Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	faith_n	grace_n	righteousness_n	14,541	5	7.8014	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47391	The ax laid to the root, or, One blow more at the foundation of infant baptism, and church-membership. Part I containing an exposition of that metaphorical text of Holy Scripture, Mat. 3. 10. : being the substance of two sermons lately preached, with some additions, wherein is shewed that God made a two-fold covenant with Abraham, and that circumcision appertained not to the covenant of grace, but to the legal and external covenant God made with Abraham's natural seed, as such : together with an answer to Mr. John Flavel's last grand arguments in his Vindiciarum Vindex, in his last reply to Mr. Philip Cary, also to Mr. Rothwell's Pædo-baptisms vindicatur, as to what seems most material / by Benjamin Keach ...	Keach, Benjamin, 1640-1704.; Rothwell, Edward, d. 1731. Paedobaptismus vindicatus.	1693 (1693)	Wing K47; ESTC R39052	37,123	40

be my people ver 33. 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. Pray observe in the Old Covenant Infants were Members who did not when taken into that Covenant and made Members of that legal Church know the Lord nor indeed their right Hand from their left Therefore they when grown up had need to be taught saying Know the Lord and thus upon this Account every one had need to teach his Neighbour and his Brother but in the Gospel Covenant God saith it should not be thus for that all whom he would make that Covenant with should know him before they were received as Members of that Church tho' afterwards 't is granted they stand in need of further teaching And in this respect the Gospel Covenant and Gospel Church State differs or is not according to the Old legal and external Covenant and Church State of the Jews as well as in other things that being a conditional Covenant the New Covenant Absolute I will and they shall that was a Covenant of Works this of Grace c. They shall all know me from the least to the greatest not one Infant then be sure is in it as a Member of the Gospel Church they are now required to repent to believe to bring forth fruits meet for re●entance They must be made Disciples by Teaching as appears by the great Commission Mat. 28 19 20. before Baptized who are to be Members of the Gospel Church Arg. 5. The Covenant of Circumcision could not be the Gospel Covenant because the Terms of it runs according to the Sinai Covenant which is said not to be of faith but 1 the man that doth those things should live in them Gal. 3. 22. 2 Life was promised to Obedience to it and Death threatned to Disobedience 3 The Promise of the Sinai Covenant was the Land of Canaan Riches Peace and Prosperity to be Blessed in the Basket and Store and so runs the Covenant of Circumcision see Gen. 17. 9 10 14. Thou shalt keep my covenant c. and I will give unto thee and to thy seed after thee the land of Canaan c. ver 8. And the uncircumcised man-child whose flesh of his fore-skin is not circumcised that Soul shall be cu● off from his People he hath broken my Covenant ver 14. Thus ran the Law and Covenant of Circumcision it was Life upon the Condition of Obedience Death upon Disobedience 't was do and live but thus runs not the Terms of the New Covenant but directly contrarywise believe and thou shalt be saved are the Terms of the Gospel Covenant from whence I shall draw this Argument That Covenant that was in the Nature and Quality of it as much a Covenant of Works as the Sinai Covenant could not be the Covenant of Grace But so was the Law and Covenant of Circumcision Therefore Circumcision was no Gospel Law or Covenant Arg. 6. The Covenant of Circumcision was of the Letter and not of the Spirit This the Apostle lays down Rom. 3. 29. But he is not a Jew which is one outward and circumcision is that of the heart in the spirit and not in the letter whose praise is not of man but of God Doth he not clearly hereby intimate that Circumcision of the Flesh was of the Law and not of the Gospel for by Letter the Law is meant all Expositors confess in that paralell Text 2 Cor. 5. Who hath made us able Ministers of the New Testament not of the letter but of the spirit see our late worthy Annotators by the Letter Here say they the Apostle understandeth the Law or the Law is called the Letter Rom. 2. 27. Who by the letter and Circumcision doth transgress the Law The Law say they in opposition to the Gospel is called the Letter and again they say the Gospel is called the Spirit both in opposition to the carnal Ordinances of the Law and because Christ is the Matter Subject and Argument of it The Law kills but the Gospel gives Life yet some affirm that Law written in Stones was the Gospel or a dark ministration of it What Law is it then that kills and what was the Covenant of Works which as such is taken away But no more of that here 't is plain Circumcision was not of the Spirit i. e. not of the Gospel but of the Law Arg. 7. That Covenant in which Faith was not reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness was not the Covenant of Grace or a Gospel Covenant But the Apostle shews us That Faith was not reckoned to Abraham in Circumcision Rom. 4. That faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness vers 9. How then was it reckoned when he was in circumcision or in uncircumcision not in circumcision but in uncircumcision ver 10. What need was there for St. Paul to argue thus against Circumcision if it were as our Brethren say a Gospel Law Precept or Covenant and remarkable 't is that the Apostle puts in this Chapter the Law and Circumcision together as being of one stamp or of the same nature and excludes them both from the free Promise of God made to Abraham which I have shew'd was the Pure Gospel or New Covenant Reader see Mr. Philip Cory's Solemn Call where thou wilt meet with this and some other of these Arguments largely opened and his Reply to Mr. Flavel both worth thy reading Arg. 8. The Law or Covenant of Circumcision is as the said worthy Writer observes contrary distinguished or opposed by the Apostle in Rom. 4. to the Covenant of Faith or Gospel Covenant therefore could not be one nor of the same Nature read 9 10 11 12 13 and 14 verse● Arg. 9. That Covenant or Precept that profited none unless they kept the Law could not belong to the Covenant of Grace but so the Apostle speaks of Circumcision For circumcision verily profiteth if thou keep the law Rom. 2. 25. That is as I have observed if thou keep the Law perfectly but if thou break the law thy circumcision is made uncircumcision that is of none effect 'T is strange to me that Circumcision should be a Gospel Covenant and yet not profit any unless they perfectly kept the Law and also obliged them so to do Gal. 5. 3. Could a Man have perfectly kept the Law of the Old Covenant he might have thereby been justified in the sight of God and then no need of a Christ to have fulfilled the Righteousness of it for us and in our nature But doth a Gospel Precept oblige any to the perfect keeping of the whole Law How then could this be a Gospel Precept O see how the Law and Circumcision agree and comport together in their nature end use and design and never plead for it as a Gospel Precept any more unless you have a mind to bring your Selves and Children under the

read yet of another Natural Seed of Abraham to whom the Promise of Grace did not belong as Ishmael and the Sons of Keturah Gen. 15. 5. but as they were the Seed of Abraham none will say the Children of beliving Gentiles are the Seed of Abraham now I affirm that there is no mention made of any other Seed of Abraham but these four sorts if any man can shew a fifth sort let him from hence I shall again draw this Argument viz. If the Children of the believing Gentiles as such are not the natural Seed of Abraham nor the spiritual Seed of Abraham then they can have no Right as such to Baptism nor to Church-Membership by vertue of being Abraham's Seed nor are they any ways as such concerned in that Covenant-Transaction God made with Abraham but the Children of believing Gentiles as such are not the natural Seed of Abraham nor the spiritual Covenant of Abraham therefore they can have no right as such to Baptism nor to Church-Membership by vertue of Abraham's Covenant nor are they any ways concerned in that Covenant-Transaction God made with Abraham Obj. The Athenian Society in p. 2. of their Athenian Gazette affirm that the Children of believing Gentiles are the spiritual Seed of Abraham until by actual sin unrepented of they are otherwise Answ. To which I answer as I have once already that then some of the true spiritual Seed of Abraham may eternally perish for certainly many Children of Believers who when they grow up proving to be prophane unbelieving and impenitent Persons and so live and dye are eternally lost 1. Which if so the Covenant of Grace is not so well ordered in all things and sure as we believe it is and the Scripture proves it is 2. 'T is also directly contrary to what St. Paul positively affirms in Rom. 4. 16. therefore it is of Faith that it might be by Grace to the end the Promise might be sure to all the Seed not to that which is of the Law but to that which is of the Faith of Abraham who is the Father of us all If this be well consider'd the Plea for our Infants as such being Abraham's Seed is gone for ever for I from hence argue again that all that are in that Gospel Covenant God made with Abraham or are his spiritual Seed have the Promise of eternal Life sure to them but all the Seed of believing Gentiles as such have not the Promise of eternal Life sure to them therefore the Children of believing Gentiles as such are not the spiritual Seed of Abraham 3. All that are in the Covenant of Grace I mean all the true spiritual Seed of Abraham have the Faith of Abraham and walk in the steps of Abraham and have also all the Privileges of the Gospel Covenant God made with him but so have not the natural Seed of believing Gentiles as such nor are they by Birth i. e. by being born of believing Parents in a better Condition than others as such being all being born in sin and in the Covenant of Works indeed if Believers Children as such were in Covenant as soon as begotten or born then they are born in the Covenant of Grace and if so not the Children of Wrath by Nature and if in the Covenant of Grace then their State is good enough without Baptism nor doth Baptism bring them into it and if they say as some do that the Children are brought into the Covenant of Grace by Baptism and so made the Children of God Members of Christ and Inheritors of the Kingdom of Heaven then it follows they had it not by vertue of being in Covenant with their Parents and then also it would follow that 't is in the power of Men and Women to bring their Children into the Covenant of Grace or keep them out of it and so through Negligence or Ignorance the Parents may damn their Children and others have power to save theirs by getting a Minister to Baptise them But if they do not suppose their Seed as such are indeed truly and really in the Covenant of Grace what signifies that which they call the Covenant to whom the Blessing of the Covenant do not belong and if it seals not the Blessings of the Covenant what doth it seal or what spiritual Advantage do their Children receive thereby Either they have the internal Blessings or Privileges sealed to them or else the external Privileges thereof or none at all now I can't believe they judge they have right as such to the internal Blessings and Privileges for then they must all be saved unless those to whom the Promise is sure it being confirmed by the Oath of God may eternally perish I know they whom I have to do with are averse to the Doctrine of falling from Grace And if it seals the External Privileges of the Covenant to them why are they denyed those Privileges Is not Breaking of Bread and Church-Fellowship the chief external Privileges of the Gospel-Church We know as to bearing the Word Prayers of the Church our Children enjoy those Privileges as far forth as theirs besides if they be not absolutely in the Covenant but only conditionally i. e. if they believe they shall c. even what is that more than what the Children of Unbelievers have shall not they be received into the Covenant also if they believe and close in with Christ I cannot learn that they can inform us of any Benefit their Children above ours have who are not baptised or other Mens by their Baptism or as they are their Seed as such tho' 't is evident Abraham's natural Seed had a Right to many external Privileges under that Dispensation as such but I shall now proceed to answer some grand Objection made against what I have said Obj. 1. The first is this viz. There is an exact Parallel or Parity betwixt Circumcision and Baptism therefore as Jewish Infants were circumcised so the Children of Christian Gentiles may be baptised thus they argue Ans. I must deny that there is such a Parity or clear Parallel as they intimate between Circumcision and Baptism but if there were yet the Argument is good for nothing but to prove the first i. e. and that there is no such Parity but in most things a Disparity will now clearly be evinced 1. Circumcision was a shadow of Christ to come by whom we receive the great Antitype of Circumcision i. e. the Circumcision of the heart Col. 2. 12 13. Baptism is a sign that Christ is already come d●ad bury'd and rais'd again 2. Circumcision was a sign of the Covenant with Abraham's natural Seed above all other Nations and a Token to them of many external Blessings and Privileges Baptism is a sign of the inward and peculiar Graces of the Spirit the Person baptized hath received if a true Subject of that Holy Ordinance 3. Circumcision only belonged to Abraham's Male Children Baptism belongs to all that believe truly in Christ both Males and Females

who are all one in Christ Jesus no difference in that respect under the Gospel-Covenant 4. Circumcision belongeth neither to no Male Children but those born in Abraham's House or such who were bought with his Money c. it did not belong to any other godly Man's Male Children that lived in his days unless they joyned themselves to his Family but Baptism belongs to all the Disciples of Christ or to all true Believers in all Nations Mat. 28. 19. 20. 5. Circumcision was to be done precisely on the Eighth Day not before nor after But Baptism is to be done at any time and is not limited to any precise day 6. Circumcision made a visible Impression on the Body which the Party might perceive when he came to Age of Understanding Baptism leaves no Impression on the Body 7. Circumcision signified the taking away the sins of the Flesh or the Circumcision of the Heart Baptism signifies the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ which Circumcision did not What Parity or Parallel there is between them I know not unless they say that Circumcision was the initiating Rite under the Law and Baptism is the initiating Rite under the Gospel to which I answer if this should be granted yet it did not initiate any but Male Children the Females were initiated without it and by the same Parity of Reason as Dr. Taylor observes no Female Infant should be baptized because none but Males were Circumcised If they say there is another Parity viz. none were to eat the Passover but those who were Circumcised so none are to partake of the Lord's Supper but such who are first baptized we are all baptized into one Body yet I must tell them all those who are Circumcised had a Right to eat the Passover and why do they not then follow the Paralell and give their Children the Lord's Supper as indeed the First Ancient Fathers did in the declining State of the Church for many Years they gave Children the Lord's Supper abusing that Text in the case of Baptism Joh. 3. 5. Unless a Man be Born again of Water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven They taking Water there to be meant of Baptismal Water and thought Baptism did regenerate the Children and wash away Original Sin and accordingly they abused and mistook that Text in Joh. 6. 53. Unless ye eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood ye have no life in you and from hence 't was they gave Infants the Lord's Supper thinking as the Papists do that our Saviour intended the Sacrament of the Supper I needed not have repeated these Things and that which follows but that Mr. Roth-well of Sussex in his late Treatise still insists on this Argument you have the same in my Answer to Mr. Burket To this I might add a word or two of a Reverend and Learned Person of our Perswasion in this Matter They suppose Baptism came in or succeeded in the place or room of Circumcision which may saith he be understood many ways as First That those Persons may be Baptized that were heretofore Circumcised by God's Appointment And in this sence the Argument must proceed if it conclude to the purpose but in this sence it is false for Females were not Circumcised which yet were Baptized Act. 8. 12 13 14. and chap. 16. 14 15. and Believers out of Abraham's House as Lot Melchisedec Job were not to be Circumcised but believing Gentiles are universally to be Baptized 2. Saith he It may be understood as if the Rite of Baptism then began when the Rite of Circumcision did or was to end but this is not to be said neither for John Baptist and Christ's Disciples Baptized before Circumcision of Right ceased Joh. 4. 1. 2. 3. He Answers That of Baptism succeeding in the Place of Circumcision in Signification which as we have shewed in several Respects it doth not But Secondly as I said if there were such a Parity or Paralell between Circumcision and Baptism as they intimate yet it would not do their Business but thus to argue as the said learned Writer observes may be very pernitious For saith he indeed if this Argument be not warily and restrainedly understood an Egg is laid out of which manifest Judaism may be hatched but if it be taken restrainedly it no more follows thence but Baptism and Circumcision in some things hold forth the same which is more plainly said of Noah's Ark 1. Pet. 3. 22. and the Red Sea and Cloud 1. Cor. 10. 4. and yet we do not say Baptism succeeded into their Place much less do we inferr any Rite to be instituted in their Stead respecting the same Person yea verily it is to be seriously thought on 1. That by such Arguments drawn from Analogies not conceived by the Holy Ghost but drawn out of our Wit a new kind of instituting R●tes to wit from Analogies are brought in besides our Lord's Precepts and the Apostles Examples 2. This being once said by a like Parity of Reason and Arguing it will be lawful to bring into the Church under other Names and Forms the whole Burthen of Jewish Rites yea almost out of what you will to conclude what you will for Who shall put a Bound to Men's feigning Analogies when they go beyond the Lord's Precepts and the Apostles Examples It is well known That the Divine Appointment of Tythes to be paid and many other Things in the Writings of Divines are asserted by this kind of Argument besides the Rule of Christ's Precepts and his Apostles Examples 3. Hereby will the Opinion of the Papists be confirmed who affirm from 1. Cor. 10. 11. the Sacraments of the Jews to be Types of the Sacraments of Christians which is rejected by Divines that dispute against Bellarmine 4. This manner of Arguing will countenance the Arguments of the Papists for an universal Bishop because the Jews had a High-Priest and Justifie a Linnen Garment at Mass because there was such among the Jews and for Holy-Water Purification of Women Easter Penticoast and many more such Ceremonies for which the Papists do in like manner argue as appears out of Durandus's Rationals and other Interpreters Yea What hinders but we may give Children the Lord's-Supper if we argue this way since Samuel Jesus Christ under Age were partakers of the Passover And of Right all Males were thrice in the year to appear before the Lord and therefore it is certain they did eat the Passover c. Least any should take this for a light Suggestion I will add That grave godly and learned Men have often warned That we are to take heed that we do not rashly frame Arguments from Analogies Among others in their Learned Writings in English John Pagit in his Defence of Church-Government Part 1. Chap. 3. Pag. 8. and else-where John Ball in his Reply to The Answer of the New-England Elders Nine Positions Posit 2. p. 14. Lastly saith he It is to be considered again and again how by these Argumentations the Consciences of Men may be freed from the Danger of Will-Worship and polluting so Remarkable an Ordinance of Christ as Baptism is especially this Care lies on them who by Prayers Sermons Writings Covenants and Oaths do deter Christians from humane Invention in God's Worship diligently and 't is to be hoped Sincerely thus far this Reverend Divine I now might proceed to Answer divers others Objections as First Circumcision was a Type of Baptism 2. Infants were once in Covenant and never cast out 3. Circumcision was part of the Ceremonial Law which was Dedicated by Blood therefore no part of the Covenant of Works or Old Covenant 4. In Circumcision God gave himself to Abraham to be his God and the God of his Seed 5. Circumcision was the Seal of the Righteousness of Faith 6. Circumcision was an Everlasting Covenant 7. There is but one Covenant of Works and that was made with Adam 8. Paul Circumcised Timothy therefore Circumcision could not in it self oblige to the keeping of the whole Law 9 The Root is Holy therefore the Branches 10. The Privileges of the Gospel are restrained and narrower then the Privileges of the Law if Children are excluded 11. The denying Infant Baptism hinders the Progress of the Christian Religion Mr. Rothwell p. 2. FINIS The SECOND PART is in the Press

to require a Condition of a Covenant of one that we know hath no Strength to perform it If a Rich Man should offer an Estate of 1000 l. a Year to a poor Man that he knew was not worth a Groat provided he fetched him 20 l. of his own Money this Act would be reckoned a mocking and ridiculing this poor Wretch God did not require that small Condition of Adam but that he actually had strength to perform it you will say God will give him ability to perform So he did to Adam previous to the Covenant c. See his farther Answer p. 130. God will in due time bring down and abase the Pride of Man O what a Doctrine do some Men preach 't is time indeed now to lay aside our lesser Differences and make Head against such capital Errors The Foundation seems now to be struck at Reader since I preached these Sermons I met with Reverend Mr. Cotton on the Covenant who confirms the same thing concerning the Ax being laid to the Root of the Trees Speaking of that Text Mal. 4. 1. The Day cometh that shall leave them neither Root nor Branch There are two Things in the Root saith he 1st The First is the Root of Abraham 's Covenant which this People much trusted upon and that is it of which John the Baptist speaks Now is the Ax is laid to the Root of the Trees c. This is spoken in Mat. 3. 9. after he had said Think not to say within your selves we have Abraham to our Father ver 8. So that all their Confidence they had in Abraham 's Covenant Temple and Tabernacle and such Things is burnt up and so they have no Root left them to stand upon But 2dly There is something more in it for with this Spirit of burning the Lord by the Power of this Spirit doth cut us off from any Power of our own natural or spiritual Gifts whereby we thought to lay hold on Jesus Christ and we are cut off hereby from all Confidence that we have in our own sufficiency c. For there is an usual Confidence that we have in our own state tho' the Lord hath cut us off from the righteousness of our Parents and from boasting of his Ordinance yet we think there is some Power left in us Cotton 's Treaty of the Cov. p. 177 178. Again he saith It is spoken of the Ministry of John the Baptist which did burn as an Oven and left them neither the Root of Abraham 's Covenant nor the Branches of their own good Works He cutteth them off from the Covenant of Abraham and so by cutting them off from the Root he leaveth them no ground to trust to Pag. 21 22. I hope if this Text be well considered and our Arguments in the ensuing Treatise no wise and impartial Person will find there is any ground for Men to plead for Infant Baptism from the Covenant God made with Abraham I shall say no more but leave what I have said to the Blessing of the God of Truth who is coming forth to shake all false Foundations and States yea both Heaven and Earth that that which cannot be shaken may remain and rest thy Servant in the work of the Gospel From my House near Horsly-down Southwark this 6th of March 1693. BENJAMIN KEACH Reader My Answer to Mr. Flavel and Mr. Rothwell I find will not come into the first Part but the Second is going to the Press where you will have it THE Ax laid to the Root c. OR One BLOW more at the Foundation of Infant Baptism and Church-Membership MAT. III. 10. And now also the Ax is laid to the Root of the Trees every Tree therefore that bringeth not forth good Fruit is hewn down and cast into the Fire THIS Text is metaphorical there is no great difference between a Metaphor and an express Similitude and for the better understanding the Mind of God therein I shall 1. Open the Scope and Coherence thereof 2. Explain the Parts and Terms therein contained 3. I shall observe some Points of Doctrine reducable there-from 4. Shall improve the Whole by way of Application First From the Scope and Coherence of the Place 't is evident that John Baptist endeavours to take off the Jews particularly the Pharisees and Sadduces from the external and legal Covenant God made with Abraham and his Fleshly-seed or Off-spring See vers 7. But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadduces come to his Baptism he said unto them O generation of Vipers who hath warned you to flee from the Wrath to come Historians tell us That there were Three more eminent Religious Sects amongst the Jews the First were called Essenes of whom we do not read in the Holy Scripture their main Doctrine was Fate they say our Annotators ascribed all Things to it Secondly The Sadduces were directly opposite to the Essenes they ascribed nothing to Fate but asserted the Liberty and Power of Man's Will in the most largest Sence or in the extravagant Height they denied the Immortality of the Soul of Man the Resurrection Angels c. All which the Pharisees owned See Act. 23. 8. The Pharisees were outwardly a very Zealous sort of People and tho' they were tainted with that false Opinion of the Freedom of Man's Will to do Good yet they ascribed much to the Providence and Grace of God they were Interpreters of the Law and separated themselves from others they spent much time in Fasting and Prayer 1. They held nevertheless a Righteousness by the Works of the Law by which they thought they were justified and accepted of God and so stumbled at the Stumbling-Stone Rom. 9. 32. 2. They gave a very corrupt Interpretation of the Law 3. They held many un-written Traditions of equal force with the Law of God by which means they made void the Commandments of God 4. They were a mere Hypocritical sort of Men in their Practices being very strict and zealous for the smaller Matters of the Law and neglected the weightier Things thereof Whether these Pharisees and Sadduces came with an intention to be Baptized or only out of Curiosity is hard to be resolved since 't is said They rejected the Counsel of God against themselves being not Baptized by John John however sharply treates them both calling them a Generation of Vipers a sort of Serpents of whom 't is said they make way into the World through the Bowels of their Dam. It may be upon this Account he gave them that Name or so called them who thought through the Bowels as I may so say of their Ancestors or being the Seed of Abraham or the Off-spring of Godly Progenitours to come to Heaven who hath warned you to flee from the Wrath to come What is the Reason that you come to my Baptism Whereas some of you think there is no Resurrection no Heaven no Hell no Angels nor no Spirits or you who think you are so Righteous as you need no Repentance

wickedly Christ 't is true dyed for Sinners but you have no True Faith in him he dyed to save Sinners from their Sins and that they might live to him See my Text now the Ax is laid to the Root of the Trees if you believe not on Christ if you are not made new Creatures 1 Cor. 5. 17. the Ax will cut you down and that with Vengeance and Wrath will at last cast you into the Fire you must learn to know the way of Salvation and how the Mercy of God shines forth in a Mediator Christ hath satisfied his Justice and by him you must come to God out of Christ he is a consuming fire Abused Mercy O Sinner will be turned at last into Fury except you obtain an Interest in Jesus Christ you are undone for the Wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men Rom. 1. 3. Or are you Self-righteous Persons Do you build on your own Righteousness like the Jews and hypocritical Pharises you may be think your States Good because you are not Swearers Drunkards c. may be you read pray and hear Sermons and give to the Poor and do much good but if you build your Hopes of Heaven on these Things down this Ax will cut you also Except your Righteousness exceed the Righteousness of the Scribes and Pharises you shall in no wise enter into the Kingdom of Heaven Matth. 5. 20. nay you must be found in the Righteousness of Christ all ours is but dung Phil. 3. 8 9. you must in a word bring forth good fruit every Soul of you or perish and this you cannot do till your Hearts are changed and so you become good Trees make the tree good and then the fruit will be good an evil Tree cannot bring forth good fruit c. all Works of unregenerate Persons yea their Religious Duties are but dead Works not good fruits nor can they bring forth good Fruits unless they are planted by Faith into Jesus Christ nay I must tell you that Gospel-Holiness will not save us it must be the Righteousness of God by Faith Sermon II. MAT. III. 10. And now also the Ax is laid to the Root of the Trees every Tree therefore that bringeth not forth good Fruit is hewn down and cast into the Fire THE Proposition I am to prosecute you may remember is this considering the Context viz. Now the dispensation is changed to be of the natural root or the Seed of Abraham according to the flesh is no ground for Church Membership or no Argument to be admitted into the Gospel Church or to Gospel Baptism You say you have Abraham to your Father or you are the Children of Believers or you have believing Parents Well but what of this as if John should say this will do you no good now this will stand you now in no steed this will give you no Right to Gospel Ordinances nor particularly to Gospel Baptism ' tho' it did to Circumcision and Legal Ordinances and Jewish Church Membership For Hager and her Son are cast out that are the Old Covenant and the Fleshly Seed this old Root and Right now in Gospel Days is struck at The Ax is laid to the Roots of the Trees i. e. To your old standing on the Old Covenant Root as you are the lineal Seed of Abraham The time is come now that the Old Covenant and Covenant Seed are to be rooted up the old House and Constitution pulled down God is now about to build a new Temple and a more spiritual House a spiritual Temple of living Stones and rather then he will want Materials he can of these Stones raise up Children unto believing Abraham and so make good the Covenant of Grace or Gospel Covenant made with him Now you must be united to a living Foundation i. e. Believe in Christ whose way I am come to prepare and make ready fit Matter for this new Building namely the Gospel Church which is not to be by natural descent from Abraham as such but only those who have the Faith of Abraham yea that Faith he had not in Circumcision but in Uncircumcision or before he was Circumcised You must grow out of a spiritual Root i. e. Be Married to Christ your first Husband i. e. The Law or Old Covenant is Just at the point of Death that so ye may bring forth Fruit to God Rom. 7. 4. But to proceed I shall prove this Proposition viz. That the Dispensation is now changed to be of that natural Root or National Church of the Jews or the Seed of Abraham according to the Flesh is no ground for Church Membership no argument for admittance into the Gospel Church or to Gospel Baptism 1. Because 't is positively said that there is a change of the whole Law i. e. The Levitical Priesthood legal Ordinance legal Church and legal Church Membership are changed and gone that so the betterCovenant and more spiritual Church and Church Membership might be established For the Priesthood being changed there is made of necessity a change also of the Law Heb. 7. 12. 'T is so changed as 't is abolished to make way for this as the late Annotators observe the mutation of the Priesthood indispensably requireth the change of the legal Covenant which hereafter I shall prove was not the Covenant of Grace but is directly called the Old Covenant the Covenant of Grace is but one and that never changeth This was made necessary by the Decree of God as they note who determined that both the Priesthood and Law should expire together like say I as an old Will or Testament doth when the Testator hath made and confirmed his Last Will and Testament When Christ the Gospel High-Priest had saith our Annotations in his own Person and Work perfected all of it in Heaven he roots out that Order of Priesthood and demolished the Temple and City to which he confined the Administration and scatters the People which would cleave to it so as all Designs and Endeavours of Jews or of Apostate Christian to repair or restore it hath been ineffectual to this Day What can be more clear Sirs then this that the Old House or Right of Church-Membership is overturned at the very Root for If the Covenant for Incovenanting the Fleshly Seed is changed or abolished and no new Law or new Precept is given forth for the bringing them in again What Ground is there left for any wise seeing and faithful Man to Plead for Infants Church-Membership but it is evident the former is true i. e. that Covenant by virtue of which they had Right to Circumcision and Church Membership or out of which Root that sprang is gone changed and abolished for ever and no new Law or Precept is given forth for the bringing them into the Gospel-Church as such To this Text let me add another which farther confirms it 2. For if that first Covenant had been faultless then should no place have been sought for

Off-spring but to his fleshly Seed as such as well as they upon that Condition they kept the Covenant of Circumcision and conformed themselves to the Law God gave them which they were obliged to do by the Covenant of Circumcision as I shewed before Secondly I shall now shew you what those Promises were that respect the Covenant of Grace made with Abraham and his true spiritual Seed as such 1. I have made thee a Father of many Nations meaning Gentile Belie 〈…〉 2. In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed Gen. 12. 3. Observe here what the Apostle speaks And the Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the Heathen through faith preached the Gospel to Abraham saying In thee shall all nations of the earth be blessed Gal. 3. 8. Nay and 't is for ever to be noted That the Holy Apostle endeavours to do the very same thing in Gal. 3. 16. which I am now about viz. To prove That the Covenant of Grace was not made with Abraham's fleshly Seed as such read the Text Now to Abraham and to his seed was the promise made he saith not to seeds as of many meaning his fleshly Seed as such but to thy seed which is Christ. And then in vers 29. he concludes And if ye be Christ's then are you Abraham's seed and heirs according to the Promise You must not reckon from Abraham but from Christ He must be blind that can't discern from hence that there were Two Covenants made with Abraham Compare these Texts with that in Rom. 9. 6 7 8. Obj. But the Jews might object they not seeing nor understanding this Twofold Covenant if we are rejected of God and rooted out God is unfaithfull and his Promise made of none Effect to Abraham and 't is his seed 1. Answ. The Apostle Answers They are not all Israel which are of Israel vers 6. 2. Neither because they are the seed of Abraham are they all Children ver 7. That is though they be all the Seed of Abraham according to the Flesh yet they are not all his spiritual Seed according to that Covenant of Grace made with Abraham all the true spiritual Seed are the Children of God as Isaac was being begotten and brought forth as the product of Almighty Power as fruit of God's Free Promise I will come and Sarah shall have a Son see the Apostle's further answer That is they which are born after the Flesh these are not the Children of God but the Children of the Promise are counted for the Seed vers 8. Martin Luther confirms the same great Truth we contend for Paul therefore concludeth with this Sentence saith he that they that 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 Abraham who is the Servant of God whom God hath chosen and made Righteous by Faith through 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 not the begetting Abraham which is nothing else but a Man conceived and 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 Luther on Gal. 3. p. 115. Thus Mr. Perkins speaks also 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 these are given to Abraham by Promise and Election of God moreover the Seed is not many as Paul observeth but one It is Objected That the Word Seed is a Name Co-elective and signifies the whole Posterity of Abraham Answ. It doth sometimes saith he but not always for Eve saith of Seth God hath given me another Seed Again he saith this one particular Seed of Abraham is Christ Jesus here the Name Christ first and principally the Mediator and then Secondly all Jews and Gentiles believing that are fit and grafted into Christ by Faith St. Paul saith The Children of the Flesh those are not the Children of God but the Children of the Promise are the Seed of Abraham Thus Mr. Perkins 2. Now nothing is more evident then that by the Promise is meant the Covenant of Grace the Children of the Promise made with Abraham are Children of the New Covenant and so generally owned by all our True Protestant Writers and this Promise or Covenant we find was only made with Abraham's spiritual Seed as these Two famous Writers and many more positively affirm 3. Yet also it is plain there was a Covenant made with Abraham's natural Seed and that they were taken into an external national Church State and Covenant relation with God and had divers peculiar Immunities and Privileges granted to them as so considered all which fully evinces that there was a Two-fold Covenant made with Abraham Certainly none can suppose but that their Church State and Legal Rights were Covenant Blessings and that they begun in Abraham and that too by those Covenant Transactings God made him is so clear that nothing need to be said more unto it and I cannot but wonder that our eminent Writers should confound and jumble these Two Covenants together as indeed I find generally they do Obj. But some will still Object that tho' this which I have said be granted i. e. That there were Two Covenants made with Abraham yet say they Circumcision was a Gospel Covenant or did appertain to the Covenant of Grace Answ. I answer and positively affirm That the Covenant of Circumcision was part of that legal old and external Covenant which is done away And this in the next place I shall fully prove 1. Because the Law or Covenant of Circumcision was it appears made in the Design and End of it to separate the natural Seed of Abraham in their National Church standing from all other Nations of the World and to give them the Land of Canaan and to keep themselves Pure from mixing among the Pople from whom Christ according to the Flesh was to come And hence it was that they were not to mingle themselves with the Heathens nor suffer any to join themselves to them unless first Circumcised Will any say that the Covenant of Grace or Gospel Covenant in the Design of it

Old Covenant and the Curse thereof compare this with Gal. 5. 3. For I testifie to every man among you that is circumcised that he is a debtor to do the whole law Not as a late Writer says in his Opinion or in his intention that was Circumcised that he was such a Debtor for it may be justly doubted Whether they so thought or not nay by the Apostle's Words it seems otherwise i. e. They did not think any such thing tho' they might seek to be justified by the Law and Circumcision yet not that they thought themselves obliged to keep the whole Law perfectly but they who were Circumcised were verily obliged by Circumcision to do the whole Law when Circumcision was in Force Whatsoever Mr. John Flavel hath said in his late Book to the contrary notwithstanding in Answer to Mr. Cary And indeed the Annotators agree with us herein thus I find they express themselves Object But did not the Fathers then by being Circumcised acknowledge themselves Debtors to the Law Answ. Yes they did acknowledge themselves bound to the observation of the Law and to endure upon the breaking of it the Curse of it but they were discharged from this Obligation by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ who was made a Curse for them Arg. 10. The Covenant of Circumcision could not belong to the Gospel Covenant because 't is called in express terms a Yoke of Bondage Act. 15. 10. Gal. 5. 1 2. Now therefore why tempt ye God to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear I wonder any should call Circumcision a Privilege the Yoke was Circumcision which those false Teachers would have put on Men who were Believers among the Gentiles see vers 1. If the Jews had any Profit Advantage or Privilege by it it was chiefly because unto them were committed the Oracles of God or Ten Commandments not chiefly because unto them was given the Covenant of Grace for had it been a Gospel Covenant or a Rite thereof as our mistaken Opposers affirm he would have said so see his Words What advantage then hath the Jew and what profit is there in Circumcision Rom. 3. 1. Much every way but chiefly because unto them were committed the oracles of God ver 2. It did not seal to them the Covenant of Grace nor assure them of the Blessings thereof for so a Seal doth all the Blessings and Privileges of that Covenant to which it is prefix'd but the direct contrary i. e. it assur'd them That they should have the Law given to them the Oracles of God i. e. The Sinai Covenant which Law shewed them what a kind of Righteousness it was God did require of all Men that would be justified in God's sight it was not given to them to give Life or Righteousness but to shew the exceeding sinfulness of Sin and to regulate their Lives to put a curb upon their Lusts so hateful to God as also to discover unto them that nothing short of a perfect and compleat Righteousness could justifie the Creature in the sight of God and so the Law through the weakness of the Flesh lay'd all Men under Death and Condemnation exacting hard Service but gave no Strength to perform its Demands it killed but could not give Life And therefore as it was a Covenant of Works do this and live or the man that doth these things shall live in them which Christ abolished it by the Blood of his Cross. And since it appears by what the Apostle says That Circumcision obliged while it was in Force to do all the whole Law which he that did not so do was Cursed by it 't is evident that instead of its being a Covenant of Grace or the Seal thereof it rather sealed the Curses of the Law upon them for their Disobedience and therefore such a yoke of Bondage which they nor their Fathers were able to bear Circumcision it appears then was an Earnest to Abraham's natural Seed of the Sinai Covenant which Law was 't is evident comprehended as a Covenant of Works in Circumcision and so Circumcision was a Part or Branch of it God then and at that time taking his natural Seed into an external Covenant Relation with himself was thereby in his Wisdom obliged to give the said Law in Tables of Stone to them for the Reasons Use and End befo●e mentioned and as 't is by our Apostle frequently in his Epistles hinted the Apostle as a Learned Writer observes doth not here begin a Discourse nor to the number of Privileges and Advantages for he names but one in all but to the quality of this Privilege viz. That it was not an Evangelical or Gospel Privilege but only a Legal or Old Covenant Rite and Privilege this is the Chief of all the Advantages the Jews had by Circumcision i. e. there having thereby an assurance that the Law of God on Mount Sinai should be given to them So much as to the Proof and Demonstration That Circumcision was no Gospel-Precept or Covenant Obj. But perhaps some may Object If Infants as such were not included in the Covenant of Grace God made with Abraham how can dying Infants be saved 1. Answ. I Answer Must Infants of Believers be comprehended in that Covenant God made with Abraham or else Cannot any dying Infants be saved How then were any dying Infants saved before Abraham's Days or before that Covenant was made with him 2. I never said no Infants were included in the Covenant of Grace God made with Abraham but not as such No doubt all Elect Persons both Infants and the Adult were included in the Covenant of Grace and had or shall have the Blessings of Christ's Blood and Merits but the Covenant of Grace may be considered Two manner of ways or under a Two-fold Consideration 1st The inward invisible Blessings Grace and Privileges of it 2d The visible and outward Administration or Privileges thereof 1. Now who they be that are comprehended or included in the inward and invisible Blessings Grace and Privileges of it are only known to God not to us But the Gospel or Covenant of Grace as to the outward Administration and Privileges thereof only belong to such who know the Lord or profess Faith in Jesus Christ and therefore all that have a Right to Baptism and Gospel Church Membership must first be made Disciples by being taught by the Word and Spirit of God and so truly believe in the Lord Jesus Christ according to the great Commission of our Saviour Mat. 28. 19 20. and the Practice of Christ himself Joh. 4. 1 2. and of his Apostles Act. 2. 37. Act. 8. 14 c. Act. 10. and Act. 16 c. God hath many ways as Dr. Taylor observes to save dying Infants which we know not he can apply the benefit and merits of Christ's Blood to them in ways we are wholly Ignorant of and ought not to trouble our Selves with it Secret Things belong to God