nor baptized and if they live to be Men and Women and do believe or God doth please to call them the Promise of Pardon of Sin and of the holy Spirit is to them and that they shall be saved Acts 2. 39. Are not they and all others told that old things are passed away and all things are become new c. 2 Cor. 5.16 Wherefore henceforth we know no Man after the Flesh it seems then that heretofore there had been a knowledg of Persons after the Flesh and 't is plain there was that because the Jews were of the natural or fleshly Seed of Abraham and were therefore all of them admitted to the Privilege of external Church-Membership while others were exempted But we see the Apostle resolves henceforth to disclaim any such Value Esteem Preference or Knowledg of them or any others upon the account of meer fleshly Descent And to this very purpose immediately subjoins in the following Verse Therefore if any Man be in Christ he is a new Creature old things now are past away and all things are become new the old Church and old Church-membership Privileges Rites and Ordinances and a new Church-State new Ordinances new Rites a new Seed and a new way of Introduction unto the participation of Gospel-Priviledges and Church-membership and if this should stumble them who can help it We know they have stumbled upon as bad Rocks as this Moreover denying Infants any right to Gospel-Ordinances cannot fill the Mouths of Jewish Children with clamorours and passionate Complaints against Christianity because they could not see Jewish Children had such benefit by Circumcision as you intimate no no they must yield to the Soveraign Will of the great Lord and plead for no more Privileges nor any otherwise than he sees good to ordain and appoint I am sure if what you say was true it is enough to fill the Mouths of poor Unbelievers Children among us who are Gentiles with clamorous Complaints against their Parents if they did regard what you say and doubtless there are more of them I mean more Children born of Ungodly Parents than such born of Godly Parents And what may they say and how may they expostulate their own Condition Alas alas sad is our State our Parents were wicked and ungodly People and we are by that means left of God to us belongs no Covenant no Sacraments nor hopes of Mercy God hath taken none but the Children of Godly Persons into Covenant We were baptized alas but had no right to it our Condition is as bad as the State of the Children of Pagans and Turks Sir if People did consider well the Purport of your Doctrine they must needs have their Hearts rise against you Nay all or most Children may be in a doubt whether their Parents were truly godly and so in Covenant or not for if not you must fly to some other Argument to prove their Baptism and Church-Privileges than that of their Parents being in Covenant True the case under the Law was another thing for if their Parents were Jews or the natural Seed of Abraham whether godly or not yet they knew they had right to those external Privileges And so much to your Absurdities and they are returned on your own Head In pag. 11. you lay down your Arguments to prove the Covenant made with Abraham was a Covenant of Grace 1. From the Language and Expression of it 2. From the Duration of it 3. From the Blessings by it 1. Your first Note is this The Language and Expression of it Gen. 17. 7. I will be a God unto thee and to thy Seed after thee Now say you is not this a pure Gospel-Phrase and shews it to be a Covenant with Abraham in Christ I pray how comes the Almighty God who upon the Breach of the Covenant of Works made with us in Adam became our enraged Enemy to be a God unto fallen Man any