Transgression and Sin That Covenant can never be a Covenant of Grace but of Works But the Legal Covenant is plainly in Scripture opposed unto the Gospel Covenant in all these Respects Heb. 12. from the 18th to the 24th Gal. 3. 10 11 12 13 14. Gal. 4. 21 c. Therefore the Legal Covenant could not possibly be a Covenant of Grace but of Works § So that notwithstanding all the most plausible Arguments which are usually urged by way of opposition to what we have now Asserted unless we must shut our Eyes there can be nothing more plain than this That the Law given by Moses to the Seed of Abraham at Mount Sinai instead of being a Covenant of Faith in Christ Jesus or a Covenant of Gospel Grace as many Divines famous for Learning and Piety do confidently affirm it is was no other than a Covenant of Works and that which is therefore now done away 2 Cor. 3. 7 8 9 11. Col. 2. 14. Heb. 8. 7 13. From whence it plainly and undeniably follows that the Covenant of Circumcision mentioned Gen. 17. 7 8 9 10. which God there promised to Establish betwixt Himself Abraham and his Seed after him in their Generations being the same thing and of the same nature as hath been already proved is therefore now also Repealed and done away therewith Acts 15. 10. Gal. 5. 3 4 5. Col. 2. 14. And consequently all the Arguments thence deduced howsoever or by whomsoever formed for the support of Infants Baptism do of themselves vanish THE FIFTH PART Containing a Description of that truly Evangelical Covenant God was pleased to make with Believing Abraham Wherein lies the Sum of the Everlasting Gospel then Preached unto him since Proclaimed by the Apostles and which now remains to be yet further Published unto all Nations for the Obedience of Faith Rom. 16. 25 26. Rev. 14. 6 7 Wherein the true Nature and Difference betwixt the two Covenants that of Works and that of Grace is further Explained Rev. 11. 19. And the Temple of God was opened in Heaven and there was seen in his Temple the Ark of his Testament and there were Lightnings and Voices and Thundrings and an Earth-quake and Great Hail SECT I. § 1. BUT though the Covenant of Circumcision which God was pleased to make with Abraham Gen. 17. 7 8 9 10. was no other than a Covenant of Works as the Covenant at Sinai was and are both therefore now done away yet as we have already declared it is evident and undeniable that God was also pleased to enter into a Covenant of Grace with Believing Abraham even such a Covenant as was purely Evengelical and that which never shall be abolished And it is also as evident that this Gospel Covenant had been Established and Preached unto Abraham long before the Covenant of Circumcision was made with him For both Abraham and all true Believers in that Age were in the Covenant of Grace long before the Covenant of Circumcision was made and would have been so if that had never been which Covenant of Grace or Gospel Covenant which God was thus pleased to make with Believing Abraham is indeed the great Charter by which the Believing Gentiles always did and do claim Heaven and Earth and all the Promises they have title to For in this respect it is that the Apostle tells us as he doth Gal. 3. 8. That the Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the Heathen through Faith preached before the Gospel unto Abraham saying in thee shall all Nations be Blessed Which he quoteth not from Gen. 17. 7 8. but from Gen. 12. 2 3. Where before Abraham's removal out of his own Country and therefore long before the Covenant of Circumcision was in being God enters into a solemn Covenant with Abraham saying I will make of thee a great Nation and I will bless thee and make thy Name great and thou shalt be a Blessing And I will Bless them that Bless thee and Curse him that Curseth thee and in thee shall all the Families of the Earth be blessed § 2. If we are to seek therefore of the Covenant of Grace that God made with Abraham which is the Great Charter of the Gentiles hope behold and see lo here it is a Covenant of Grace indeed A Covenant truly Evangelical as being every way Extensive Full Free Absolute and without those Conditions that the Covenant of Circumcision was manifestly clogged withal And therefore called the Covenant of Promise in the forementioned 3d of the Galatians for having told us vers 8. of the Promise that God had made unto Abraham that in Him should all Nations be Blessed And having also told us vers 14. 16. that the blessing of Abraham was to come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ that we might receive the Promise of the Spirit through Faith He adds vers 17 18. And this I say that the Covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ the Law which was 430 years after cannot disanul that it should make the Promise of none Effect For if the Inheritance be of the Law it is no more of Promise but God gave it to Abraham by Promise Which clearly argues the Absoluteness of this Gospel Covenant For if it had not been Free and Absolute but Conditional as the Covenant of Circumcision was and as the Legal Covenant at Mount Sinai was then according to the Scope of the Apostles Reasoning it had not properly been a Covenant of Promise but a Legal Covenant and so the Inheritance had been of the Law For wherein differs the Law from a free Promise but that the one is Conditional the other Absolute The one promiseth Life upon condition of Obedience the other without Mony and without Price Isa 55. 1. And therefore the Covenant which God made with the Israelites at Mount Sinai though it had many Glorious Promises in it that God would be their God and they should be his peculiar People and Treasure c. Yet these Promises being clogged with Conditions of Obedience impossible to be performed That Covenant therefore is never presented to us in the Scripture under the Notion or Denomination of a Covenant of Promise but under the Denomination of the Law or as a Covenant of Works only For Moses saith the Apostle describeth the Righteousness of the Law that the man that doth these things shall live by them Rom. 10. 5 And so likewise Gal. 3. 10. As many as are of the Works of the Law are under the Curse For it is written Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the Book of the Law to do them And vers 12. The Law is not of Faith but the man that doth them shall live in them And for the same Reason therefore is the Covenant of Circumcision represented to us also under the same Denomination of the Law Rom. 4. 13. as shall be afterward shewn because though it is true it had Promises in it that were
and only Firm Deed of Gift by which the Believing Gentiles always did and do claim Heaven and Earth and all the Promises they have Title to § 5. Besides that the Promise that Abraham should be the Heir of the World cannot be understood of an Earthly Inheritance but the call of the Gentiles and consequently hath reference to his Universal Fatherhood to all sorts of true Believers whatsoever whether Jews or Gentiles is yet further evident from what the same Apostle tells us Rom. 1◠11 12 13. Have they stumbled saith he speaking of the Jews that they should fall God forbid But rather through their fall Salvation is come unto the Gentiles Now if the Fall of them be the Riches of the World and the Diminishing of them the Riches of the Gentiles How much more their Fulness And so likewise vers 15. If the Casting away of them be the Reconciling of the World what shall the Receiving of them be but Life from the Dead Where the same expression is made use of in reference to the Call of the Gentiles as had been before made use of Chap. 4. 13. concerning Abraham's Heirship For as Abraham by Promise was to be the Heir of the World so the Call of the Gentiles is here said to be the Riches of the World The same expression we have likewise in reference to Christ 1 John 2. 2. And he is the Propitiation for our sins and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole World Not for ours only that is not only for us Jews but for the sins of the whole World that is both Jews and Gentiles because the Partition Wall between Jew and Gentile was now broken down In the same sense therefore that Christ is here said to be the Propitiation for the sins of the whole World In the same sense is Abraham said to be the Heir of the whole World that is he was constituted or appointed to be an Universal Father unto all them that Believe not only Jews but Gentiles also And indeed as the Blessing of Abraham is hereby said to come upon the Gentiles through Jesus Christ Gal. 3. 14. So had it not been for this Gospel Promise the poor Gentiles had still remained without hope of Relief or ground of Comfort strangers to the Covenants of Promise and without God in the World there being no ground of Relief or hope of Comfort at all afforded unto them from the Covenant of Circumcision § 6. And in this respect therefore whereas the Apostle tells us in the forementioned Rom. 4. 13. That the Promise that Abraham should be the Heir of the World was not to him or to his Seed through the Law but through the Righteousness of Faith It is yet further observeble that the Law he here speaks of and which he doth so manifestly contradistinguish or oppose unto the Righteousness of Faith cannot be understood concerning the Law given by Moses to that People in the Wilderness 400 years after Abraham's time though it was of the same nature But it must of necessity be understood concerning the Law or Covenant of Circumcision which God made with Abraham himself and his Natural Posterity which was extant in his own time And that this is the Law which the Apostle here intends will evidently appear if we duly attend unto the scope of the Apostie in the foregoing part of this fourth to the Romans which was to shew that Abraham himself was not justified by Works no not by his Circumcision but by Faith which he had long before he was Circumcised For thus he begins vers 1. 2. What shall we say then that Abraham our Father as pertaining to the Flesh hath found For if Abraham were justified by Works he hath whereof to glory but not before God For what saith the Scripture Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for Righteousness So then Abraham was not justified by Works before God but by Faith alone But how doth that appear Why thus it appears vers 9. 10. Because Faith was not reckoned to him for Righteousness when he was in Circumcision but in Vncircumcision And so vers 11 12. He received saith he the Sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of the Faith which he had yet being Vncircumcised that he might be the Father of all them that believe c. For saith he vers 13. the Promise that he should be the Heir of the World or as he had said just before that he should be the Father of all them that believe was not to Abraham or to his Seed through the Law which must needs therefore be understood of the Law of Circumcision but through the Righteousness of Faith From whence as it hath been already made evident the Promise he here speaks of was not derived unto Abraham or to his Seed through the Covenant of Circumcision there being no such Promise at all to be found in that Covenant So it is as manifest that the Covenant of Circumcision was not a Covenant of Faith since it is here so plainly contradistinguished or opposed thereunto SECT V. ANd therefore whereas the Apostle tells us of Abraham in the formentioned Rom. 4. 11. That he received the Sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of the Faith which he had yet being Vncircumcised From thence to infer that the Covenant of Circumcision was a Covenant of Faith would be point blank to contradict the whole scope and design of the Apostle in the foregoing passages of that Chapter which as hath been alredy shewn as it was in general to prove that Abraham was not justified by Works but by Faith only vers 2. 3 4 5. So in particular to assure us that Faith was not reckoned to him for Righteousness when he was in Circumcision but in Vncircumcision vers 9 10. And what more convincing Testimony or Evidence can we desire that the Covenant of Circumcision was not a Covenant of Faith The Sign of Circumcision was indeed a Seal unto Abraham of the Faith which he had in respect of the Promises made him yet being Vncircumcised But it doth not therefore follow that the Promises Gen. 17. 7 8 9. that God would be a God unto him and his Seed after him in their Generations c. upon Condition that he and his were Circumcised were any part of the Covenant of Faith For otherwise the Apostle would never have told us as he doth that Faith was not reckoned to him for Righteousness when he was in Circumcision but in Vncircumcision The Argument hence resulting therefore is Irresistable That Covenant in which Faith was not reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness could never be a Covenant of Faith But the Scripture is express that Faith was not reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness when he was in Circumcision but in Vncircumcision therefore the Covenant of Circumcision could never be a Covenant of Faith Besides it is evident that long before his Circumcision God had promised Abraham to bless
Infants in the Days of the Gospel many of them are in the Covenant of Grace and so Saved by Virtue of the Free Promise But yet not to be Baptized if they do not Live to the time of Believing and Repenting the only time appointed for Baptism So that the Administration of Ordinances to Infants depends upon the Law of Institution only and not upon their being in Covenant Fourthly In this respect therefore it ought to be duly considered as hath been before Observed That the Covenant of Grace or the Gospel Covenant which Believers are now under whereof Christ is the alone and only Mediator was not made with Believers and their Seed but with Abraham and his Seed that is Christ For so the Apostle tells us expresly That to Abraham and his Seed were the Promises made He saith not unto Seeds as many but as of one And to thy Seed which is Christ So that all Gospel Promises run to Christ the Inheriting Seed To Him they are made In Him do they all center and from Him alone are all the Blessings in Promise to be derived unto all His Members 'T is true In the Covenant of Circumcision Gen. 27. 7 8 9. which was a Legal Bondage Covenant and therefore now repealed as shall be afterward shewn God doth indeed therein promise to be a GOD to Abraham and his Fleshly Seed and to give them the Land of Canaan for an Inheritance And their Obedience to Circumcision is expresly called the Covenant on their Part. Gen. 17. 10. This is my Covenant which ye shall keep between Me and you and thy Seed after thee Every Man-Child among you shall be Circumcised So Acts 7. 8. And he gave them the Covenant of Circumcision and so Abraham begat Isaac and Circumcised him the Eighth Day By which they stood engaged to keep all those other Additional Ordinances which Moses gave them when they were about to enter their Promised Inheritance Gal. 5 3. For I testifie that whosoever is Circumcised he is a Debtor to do the whole Law But the Covenant of Grace which God shade with Believing Abraham before his departure out of his own Countrey and therefore long before the Covenant of Circumcision was in being runs in another strain For therein as GOD freely Promiseth to Bless Abraham himself so he doth as freely Promise to make him a Blessing For that in him that is in his Seed Christ should all the Families of the Earth be Blessed Gen. 12. 2 3. And this was a Covenant of Grace indeed a Covenant that was purely Evangelical every way Extensive and Absolute and therefore unchangeable For therein God hath freely Promised a Blessing unto all sorts of true Believers whether Jews or Gentiles in giving unto them an Eternal Inheritance Heb. 9. 15. Incorruptible and Vndefiled that fadeth not away Purchased by the Blood of Jesus and reserved in Heaven for them of which the Earthly Inheritance in the Land of Canaan was a Type So that as there was a two-fold Covenant made with Abraham a Covenant of Grace and a Covenant of Works So there is a two-fold Seed of Abraham a Fleshly and a Spiritual Typed out by Ishmael and Isaac and a two-fold Inheritance an Earthly and a Heavenly But the Heavenly Inheritance was not given to the Fleshly Seed but only in Types offered to them and confirmed only to the Spiritual Seed whether Jews or Gentiles who in that respect are called the Heirs of Promise yet not immediately or at first hand rate but through the Mediation of Christ alone in whom all the Families of the Earth are Blessed For as Ishmael the Child of the Flesh had no right with Isaac in the outward Typical Promise so Isaac himself by vertue of his fleshly descent had no right nor interest in the Heavenly Inheritance Rom. 9. 7. any otherwise than as he came to have an Interest in Christ And therefore we find the Apostle expounding the Word of Promise sheweth that the Evangelical Promises made to Abraham were not made to any one Fleshly Seed no not with the meer Fleshly Seed of Believing Abraham himself but these Promises did all run to Christ the Inheriting Seed to whom they were made and when Christ was come they all centre in Him Now to Abraham and his Seed saith the Text were the Promises made He saith not unto Seeds as of many but as of One and to thy Seed which is Christ In whom all the Promises of the Gospel are Tea and Amen Fifthly Having thus followed the Promises down from Abraham unto CHRIST let us now see to whom they come forth again and it is not to any ones Fleshly Seed whatsoever but from Christ they all Flow forth again to Believers and only to Believers and that by vertue of their union with Christ To this purpose the Apostle tells us That if we be CHRIST's then are we Abraham's Seed and Heirs according to the Promise There being no way to partake of the Promise but by Faith in Christ Gal. 3. 22. The Scripture hath concluded all under Sin that the Promise by Faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that Believe So that all the Promises run to Christ and from Him Flow forth again only to Believers not to them and their Natural Off-spring as is Suggested further than they are Believers also in their own Persons For no otherwise was it with the Fleshly Seed of Believing Abraham himself Which being Impartially Consider'd is a full Answer to all Arguments drawn from the Covenant and the the Promises made to Abraham and certainly and unavoidably cuts off Infants Church-member ship in the Days of the Gospel unless you can find a new Institution for it and consequently it leaves no room for Infants Baptism unless it can be proved that all the Infants of Believers are Heirs of Abraham's Faith Believing as he did and that the Promises are theirs not by Application or Analogy but directly and properly and by their own Personal Faith Which the Scriptures do no where Affirm And indeed so to Assert would be not only contradictory to the Scriptures which tell us that we are all Children of Wrath by Nature But to all former and latter Experience Then would Grace be a Birth Priviledge and Regeneration tied to a Natural Generation Then must all the Posterity of Believers be Saved unless that Doctrine be true that Men may fall from Grace Then must we tie up and restrain the Grace of God's Covenant to the Children of Believers only and then what Hope for the Posterity of Vnbelievers Contrary to the Experience of all Ages whilst Grace was extended to the Gentiles who were not the Off-spring of Believers when the Natural Branches the Children of Believing Abraham were cut off Sixthly Whereas you tell us That all those that were Faederati were to be Signati that is all those that were in the Covenant were to have the Seal thereof Gen. 17. 10. And that therefore it naturally follows that
of the Righteousness of the Faith which he had while Uncircumcised that he might be the Father of all them that believe in Uncircumcision to one that never had Faith either before or after his Circumcision nor ever had or should have the Relation of a Father to all Believers as Abraham had In which respect it is equally absurd to say that Circumcision was a Seal unto all its Subjects of the Righteousness of the Faith which they had while Uncircumcised as to affirm that it was the Seal of a Paternal Relation to all Believers unto every one that received it And therefore both these must necessarily be resolved into the particular Circumstances of Abraham the particular Relation he had in the Covenants made with him and not into the Nature of Circumcision considered simply and in it self What Circumcision was directly and in its immediate use is one thing and what it was as subordinate to a better Covenant and Promise that had Precedency to it is another And it is easie to conceive that it was that to the Father of the Faithful in its extraordinary Institution that it could not be to the Children of the Flesh or carnal â—â—ed in its ordinary Use Page 189 190 191. 194. Upon the whole therefore it clearly appears That Circumcision was never appointed by God as a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith or of the Gospel Covenant to the Generality of the Subjects thereof It was indeed a Token of the Covenant then made betwixt God and them but a Seal only to Abraham and that in respect of the Righteousness of the Faith which he had being yet Vncircumcised that he might be the Father of all them that believe which cannot be affirmed of any others And so for Baptism it is indeed called a Figure 1 Pet. 3. 21. But a Sign or Figure proper only for men of Understanding not as Circumcision which was a Sign not improper for Infants because it left a signal Impression upon their Flesh when they came to understand the Reason of it But so cannot Baptism be to any Infant And indeed if Baptism be as you say it is a Seal of being already ingrafted into Christ and consequently into the Church then it is a Seal only to Believers who alone are capable thereof Since it is by Faith that men are in Christ and Christ in them 2 Cor. 13. 5. Rom. 11. 20 29. Eph. 3. 17 And therefore it cannot be any Seal at all to Infants that have no Faith But as it is evident that a Profession of Faith is required of all to be Baptized Mark 16. 16. Act 8. 37. which Infants are uncapable of so it is as evident that though Baptism is indeed a Sign or Figure of Regeneration to the Baptized 1 Pet. 3. 21. yet a Seal it cannot be that being the Work which the Holy Scripture assigns unto the Holy Spirit only Eph. 1. 13. In whom also after ye believed ye were Sealed by that Holy Spirit of Promise And no where is it assigned unto Baptism Besides as the true Seal of the Gospel Covenant is not at all at Man's dispose Jo. 3. 8. as Baptism is if that be it So it is as certain that God never sets his Seal to a Blank Which yet it must of Necessity follow that he doth if Circumcision or Baptism either were appointed by God as Seals of the Gospel Covenant or as Seals of their Interest in the Righteousness of Faith to whom soever they were to be Administred 'T is true both serve to represent Spiritual Things and Mysteries and therefore may be justly enough termed Signs Tokens or Figures But yet in a different Respect as well as also in a different manner For though Circumcision might and did signify the Duty of Regeneration or the Necessity thereof to Infants when they came to Years of Understanding Yet Regeneration in Actual being before their Circumcision could not be signified by it for then they had been all saved as it ought to be in the Baptized at least in Profession Mar. 16. 16. Acts 8. 37. Which is all the Baptizer is to require which cannot be expected of Infants However by the Secret Operation of God the great Work of Regeneration may be wrought in them from which they are not excluded by us though they are from Baptism for want of an Institution And if you say you have as much Reason to look upon Infants of Believers to be Sanctified as we have to esteem grown Christians to be such because our owning of these as such depends upon their own Testimony only in a Verbal Profession which may be Counterfeit We Answer That this is not Cogent forasmuch as we have no Testimony of Infants that they are Regenerate but Visible Profession of grown Per sons being Free and Serious is not only in the Judgment of Charity buâ— also of Ministerial Prudence to be taken for a Sign of Regeneration though it may be in God's Sight Counterfeit which belongs to us to examine Eighthly But then at last you tell us That though it cannot be made out that God hath promised to be a God by Regenerating and Justifying every Believer's Child which cannot be affirmed of all the Natural Posterity of Believing Abraham himself without contradicting Rom. 9. 6 7 8. Yet say you they are in Covenant in Respect of outward Priviledges But this we also deny Nor do the Scriptures any where give any Countenance at all unto such a conceit No Scripture in the whole New Testament doth affirm it neither by their Profession nor any other way as a Nation or by solemn Oath or by having Prophets sent unto them or by any other Revelation of Gods Mind or Promise are Infants said to be now at all in Covenant with God upon this Account And if it could be made out that they have an External being in the Covenant yet that gives them no Interest in the Covenant of Grace by God's Promise to be a God to Abraham's Seed Gen. 17. 7. And therefore that Text is in vain alledged to prove Infants to have an Interest in the Covenant of Evangelical Blessings and so of right to be Sealed with the Seal thereof For your Argument if the terms be distinctly opened is nothing else but this Infants of Believers as their Natural Seed are all in the Gospel Covenant not in the Inward but the Outward that is in the Outward Administration that is Baptism and therefore to be Baptized Which is meer trifling as proving that they are to be Baptized because they are to be Baptized and is but a meer Petitio Principij or a pitiful begging the Question in dispute It hath been frequently demanded by us what plain Scripture can you produce for the Warrant of Infants Baptism But for want of a plain Scripture Proof you are driven to make Use of Consequental Deductions And among the rest you seem to have your Principal Reliance upon those drawn from Gen. 17. 7. deriving your Consequence
Spiritual We say not For it is plain there was no such Inquisition concerning the good or bad qualities the Fruitfulness or Unfruitfulness of the Members of the former Church in 〈◊〉 to Admission thereinto It was enough barely to be of Abraham's Seed or Family to be so esteemed But now saith John the Axe is laid unto the Root of the Trees And they must all be hewn down under the Gospel that have nothing else to pretend unto but that of a Godly Parentage which plainly excludes Infants as well as all other unfruitful Branches from the Gospel Church And to this same purpose is it that he doth further assure them ver 12. That Jesus Christ was now resolved with the Gospel Fan to Purge thoroghly the Floor of the Gospel Church and to gather the Wheat into His Garner Under the Law and before also even in Abrahmam's time the Chaff and the Wheat remained together unsevered but now the Fan must go to Work We read of no such Fanning Work in the former Church state And to what purpose is it else that Christ told the Woman of Samaria as he doth Jo. 4. 23. The Hour cometh and now is when the true Worshippers shall Worship the Father in Spirit and in Truth For the Father seeketh such to Worship Him Which plainly sheweth that God expecteth now greater Purity Exactness and Spirituality in such as were to approach His Presence in the Celebration of Gospel Worship And indeed of this the whole fifth of Mat. is a sufficient and convincing Proof giving clear evidence concerning the refinedness and spirituality of the Gospel Administration above and beyond that of the Law For then saith our Saviour it was thus and thus but I am come to tell you a New Doctrine and do call you up to greater Purity and Strictness § 4. Secondly We Answer That that Holiness which was ascribed unto the whole Body of the Jewish Nation was a Typical Ceremonial Holiness and was no other than was ascribed to the whole Land City Temple Altar and divers other things and is therefore now Abolished For if all things under the Law were but a Figure and Shadow of good things to come then such was the Holiness of the Jewish Nation and People also Now this the Apostle in the 9th and 10th Chapters to the Hebrews proves at large shewing that all things under the Law all the Priviledges of the Old Covenà nt with all the Perquisites Dependancies and Appurtenances thereunto belonging are called by such Names as make them evidently appear to be Typical As First they are called a Figure Heb. 9. 9. Which was a Figure for the time then present So verse 24. For Christ is not Entered into the Holy Place made with Hands which are the Figures of the true Secondly They are called a Pattern Heb. 9. 23. It was necessary that the Pattern of things in the Heavens c. Thirdly They are called a Shadow Heb. 10. 1. For the Law having a Shadow of good things to come and not the very Image of the thing◠c. Now the Holiness of the Jewish Nation being an Appurtenance belonging to the Law or the Old Covenant It was but a Figure Pattern or Shadow of all good things to come and was therefore Typical and is now Abolished And if we will know what the Holiness of the Jewish Nation did serve to Typifie or Represent unto us It is evident that as it Typified the Holiness of Christ himself So of all Abraham's Spiritual Seed who are made Holy by Believing in Christ § 5. The Time of Reformation therefore spoken of in the forementioned Scripture Heb. 9. 8 9 10. being come wherein those Imperfect Gifts and Sacrifices with all those Carnal Ordinances which were for a Season Imposed on the Jewish Nation were to be done away and the Gospel-Church taking place in the Room thereof It cannot rationally be supposed but the one doth far exceed the other at least in Purity and Inward Glory For by how much Christ hath now obtained a more excellent Ministry than that of Moses and by how much also he is the Mediatour of a better Covenant Which is Established upon better Promises as the Apostle affirmes Heb. 8. 6. By so much of necessity must the gospell Church exceed in lustre beauty Refinedness and Spirituality the former Administration SECT VIII THE Second Argument in Mr. Allen's Book remaining to be Answered is this That all Persons and so little Children that were of the Legal Church must needs in one Respect or other have been Persons of a Religious or Spiritual Consideration And this considered saith he I know not upon what better to place the Visible Church-Membership of Infants or to Attribute it to than God's Electing and Calling them to his People and their Parents Dedicating and Devoting them to God and his Service And the Scripture useth to reckon little Children as having begun to do this or that when they are but placed in Circumstances that will bring them to it Actually in the Issue And thus the Children of the Kohathites of a Month Old were numbred with their Fathers as with them keeping the charge of the Sanctuary when they were but in a way of being trained up to it And for the same Reason little Children were said to enter into Covenant with God when their Parents did so Deut. 29. 11 12 § 2. To this we Answer First By granting that it was in a Religious Consideration that Children were then Admitted Members of the Legal Church But yet it doth not therefore follow that they are to be admitted Members of the Gospel-Church for the Reasons before rendered The Terms of Admission into that being far more strict and Spiritual than were those under the Law Secondly Whereas he tells us That the Reason of their Admission into the Legal Church was God's Electing and Calling them to that Priviledge This we also grant But then we also say that though the Call and Election of God in Reference to the Inward Substance of the Covenant of Grace or to an Invisible Membership in the Invisible Church is Invariable It doth not follow that the Gifts and Callings of God in Reference to External Membership are therefore also Invariable or Irrevokable as is afterward by Mr. Allen Asserted and unto which we have already in the Second Part of this Discourse given a sufficient Answer For we find by undeniable Evidence that those External Gifts and Priviledges that the Natural Posterity of Abraham were once Invested with are now Rescinded Repealed and Repented of and it cannot be affirmed that in any Religious Capacity whatsoever they are now at all owned by God as his Church and People as once they were neither Parents nor Children But for the most part remain broken off and Unchurched to this Day And if you say That they and their Children being broken off We and our Children are Ingraffed in their Room This is that which remains to be proved and indeed the
shall be a peculiar Treasure unto me above all People for all the Earth is mine ve 6. And ye shall be unto me a Kingdom of Priests and an Holy Nation And if this was a Covenant of Works as the Apostle doth plainly Affirm it is Rom. 10. 5. from Lev. 18. 5. Why not that made with Abraham also since the terms are the same as well as the Promises are the same The like account the Scripture gives us of the Covenant mentioned Deut. 29. You have seen saith Moses there ver 2 3. all that the Lord did before your Eyes in the Land of Egypt unto Pharaoh and all his Servants the great Temptations which thine Eyes have seen and those great Miracles ver 4. Yet the Lord hath not given you an Heart to perceive and Eyes to see and Ears to hear unto this day ver 5. 6. And I have led you forty years in the Wilderness your clothes are not waxen old upon you That ye might know that I am the Lord your God ver 9. Keep therefore the words of this Covenant and do them that ye may prosper in all that ye do The same Language with that Exod 19. 5. and Lev. 18. 5. compared with Rom. 10. 5. So that we cannot but plainly see that all those fore-mentioned Covenants are of one and the same Nature what the one is the others are the same And therefore if the Covenant made with our First Parent before the Fall and that made with Israel at Mount Sinai were neither of them a Covenant of Grace nor a Gospel Covenant whereof Christ is the alone and only Mediator For the same Reason neither was that mentioned Deut. 29. nor that Gen. 17. 7 8 9. as being all of the same tenor and the Promises in them all of a like Nature § 6. The whole entire Nature saith Dr. Owen of the Covenant of Works consisted in this That upon our Personal Obedience according unto the Law and Rule of it we should be Accepted with God and Rewarded with him Herein the Essence of it did consist And what ever Covenant proceedeth on these terms or hath the Nature of them in it however it may be varied with Additions or Alterations is the same Covenant stiil and not another As in the Renovation of the Promise wherein the Essence of the Covenant of Grace was contained God did oft times make other Additions unto it as unto Abraham and David yet was it still the same Covenant for the Substance of it and not another So whatever Variations may be made in or Additions unto the Dispensation of the First Covenant so long as this Rule is retained Do this and Live it is still the same Covenant for the Substance and Essence of it Dr. Owen in his late Discourse Entituled The Doctrine of Justification by Imputed Righteousness p. 397. SECT II. BUt forasmuch as Mr. Roberts Mr. Sedgwick and many other Divines who have Written upon the Covenants do affirm that the Covenant at Mount Sinai was a Covenant of Faith or which is all one a Covenant of Grace At least that it was Subserviently the Covenant of Grace Or a Covenant of Grace for the Substance of it though propounded in a more dark way and in a manner fitting for the State of that People and that present time and Condition of the Church And for as much as it will unavoidably follow that if that was a Covenant of Grace So also was that made with Abraham Gen. 17. 7 8 9. We shall therefore the more Intently apply our selves toward the Discovery of their great Mistakes in this Respect it being of so vast an Importance to the Church of God to be set at rights herein on which as all will grant So much of the Superstructure of the Christian Faith and Practice depends For this purpose therefore Additional unto what hath been already said we shall only premise two Arguments proving that the Covenant at Mount Sinai mentioned Exod. 19. and Exod 20. was no other than a Covenant of Works And then proceed to Answer those Scripture Objections which are usually urged by way of Opposition hereunto § 2. In the first place then that the Covenant at Mount Sinai before mentioned was no other then a Covenant of Works We thus prove First that Covenant that is not of Faith cannot be a Covenant of Faith but of Works But the Apostle doth Expresly affirm that the Law is not of Faith Gal. 3. 11 12. Which is most plainly to be understood of Mount Sinai Covenant therefore that Covenant cannot be a Covenant of Faith but of Works Secondly that Covenant which is now Repealed could not be a Covenant of Grace but of Works But the Apostle doth plainly Affirm that the Covenant which God made with his People at Mount Sinai when he took them by the Hand to lead them out of the Land of Egypt for the faultiness thereof is now Repealed Heb. 7. 18. Chap. 8. 7. 13. 2. Cor. 3. 7. 11. Col. 2. 14. Therefore it could not be a Covenant of Grace but of Works The Covenant of Grace being every way Immutable and perfect and therefore unrepealable and Eternal 2. Sam. 23. 5. Isa 55. 3. Heb. 7. 21 22 24 25. Heb. 13. 20. And the Gifts and Callings thereof without Repentance Rom. 11. 27. 29. And if Mount Sinai Covenant was no other than a Covenant of Works and accordingly now Repealed It cannt be denied but that the Covenant Gen. 17. 7 8 9. Was of the same Nature and therefore also now Repealed Act. 15. 10. 24. Col. 2. 14. § 3. If any shall Object that it is unlikely that the Covenant of Works should be Renewed after Mans fall and after the Covenant of Grace had actually taken place as it did in the first promise Concerning the Womans Seed that was to bruise the Serpents Head We answer that how absur'd so ever it may seem to us it is plain matter of fact that so it was and we ought not to Impeach Infinite Wisdome that so appointed it And if we will know the reason why the Covenant of Works should be thus Renewed after the Fall the Scripture Expresly tells us That the Law was added because of Transgressions till the Seed should come to whom the Promise was made Gal. 3. 19. The Apostle had before told us ver 17. That the Covenant that was Confirmed before of God in Christ the Law which was 430. Years after could not Disannul that it should make the Promise of none Effect wherefore then saith he ver 19. Serveth the Law To which himself gives this Resolution That it was added because of Transgressions till the Seed should come to whom the Promise was made And elsevvhere the same Apostle Informs us That the Law entered that the Offence might abound Rom. 5. 20. Or as he Expresseth it Chap. 7. 13. That Sin by the Commandment might become exceeding Sinful It being Evident that the Lavv vvas appointed as a School-master to Christ Gal. 3.
that the present Work is needless unless any thing further be produced than hath been by others already Urged and argued in this present Controversie By way of Answer unto which I have two things to offer First That though very much hath been already said by others that have Laboured in the same Province and that with that clearness of Evidence and Scripture Demonstration by way of Opposition unto Infant Sprinkling as cannot be refuted unless another Canon or Scripture Oracle can be produced for the Justification thereof than we have yet met with yet those several Works of their having their several Excellencies and some of them being Voluminous I judged it no needless or unprofitable Labour to Collect the Sum or Substance of what hath been already said in this Respect and to present it to thy View in one Intire Piece and that with as much Succinctness and Brevity as the Matter would well require The Second is this That peradventure thou may'st find upon a due Perusal of the ensuing Discourse an Improvement of several Considerable Scriptures and Arguments to this purpose in the present Essay that hath not yet been made publick that I know of by any other hand and in particular among diverse others as to what concerns the true Nature and Difference betwixt the two Covenants that of Works and that of Grace Wherein I think I have plainly proved that the Covenant which God made with Israel at Mount Sinai Exod. 20. That made with the same People in the Land of Moab Deut. 29. As also the Covenant of Circumcision made with Abraham Gen. 17. 7. 8. 9. Whereon so much stress is laid for the support of Infants Baptism were all of them no other than three several Repetitions of the Covenant of Works and that as contra-distinct or essentially different from the Covenant of Grace and consequently now Repealed Which I have the rather taken the pains distinctly to prove because upon this Hypothesis or Supposition that these were Gospel Covenants differing from the New Covenant only in the manner of Administration the greatest part of the most plausible Arguments for the support of Infants Baptism are founded But if I have substantially proved that neither of these forementioned Covenants were Gospel Covenants reaching Gentile Believers and their Seed but Essentially different therefrom and consequently now repealed no wonder if I have made an answerable Improvement thereof by way of Opposition to the forementioned Practice The Design therefore and Scope of the following Treatise Beside what concerns the Nature and Difference betwixt the two Covenants the true Knowledge and Understanding whereof is indeed of highest Importance to us is with all Humility to endeavour the Rectification of that which I cannot but apprehend to have been amiss and the promoting of that which I cannot but Judge to have been greatly defective among many that are right dear and precious in the sight of GOD And that is among other things in respect of the Purity of that Divine Worship which as the Servants of Christ we are obliged to offer up to Him in a due Susception and Administration of that Sacred and Solemn Ordinance of Baptism we are now contending about My Reasons why I so think I have now given you in this present Discourse And certainly the Purity of Divine Appointments is worthy pleading for it hath been the subject matter of many Prayers and should be of our joynt Endeavours We Read in the Prophecy of Zechary of a Candlestick all of Gold Zec. 4. 2. 3. And he said unto me What seest thou And I said I have looked and behold a Candlestick all of Gold with a Bowl upon the top of it and the Seven Lamps thereon and Seven Pipes to the Seven Lamps which were upon the top thereof and two Olive Trees by it one upon the right side of the Bowl and the other upon the left side thereof And Verse 12. I answered again and said unto him What be these two Olive Branches which through the two Golden Pipes empty the Golden Oyl out of themselves By the concurring consent of all Interpreters I suppose by this Candlestick all of Godl here spoken of we are to understand that pure Church State which God hath promised to erect unto Himself in Gospel Times And certainly that must be a blessed Day and a glorious Priviledge when we shall come to have a Candlestick all of Gold A Candlestick that hath a Golden Bowl Golden Lamps and Golden Pipes for the reception and conveyance of the Golden Oyl Will it not be a singular Favour to be the Children of that Church All whose Members are Golden Members whose Ministers and Ordinances also are All of Gold for the conveyance of the Golden Oyl of the Heavenly Blessing to the Comfort Enlightning and Satisfastion of the whole But alas So it is that for the most part of those that call themselves or that pretend to be the true Churches of Christ at this day in the World they are far from being a Candlestick all of Gold whether in respect of their Constitution and Ministry or in respect of that Purity of Ordinances which God requires For whilst men do content themselves rather as it were with Leaden Pipes that is with Ordinances of an Humane Invention the Golden Pipes or Ordinances of God's Appointment are thereby neglected and made void And then no wonder if such a Church have also many Leaden Members or such as are unsuitable unto the Gospel Characters All of Gold being rather ignorant prophane and scandalous who coming in or being admitted at the wrong Door are there suffered also to continue to the hardning and Soul ruine of themselves which is the case of Millions who without Christ's Appointment having been Sprinkled or as they call it Christned in their Infancy as having by vertue of their Natural Birth an Interest in the Covenant of Grace are Induced thereby to reckon themselves good Christians and in a State of Salvation without looking after the New Birth or being acquainted with the Mystery of the Spirit of Regeneration It is no way to be doubted but that where there is a pure Church there are pure Ordinances The Pipes are all of Gold as well as the Church or Candlestick it self that is it hath only such Ordinances as have the stamp of Heaven upon them even the things which Christ hath commanded and those observed as he hath commanded and not otherwise And it is equally as clear that where those Golden Pipes are wanting or where the purity of Gospel Ordinances is neglected and Pipes of a baser Alloy are substituted in the Room of those of Christ's Appointment and those also mis-applied about wrong Subjects there can be no true Church much less can it pretend to that Purity that Christ expects There can be no true Church but what hath a Golden Constitution Golden Lamps and Golden Pipes for the Conveyance of the Golden Oyl And if you say that you have not been
27. Out of whose Mouth God there Promiseth That his Spirit should never depart nor out of the Mouth of his Seed nor out of the Mouth of his Seeds Seed for ever Indeed If God's Holy Spirit were absolutely and everlastingly entailed upon all the Natural Off-spring of Believers now as our Opponents from this Scripture do affirm it is this would be comfortable Tydings indeed could it be substantially proved unto us But alas As the present Scripture proves it not so neither doth any other that we know of and were it so that God had any where promised that at the Request of the Believing Parents he would not fail to give his Holy Spirit unto all their Natural Seed No doubt Noah Abraham and David with many other choice Believers recorded in the Scripture were not defective in their Duty to be wrestling with God for their Off-spring in this Respect that they all might be Partakers of his Holy Spirit and consequently that they all might be made Inheritours of the Heavenly Kingdom For the Holy Spirit once given as the Scripture before alledged proves was never more to depart from them But alas Most evident it is that notwithstanding their most Zealous Prayers and other Pious endeavours for the Spiritual benefit of their Natural Off-spring they had many of them such Children as were very Wicked Flagitious and Prophane and such as were rejected by God which yet they had not been had they been at all possessed of Gods Holy Spirit as the Fruit of their Parents Prayers and Supplications to God for them And to this doth the dayly Experience that occurs to our own Observation very sadly testify The Sum then of our Answer to the forementioned Objection is this They that have Received the Holy Ghost or such at least concerning whom there is any convincing Evidence thereof as was the Case of them in the 10. Act. of whom this word was spoken such are the proper Subjects of Baptism For who can forbid Water that such should not be Baptized But till there can be convincing Evidence given concerning our Children that either all or any of them are actually partakers thereof according to this Rule they are not the proper Subjects of Baptism And therefore till then they are not to be Baptized As for Mr. Allen's Third Argument drawn from Rom. 11. 17. We say that that Scripture is by him and others impertinently alledged to this purpose It being to be understood not of ingrafting into the visible Church by an outward Ordinance as Baptism but into the Invisible by Election and giving of Faith as the whole Chapter shews His Fourth Argument is drawn from 1 Cor. 7. 14. For the Vnbelieving Husband is sanctified by the Wife and the Vnbelieving Wife is sanctified by the Husband else were your Children unclean but now are they holy from whence he would infer that the Children of Believers are Holy with a faederal or Covenant Holiness and therefore to be Baptized To this we Reply That the same sort of Holiness is ascribed to the Children as is to be understood in reference to the Vnbelieving Husband or the Vnbelieving Wife who are both here said to be Sanctified by their Respective Yoak-Fellows which cannot be understood of a Faederal or Covenant Holyness but that which is Matrimonial For if we must understand it of a Covenant Holyness then it will follow that the Vnbelieving Wife or the Vnbelieving Husband may upon the same ground lay claim to Baptism as well as their Children which yet your selves will not grant Besides it is evident from the Words themselves in which the term Believer is omitted which would not be if the Holiness were derived from the Faith of the one Party and so to be understood of a Covenant Holiness And the single terms of Husband and Wife are twice used which shews that the Holiness is from the Conjugal Relation and cannot bâ— meant of any other than Legitimation And the term Vnbeliever is also twice used and said to be Sanctified which can have no other sence but this That the Vnbelieving Yoke-fellow is Sanctified in respect of Conjugal Vse to his or her Yoke-fellow and so though the one be an Vnbeliever they might comfortably enough live together in Lawful Wedlock For else saith he your Children were to be accounted Vnclean that is Illegitimate But this being determined that the Husband is thus Sanctified to the Wife and the Wife to the Husband though the one be an Vnbeliever hence it follows that your Children are Holy that is Lawfully begotten which is the only sence â—pposite to the Determination verse 12. 13. And as for the use of the Word Holy for Legitimate that it is in this Sence used elsewhere in the Scripture is evident from Mal. 2. 15. Where a Seed of God can be understood in no other sence than that of a Lawful Seed in Opposition to those born by Polygamy But though it should be allowed that the Holiness in the Text is indeed to be understood of a Faederal or Covenant Holiness yet we cannot therefore grant That that is a sufficient Reason for the Baptism of Infants For let the Holiness in the Text be what it will whether Moral Faederal or Matrimonial neither of these is either there or elsewhere assigned to be a Ground of Baptizing Children upon that which is laid down in the Institution being that alone that can Warrant the same It is God's Word only not our Reason that can Justifie our Practice in God's Ordinances That a Profession of Faith and Repertance is a Substantial Warrant for Baptism is undeniable to be proved from the Scriptures But that so is Faederal Holiness or any other Indiscernable Qualification in Infants the Scripture is altogether silent therein His Fifth Argument for Infants Baptism is derived from Acts 2. 38 39. Repent and be Baptized every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the Remission of Sins c. For the Promise is unio you and to your Children and to all that are afar off even as many as the Lord our God shall Call But whatever Mr. Allen or others suppose First it is Evident that the Promise here spoken of is not to be understood of a Promise of External Priviledges but the Promise of the Gospel or the Grace of God â—â— Christ Jesus which was now freely held forth unto them upon their Repentance notwithstanding they had been the Actual Murderers of the Lord of Glory which he had before charged upon them which only could be a Suitable Plaister for the Wound now given them thereby telling them that they might have Remission of Sins even of that Sin if they did Repent Because beyond and contrary to their Acting in Crucifying Christ God had brought to pass the raising up of Christ for their Salvation and their Children and all whom God should Call though a far off if they also did Repent and were Baptized into the Name of Christ Nor indeed Secondly was the
of the Supper whatever Circumstances were by the command of God to be Observed in the Celebration of the Type And after the same sort must we Reason if we will Reason aright concerning Circumcision and Baptism also And yet again Thirdly Even in the very Instance of this Argument Supposing a Corespondency of Analogy between Circumcision and Baptism yet there is no Correspondency of Identity For although it were granted that both of them did Consign the Covenant of Faith yet there is nothing in the Circumstance of Childrens being Circumcised that so concerns that Mystery but that it might very well be given to Children and yet Baptism only to men of Reason Because Circumcision left a character in the flesh which being Imprinted upon Infants did its work to them when they came of Age. And such a Character was necessary because there was no word added to the sign But Baptism Imprints nothing that remains on the Body and if it leaves a character at all it is upon the Soul to which also the word is added which is as much a part of the Ordinance as the Sign it self For which cause therefore it is highly requisite that the Parties Baptized should be capable of Reason that they may be capable both of the word of the Ordinance and the Impress to be made thereby upon the Soul Since therefore the Reason of the Parity doth wholly fail there is left nothing to Infer a Necessity of Complying in this Circumstance of Age more then in the other Annexes of the Type Then also the Infant must be precisely baptized upon the Eighth day And Females must not be baptized because such were not to be Circumcised But it were more proper if we would understand it aright to prosecute the Analogy from the type to the Antitype by way of letter and Spirit and Signification That as Circumcision figures Baptism so also the Adjuncts of the Circumcision shall signifie some thing Spiritual in the Adherences of Baptism And therefore as Infants were Circumcised So Spiritual Infants shall be Baptized which is Spiritual Circumcision For therefore Babes had the Ministry of the type to Signifie that we must when we give our Names to Christ become Children in Malice and then the type is made Compleat The Seventh Argument for Infants Baptism and whereon the greatest stress is laid by Mr. Allen Mr Baxter and others is drawn from the Church-member-ship of Infants under the former Administration That because Infants were comprehended with their Parents in the Jews Church state they are so still under the Gospel and therefore to be baptized Reply We know very well that Mr. Baxter and others do Assert the Church-membership of Infants before Abrahams time and that therefore it is a Moral Institution and so not Capable of being Repealed as other Jewish Rites were But that is a groundless Fiction and cannot be at all proved from the Scripture The Discussion whereof shall be reserved for the latter part of this Discourse In the mean season That they were admitted Members of the Jewish Church is Evident And it is also as Evident that God hath now quite pulled down that House of his broke up House-keeping and turned the Servants Infants and all out of Doors Rom. 11. 17. 24. The Natural Branches are broken of and God hath now built him a New house into which God hath admitted none as his Houshold Servants but Believers only or such as Profess so to be Moses saith the Apostle Heb. 3. 5. 9. was faithfull as a Servant in all his house But Christ as a son over his own House Whose House are we if we hold fast the Confidence c. Where the Servants of the new house are discribed te be Beleivers not Infants and therefore called Living stones and a Spiritual House 1. Pet. 2. 3. And that the Old House the Jewish Church with all the Appurtenances and Priviledges of it is pulled down and a new One Built into which Infants are not to be admitted is Evident from the Apostles Reasoning Heb. 7. 12. For the Priesthood being changed there is made of necessity a change also of the Law Which must needs Include Circumcision with all the Appurtenances and Priviledges belonging to it And therefore as Infants Church-membership came in with the Law of Circumcision So it went out and was repealed with it They were t is true of the Houshold of Old but it was by a positive Law Shew us the like now or you say nothing Sure it is There is now no Institution that makes Infants fellow Citizens with the Saints and of the Houshold of God neither are they to bo so accounted till they believe and are able to do Service in the House And if you say that among men Infants are counted of the Houshold tho they can do no Service we Answer that as Comparisons do not run upon four feet so it doth not follow that because we count our Infants of our Family therefore they are to be accounted members of Gods Family the Gospel Church unless God by any Institution had made them so The Houshold of God is called the Houshold of faith or a House Consisting of Believers Now unless you can prove Infants to be Believers they are not of this House For all the Servants here must be Believers either Really or at least historically and Professedly which Infants cannot be If it be Objected That as the Jews and their Children are broken off So the Gentiles and their Children are Ingraffed in their Room according to Rom. 11. 20. Because of unbelief they were broken off and thou standest by faith We Answer That the Reason why the Jews and their Children were broken off was not because they had not Believing Parents For Abraham Isaac and Jacob were still the Parents of them all They were Abraham's seed when they were broken off as well as before But the true Reason was because the terms of standing in the Church were now altered For before the Gospel came they stood members of the Old Jewish Church though as much unbelievers for many Generations as they were when they were broken off But now Abraham's Church state is at an end and all the Priviledges and Immunities cease The Jewish Church must give way to the Gospel Church The Messiah being come and about to build him a New House into which none are of Right to enter but such as are profest Believers For the Old House or Jewish Church was not intended to abide for ever but only to the time of Reformation And then the Law must be changed the Priesthood changed the Priviledges and Ordinances changed yea the Covenant changed Which they not believing being willing to abide in the Old House still and to remain Church Members upon the account of a meer Fleshly and Natural Birth still crying out Abraham is our Father and we are his Seed and are Free and were never in Bondage Wherefore they were broken off and that whether they would or
not expresly Commanded provided they be not some way or other forbidden in the Word But as for the matters of God's Worship We have no such Rule but rather the contrary Render therefore to Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto GOD the things that are GOD's Mat. 22. 21. God having above all things expressed His Jealousie concerning the same and hath frequently given Testimonies of his severest Displeasure against His People because of their Presumptuous Additions thereunto Witness Deut. 12. 32. and 18. 20. Prov. 30. 6. Ezek. 43. 8. Mat. 15. 9. Exod. 39. 43. And among the rest to this purpose Remarkable is that Reprehension given by our Saviour unto the Scribes and Pharisees when he tells them that their Worship of this kind was but vain Worship Mark 7. 7. 8. Howbeit in vain do they Worship me Teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of Men. For laying aside the Commandment of God ye hold the Tradition of Men as the washing of Pots and Cups and many other such like things yee do And he said unto them ver 9. Full well ye reject the Commandment of God that ye may keep your own Tradition Neither indeed is there any Power on Earth that hath Authority sufficient to Innovate or Institute any thing in the Worship of God the highest Government that Christ hath ordained in His Church being but of a Subordinate and Ministerial Property and therefore not Absolute but limited in its Commands by the Word of God Deut. 12. 32. Whatsoever I command you Observe to do it thou shalt not add thereunto nor diminish from it Deut. 18. 20. The Prophet that shall speak a Word in my Name that I have not commanded even that Prophet shall Dye Ezek. 43. 7 8. Son of Man the place of my Throne and the place of the Soles of my Feet where I will dwell in the midst of the Children of Israel for ever and my Holy Name shall the House of Israel no more defile neither they nor their Kings by their Whoredom nor by the Carkases of their Kings in their high Places In their setting of their Threshold by my Thresholds and their Post by my Posts In the Work of the Tabernacle of Old nothing was to be Superadded but what God had Expressly appointed Exod. 39. 43. And the Reason is the same in the Gospel Ministration But by way of Opposition hereunto is that general direction of the Apostle urged 1 Cor. 14 40. Let all things be done decently and in order From whence it is Inferred that whatsoever Church Governours shall Judge decent and orderly in God's Worship ought to be submitted unto We Answer That this cannot be justly Inferred from these Words for the following Reasons For First To Worship GOD in a way that is not decent and orderly according to Scripture Rule is manifestly our Sin 1 Cor. 14. 40. But to Worship Him in the use of those enjoyned Ceremonies is to Worship Him in a way not decent and orderly according to Scripture Rule Therefore so to do would be manifestly our Sin The Major is proved the Minor is thus proved If to Worship GOD in the use of such Ceremonies be decent and orderly according to Scripture Rule then to Worship Him without such Ceremonies is not to Worship GOD decently and orderly according to Scripture Rule For one Rule cannot make the same Worship decent and undecent orderly and disorderly But to Worship Him without the use of these Ceremonies is to Worship Him decently and orderly according to Scripture Rule the Apostles and Primitive Christians Worshiping Him decently and orderly without them Ergo c. Second Argument To part with our Christian Liberty purchased for us by the Blood of CHRIST is our Sin But to submit unto the Injunction of such Indifferent things is to part with our Christian Liberty Therefore so to do is our Sin The Major is undeniable from Gal. 5. 1. Stand fast therefore in the Liberty wherewith Christ hath made us Free and be not intangled again with the Yoke of Bondage The Minor is Evident from Scripture 1 Cor. 7. 23. Ye are Bought with a Price be not ye the Servants of Men. And from Reason For all Actions fall into these three Classes viz. Things Commanded Things Forbidden and Things Indifferent In the two former we have no Liberty it remains therefore our Liberty must consist wholly in the Latter and to submit to the Injunction of those things as necessary is to part with that and consequently with all our Liberty which would therefore be our Sin Third Argument To Derogate from Christs Honour and Royal Authority is manifestly our Sin But to submit to the Imposition of unnecessary Rites in the Worship of God by the Authority of Man is to derogate from the Honour and Royal Authority of Christ Therefore to submit to their Imposition is Sin The Minor only needing Proof hath it abundantly from all those Scriptures that Assert Christ to be the only Lord and Lawgiver to His Church Mat. 23. 8. Be ye not called Rabbi For One is your Master even Christ Jam. 4. 12. There is One Lawgiver who is able to Save and to Destroy And all those Scriptures that Assert the Plenitude and Perfection of His Laws for Government Heb. 3. 5. 6. Moses verily was Faithful in all his House as a Servant But Christ as a Son over His own House c. 2 Tim. 3. 16 17. All Scripture is given by Inspiration of GOD and is profitable for Doctrine for Reproof for Correction for Instruction in Righteousness That the Man of GOD may be perfect throughly furnished unto all good Works And by all those Scriptures which Condemn the Observance of any Religious Rites Imposed by any other Authority 2 Col. 21 22 23. Touch not Tast not Handle not which all are to Perish with the using after the Commandments and Doctrines of Men. Which things have indeed a shew of Will-worship and Humility c. Mark 7. 7. For laying aside the Commandment of God ye hold the Tradition of Men as the Washing of Pots and Cups and many other such like things ye do Fourth Argument To cross the Imitable Example of Christ in our Practice is Sin But to submit to the Imposition of things Indifferent though by Men in a Lawful Authority is to cross the Imitable Example of Christ Therefore so to do would be our Sin The Major is plain from all those Precepts that make it our Duty to follow Treading in His Steps 1 Pet. 2. 21. To Walk as He Walked 1 John 2. 6. To be followers of God aâ— dear Children Ephe. 5. 1. The Minor is as Evident from Mat. 15. 2 3 11 13. Washing of Hands there spoken of was an Indifferent Ceremony The Authority Commanding it was Lawful the Elders or Sanhedrim who at this time were not only their Ecclesiastical but Civil Rulers Besides the Argument from Decency to Induce it yet all these Motives in a thing so Innocent and Small as that
And if the visible Church be the same Why should not the Subjects be the same viz. Children and the Priviledge be the same viz. an External Badge and Cognisance given to the Children of the Church now as well as under the Law We Answer That true it is the Church of the Jews and that of the Gentiles is one and the same in reference to the true Essence or Inward Substance of either In which respect as we have said before the Believing Gentiles according to the Apostles Metaphor are here said to be Graffed in amongst them and with them to be made Partakers of the Root and Fatness of the Olive Tree And in reference hereunto it is rightly added by the Apostle that the Gifts and Callings of God are without Repentance The Inward Substance of the Church and of the Covenant of Grace whereon 't is Founded being Invariable and that which shall remain for ever Immoveable But it doth not therefore follow that there should be no Alteration in respect of the Outward Form or Administration of either For in this Respect as hath been already proved there is a wide Difference between them For barely to be of the Natural Seed of Abraham was sufficient to be admitted a Member of the Jewish Church but not so under the Gospel unless we be of the Seed of Abraham according to the Spirit And till this be Evidenced neither therefore doth the External Badge or Cognisance belong unto us And thus it may appear that this Illustrious Scripture is very much darkened by applying that Holiness and Incision here spoken of to Outward Dispensations only in the visible Church which is meant of Saving Graces in the Invisible by Faith And whilst you make every Believer a like Root to his Posterity as Abraham the Father of the Faithful was to his Since no Believer in the World whether before or since had ever the like Priviledge or Prerogative conferred upon him to be Called the Father of the Faithful as Abraham was But for the further support of Infants Baptism It is Objected First That since Infants stood visible Members of the Church for 2000 Years under the Legal Administration It is unlikely they should be now Excluded To this we Answer First That they stood Excluded altogether as much above 2000 Years before Circumcision as they do now So that an Ordinance for their Church-member-ship was not so from the Beginning but came in by special Institution long since Secondly The other Administration in which they stood was Established with a Seed to be Propagated by Natural Generation according to express Command Gen. 17. 9 10. Thou shalt keep my Covenant therefore thou and thy Seed after thee in their Generations Verse 10. This is my Covenant which ye shall keep Every Man-Child among you shall be Circumcised But where have we Command for the like in this Administration For though it should be granted that the Believing Gentiles are intended as the proper Subjects of the general Obligation mentioned Verse 9. which yet cannot be for the Reasons given in the latter part of this Discourse upon that Subject Yet the Baptism of Infants cannot thence be justly Inferred For there God only saith Thou shalt keep my Covenant therefore thou and tby Seed after thee in their Generations It is true by the Seed there spoken of you understand the Spiritual Seed in the Gospel Day and by keeping the Covenant their keeping it in the proper Sign of it belonging to the Gospel that is Baptism But where lies the Ground for Infants Baptism in all this Is there a Syllable there concerning Infants that they also must be Signed To keep the Sign of GOD's Covenant say you is to wear it themselves and to put it upon all theirs The Believing Gentiles are to keep the Sign of GOD's Covenant Therefore the Believing Gentiles are to wear it themselves and to put it upon all theirs But who told you so Or what Scripture is there that proves that thus stands the Case with the Believing Gentiles That is that they are not only to wear the Sign of the Covenant themselves but to put it upon all theirs All that you can prove is that thus it was with Abraham and His under the former Administration and when you can also prove that thus it must be now you say something otherwise all you say is Impertinent The Covenant of Promise 't is true Gen. 12. 2 3. Gen. 22. 16 17 18. is one and the same to them and to us but the Covenant of Circumcision Gen. 17. 7 8 9 was plainly Typical and Temporary and in a Figure it Ministred unto the ends of the Everlasting Covenant And therefore it sufficed as unto that Administration if the People the Children thereof were of the Natural Seed of Abraham because by that shadowy Covenant Young and Old Good and Bad were all alike Covenanters and all alike in a Capacity to be the Subjects of an Administration which was to serve unto the Example and Shadow of Heavenly things till the Seed should come to whome the Promise was made Gal. 3. 19. But the Gospel Administration that brings Christ and all the Mystery of His Grace in the Truth and Reality and not in the Figure and Example is not Receptive of Children as to the Principle upon which it stands any other way than upon some visible Demonstration of Faith whereby CHRIST comes to be received who are therefore called the Sons of God John 1. 12 13. As many as Received Him to them gave He Power that is the Right or Priviledge to become the Sons of GOD Even to them that Believe in His Name Born not of Blood nor of the Will of the Flesh nor of the Will of Man but of GOD. Thus the Apostle Gal. 4. 28. Calls the Saints of the Churches of Galatia Children of the Promise in Opposition to the Seed according to the Flesh Verse 7. Neither because they are the Seed of Abraham are they all Children but in Isaac shall thy Seed be called that is they which are the Children of the Flesh these are not the Children of GOD but the Children of the Promise are counted for the Seed Whereunto many other Scriptures might be added yea the whole Stream of the New Testament witnesseth to a Seed ' according to Calling and as to the 〈◊〉 of their Admission all Living Stones for the Constitution of the Church of GOD and not one Word in Favour of a Seed according to the Flesh as to Admission into the Church upon that Principle of Birth Priviledge We are told indeed that the Believing Gentiles are now Graffed in not upon the Legal Branch but upon the Root Olive which affordeth all the Nourishment that either the Jews had or the Gentiles have Which Root Olive is the Covenant of Promise that was 430 Years before the Law Now into that State of things say you wherein not the Law but the Gospel Preached unto Abraham did Obtain God was a GOD
not only to the Father but to the Children yea to all his Family And the Father of the Family did not only give Himself but all his Children and even his Servants all His to GOD to take his Sign upon them and so it must be now To which We Reply that it is indeed the unspeakable Blessedness of the Believing Gentiles to be Graffed in upon such a Stock not upon the Legal Branch but upon the Root Olive which affordeth all the Nourishment that either the Jews had or the Gentiles have that Root Olive being no other than Christ Himself who was given for a Covenant of the People and a Light to Lighten the Gentiles The Gospel of whose Grace was indeed Preached to Abraham 430 Years at least before the Law was given But what then Doth it therefore follow that the Believing Gentiles are put into that very State of things as under Circumcision Where is that Scripture that affirms it Evident it is that though Circumcision was in use before as well as under the Law and though Jesus Christ Himself is by the Apostle Stiled the Minister of the Circumcision for the Truth of God to confirm the Promises made unto the Fathers yet as it cannot be denied but that it was adopted into the Legal Family And that it was also adopted unto the Nature and Quality of the Legal Dispensation So it is as evident that it is now Abolished And we can meet with no one Text in all the New Testament that tells us that Baptism is appointed to have the same Place and Vse in the Church of God that Circumcision had but rather much to the contrary as hath been already proved And it being manifest that the External Administration of the Covenant is changed to what it was in Abraham's Time it plainly follows that there is an Alteration of the Rule that must direct us in our Practice in that Respect Obj. 2. If this Interpretation hold good there would be a very great Change in the Extent of the Covenant narrower under the Gospel than it was under the Law and yet no notice in all the Book of God given of such a Change We Reply First That the Covenant of Grace hath one and the same Extent before under and since the Law in Respect of the Substance of it or considered singly in its self as hath been already declared In Respect of the Administration of it indeed it is Changedble and hath been often Changed Secondly we say that the Administration under the Gospel is not narrower than that under the Law because it admits not Infants Baptism The Administration under the Law was Circumscribed to a little Land and a small People the Bounds of the other are stretched from Sea to Sea and from the River to the ends of the Earth That was restrained to the Seed and Family of Abraham the other extends to the Seed and Family of Christ That had its Existence but 2000 Years upon an Occasional Temporary Principle the other is suited to Answer a Principle existing from Everlasting to Everlasting That Administration was the Shadow Figure and Example the other the Substance That was the Handmaid the other the Mistress And if the Case be thus between these two Administrations can we Reasonably Charge the Gospel Administration with more narrowness than the Law because of the Discontinuance of the Birth-Priviledge Thirdly Although the Grace of the Gospel be extended far beyond the Grace under the Law yet as to Persons the Children of the Gospel are formed to so strict and refined a Qualification that in that Respect we grant that the Law had a Latitude beyond the Gospel But yet with this Mark that the Indulgence of the Law was one of the great Imperfections which the Gospel came to Reform Mat. 3. 10 11 12. And of this Change the Book of God doth give abundant Notice Gen. 21. 10. Cast out the Bond-woman and her Son c. Shortly after the Institution of the Ordinance of Circumcision for the Priviledge of the Seed according to the Flesh The Lord brings forth a Prophetical Instance in the very Family of Abraham wherein this great Change of Church Priviledge was revealed viz. That it was to be taken from the Carnal Seed and that it should be given to the Seed according to Grace under the Gospel Administration And to put that matter out of Question we have the unvailing of this Prophetical Instance to the very same purpose in Gal. 4. 30. So also Isa 14. 1. Sing O Barren thou that bearest not What she was the Apostle tells us Gal. 4. 26 27. ver 5. Thy Maker is thy Husband the Lord of Hosts is his Name and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel At ver 13. We have the Refined Qualification of her Children and People And all thy Children shall be Taught of the Lord Where we have a Prophetical Description of the Gospel Church State which the People of a Fleshly Extraction only from the most sanctified Saints cannot possible compare unto It must therefore necessarily be understood of another Seed even of a Seed begotten of God by the Word of Truth Jam. 1. 18. the Gospel People And this was a fair Notice given of the Change in Question to wit narrower as to the Qualifications of the Persons but more extended in Grace Another fair warning for the Fleshly Seed is Isa 65. 15. For the Lord God shall slay thee and call his People by another Name In all which we find plain notice given of the Change of the Old Administration which gloried in the Seed of Abraham after the Flesh and as plainly foretelling the Cessation of that Propagation to give place to the New Administration and the true Seed of Abraham the Seed according to the Spirit And indeed the Change of the Administration necessarily removes the fleshly Seed because it hath a standing by no other Right than what it had under that Covenant As for the New Testament it every where abounds with Evidence to the Proof hereof as appears from the several Scriptures that have in part been already opened and discussed in the former part of this Discourse Wherein it hath been proved that though Infants were comprehended with their Parents in the Jewish Church yet none but such as are capable of making an Actual Profession of Faith and Repentance with some competent Measure of Fruitfulness answerable thereunto are to be admitted to the Priviledge of Church-Membership under the Gospel To this purpose we are told Mat. 3. 7. That when many of the Pharisees and Sadduces came to be Baptized of John Though their being of the Natural Seed of Abraham was a sufficient ground why they should be Circumcised yet it was no sufficient ground why they should be Baptized And therefore their Birth-Priviledge notwithstanding John rejects them as a Generation of Vipers and bids them bring forth Fruits meet for Repentance 'T is true those that John had now to deal with were Men at
Consequence of the former it will also naturally follow that it is only by the Actual Faith of both Parents and Children as an Instrumental means by which either of them shall be blessed with that their desired Restauration And this may serve also for a Confutation of that Groundless and Unscriptural conceit of Mr. Allen when he affirms that the Infants of Believers are Abraham's Spiritual Seed and that upon this Account it was that they were admitted to the Priviledge of Church-Membership under the Law For thus he tells us If such Infants are as much of the Church and as much Abraham's Spiritual Seed as ever Infants in the Old Testament-Church were then they can be no more uncapable than they were of a solemn Admission into the Church by the Ordinance of Initiation for the time being as Baptism is now and as Circumcision was then But this which Mr. Allen takes here for granted and is indeed the Foundation of his Argument we utterly deny as not having been at all proved nor indeed can be proved by him or any other to wit That the Infants of Believers have any where in Scripture the Denomination of Abraham's Spiritual Seed This is a most certain Truth that as Abraham himself had a double Capacity one of a Natural Father the other the Father of the Faithful So he had a two-fold Seed For First he had a Seed that proceeded from him according to the Course of Natural Generation only And Secondly some were his Natural and Spiritual Seed also such as was Isaac and all the Faithful who proceeded from Abrahams Loyns To which we must add a Third sort and that is all true Believers or the Elect of God in all Nations who by Vertue of their Interest in Christ have also in Scripture the Denomination of Abraham's Seed who yet can lay no claim to Abraham as their Father according to the common Course of Nature And to imagine that Abraham hath any Seed in any other Religious or Spiritual Consideration whatsoever under the Gospel is to be wise above what is written For whatever the Jewish Children were to say that the Children of Christians are Relatively Holy that they are Church-Members and as much Christians externally as the Children of the Jews were Jews externally as some have suggested All these are but unproved Figments and Unscriptural Dictates And therefore from hence to infer their Relation to Abraham as his Spiritual Seed and thence that they are the proper Subjects of Baptism is no other than to build a lofty Structure upon a Sandy Foundation If then we shall affirm that the Infants of Believers now are Abraham's Seed they must of Necessity come under one or another of these Heads To say that they are so in either of the two former Respects cannot be at all pretended unto if in the latter neither can this with any shadow of Truth be affirmed For thus it was not with all the Natural Seed of Abraham himself as the Apostle expresly affirms Rom. 9. 7 8. Neither saith he because they are the Seed of Abraham are they all Children but in Isaac shall thy Seed be called that is they that are the Children of the Flesh these are not the Children of God but the Children of the Promise are counted for the Seed So likewise Gal. 3. 29. If ye be Christs then are ye Abraham's Seed and Heirs according to the Promise Therefore to affirm that all the Infants of Believers are the Spiritual Seed of Abraham as there is no Scripture that proves it so it is directly contrary to the Scripture and indeed contrary to our own most common and obvious Experience whilst we consider with all that as for many of Abraham's own Natural Posterity they are so far from being his Spiritual Seed that as hath been already observed together with their Children they are Unchurched broken off and rejected by God because of their Vnbelief to this very day Which yet had not been had they been the Spiritual as well as the Natural Seed of Abraham For sure it is altogether Inconsistent with the terms of the Covenant of Grace the Gifts and Callings whereof are without Repentance that Abraham's Spiritual Seed or that such as are Members of the Invisible as well as the Visible Church should be at all cast off rejected and forsaken as the Jews now are Upon the whole therefore of our Answer to the forementioned Objection That if this Interpretation hold good there would be a great change in the extent of the Covenant narrower under the Gospel than it was under the Law and yet no notice in all the Book of God given of such a Change We say that there is abundant notice given unto us in the Book of God and that both in the Old and New Testament also concerning the change in question viz. the disfranchisement of Infants from their so long enjoyed Priviledge of Church-Membership We grant that under the Law they were admitted thereunto with their Parents But the Scriptures already alledged do abundantly prove their Exclusion under the Gospel Administration Unto which we shall only at present add Heb. 7. 12. For the Priesthood heing changed there is made of Necessity a change also of the Law which Change of the Law there spoken of must needs include Circumcision with all the Priviledges and Appurtenances belonging to it And therefore as Infants Church-Membership came in with the Law of Circumcision so it went out and was Repealed with it Objection 3. If this Interpretation be true the Believing Jews should have loss upon their Repentance and Belief of the Gospel if their Children formerly Church Members should now be Excluded upon the Faith and Repentance of their Parents To this we Answer First It is true that insome Sence a Jew converted to the Gospel should have loss and particularly in that point of Signing his Fleshly Seed by an Ordinance together with the Fall of all the Glory of their Sanctuary and pompous Priest-hood so much and so long the joy and boasting of that Nation Which the Spirit of GOD fore-saw and fore-told Isa 8. 14. And hence it came to pass that Christ became so great an Offence and the Gospel so sore a Stone of Stumbling and Rock of Offence to them all yea even to many of them after they had submitted to the Gospel yea the Gentile Churches were scarce if at all preserved from Stumbling hereat with the Jews But all this Loss well considered would amount to no more than what befals a Man who from the Priviledges of a Servant is Invested into the Priviledges of a Son And this was the very Case Gal. 4. 4. God sent forth His Son c. Verse 5. To redeem them that were under the Law that we might receive the Adoption of Sons Verse 7. Wherefore thou art no more a Servant but a Son And the Reason of this Change the Apostle plainly sheweth us Verse 23. He that was after the Bond-Woman was Born after the
granted by GOD in lieu of Circumcision Object 6. But Circumcision was a Seal of the New Covenant to Believers and their Seed under the Law and therefore so is Baptism to the Seed of Christian Parents under the Gospel the denial therefore of Baptism to Infants is the denial of a great Priviledge which of right belongs unto them To this We Answer in the Negative That neither was Circumcision a Seal to them nor much less a Seal to them of the New Covenant for then they had been all Saved It is true it was a Seal Confirmation or Ratification of the Faith that Abraham had long before he was Circumcised But so it could not be said of Infants that had no Faith It was indeed a Sign put into the Flesh of the Infant but a Sign and Seal only to Abraham Witnessing to Him that he not only had a Justifying Faith but to the Truth of the Promises viz. That he should be the Father of many Nations Rom. 4. 17. Gen. 12. 2. 3. The Father of the Faithful Rom. 4. 11. Heir of the World Rom. 4. 13. Which was no way true of any Infant that ever was Circumcised for none had before their Circumcision such a Faith that entituled them to such singular Promises and Prerogatives The Scope of that place Rom. 4. being to shew that Abraham himself was not Justified by Works no not by Circumcision but by Faith which he had long before he was Circumcised and so but a Seal or Confirmation of that Faith which he had before and to assure him of the Truth of those special Promises then made to him So that though Circumcision is rightly termed by the Apostle A Seal of the Righteousness of Abraham 's Faith which he had yet being Vncircumcised of which see further p. 51. 52. 53. but more especially from p. 205 to p. 206. Yet the Scripture no where affirms that so it was to any others neither indeed could it be a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith to Infants that had no Faith Besides diverse others who as it appears from the Scriptures were utterly destitute of that Saving Grace For some were Circumcised to whom no Promise in the Covenant made with Abraham did belong Of Ishmael GOD had said that His Covenant was not to be Established with him but with Isaac and yet he was Circumcised Gen. 17. 20 21 25. Rom. 9. 7 8 9. Gal. 4. 29 30. The like may be said of Esau Together with which it must be considered That all that were in Abraham's House whether Strangers bought with Money or Born in his House though not of his Seed were to be Circumcised To whom nevertheless none of the Promises of that Covenant were made as is plain from Gen. 17. 7 8 20 21 23 27. So that as far as appears to us from the Scriptures Circumcision was a Seal of the Rightcousness of Faith only to Abraham not so to the rest as all the Jews also were not called the Fathers of the Faithful or the Fathers of many Nations as Abraham was Secondly Neither is Baptism more than Circumcision called a Seal It is indeed called a Figure 1 Pet. 3. 21. And it is a Sign also but a Sign and Figure proper only to Men of Vnderstanding not as Circumcision which was a Sign not Improper for Infants because it left a signal Impression upon their Flesh to be remembred all their Days But so cannot Baptism be to any Infant To affirm Baptism therefore to be a Seal of the Covenant of Grace is groundless for that is the peculiar Work and Office of the Holy Spirit Eph. 1. 13. and 4. 30. And since neither hath GOD any where Commanded Infants to be Baptized the denial therefore of Baptism to Infants cannot be the denial of any Priviledge due unto them Object 7. But Circumcision was Administred to Believers as Believers and to their Seed after them as such to which Baptism was to correspond We Answer That Circumcision was an Ordinance which by the Institution belonged to all the Natural Lineage and Posterity of Abraham good or bad without any such Limitation as was put upon Baptism If thou Believest with all thine Heart thou mayst Acts 8. Or any such Qualification that an Infant capable to receive it must of necessity have a Believing Parent For we know that the Servants Born in Abraham's House and Strangers Bought with Money were also to be Circumcised as well as those proceeding from Abraham's Loins who yet surely could not pretend to be all of them the Off-spring of Believing Parents Which clearly shews that Circumcision was not Administred to Believers as Believers and to their Seed after them as such But though the Natural Posterity of Abraham whether they were Believers or no were to be Circumcised because God had so Commanded it yet this was not sufficient for their Admission to Baptism The main Plea indeed of the Jews in John's time was That they had Abraham to their Father But notwithstanding this he rejects them and bids them bring forth Fruits meet for Repentance as that which alone would give them Admission to the Baptism of Repentance And if you say that this concerns the Adult only We say that it concerns Infants as much who are uncapable of that Faith and Repentance which the Gospel every where requires in those to be Baptized From what hath been already said therefore it clearly appears that the not Baptizing Infants makes not our Priviledge under the Gospel less than theirs under the Law to which Circumcision was annexed inasmuch as they were not Circumcised because they were the Children of Believers but because GOD had Commanded it neither were they by Circumcision Sealed with a New Covenant Seal as being thereby Interessed in the Mercies of God's New and Everlasting Covenant many being then Circumcised as Ishmael and others who had no right or title at all thereunto But they were Circumcised by the Command of God to distinguish them from the Nations and to keep that Line clear from whence Christ according to the Flesh should come and to oblige them to keep the Law c. but no such thing in the Gospel The Body and Substance being come the shadow was to vanish and pass away No common Father now but Christ and if Christâ— then Abraham's Seed and Heirs according to Promise No Birth Priviledge but the New Birth therefore to go back to the National Birth Priviledge is so far from being a Priviledge that it is a Bondage rather and no other than to rtâ—urn to the Type and Shadow the Anti-type and Substance being come Neither ought such a thing to be any more esteemed the loss of a Priviledge than our not enjoying litterally a Holy Land City Temple a Succession of a High Priest and a Priest-hood by Generation or Lineal Descent as it was with them since all these Types are Spiritualized to us the Believers under the Gospel who are now the Holy Nation City Temple and Royal Priest-hood
will be a God to thee and to thy Seed after thee We Answer First That we know of none that do affirm that the Children of Believers are Excluded from the Promise But this we say That as the Denial of Infants Baptism imports no Exclusion from the Promise so neither doth every Right to the Promise Instate a Person into the Inheritance The Jew had a Right to the Promise uncalled First As God had his Remnant among them according to Election Secondly He had a Right to the Promise as God gave him a Priority and Precedency in the tenders of the Promise above and before all other People Thirdly They had a right to the Promise as they were lost Sinners whom Christ came to seek and to save But in neither of these Respects was the Jew an Heir in the Promise Such an Interest and Right to the Promise declares the Person to be a Son by Adoption And if Sons then Heirs of God through Christ Gal. 4. 7. a Priviledge which no title to the natural Father could ever prefer a Creature unto whether under the Gospel Administration or before Secondly The Scripture made use of for Infants Baptism in this Objection is this If ye be Christ's then are ye Abraham's Seed and Heirs according to the Promise How plainly doth this Scripture lay the Title of the Heir upon this conditional Qualification of being Christ's And he that is Christs is an Heir by this Text be the Children never so great Aliens and Strangers Thirdly It is said that the Childrens right to the Promise is part of the Fathers Inheritance For the Promise is to thee and to thy Seed whereby is intended that if the Father be Christ's and so cometh to be an Heir then the Promise carrieth the same Title of the Inheritance down to the Children that is if the Father be a Son of Abraham which in Gospel Construction is a Believer then the Child must be a Son of Abraham and a Believer also even by his Birth Priviledge directly confronting many Scriptures which restrain the Blessing of Sonship to Abraham and the Inheritance in all manner of Persons to Faith in Christ Gal. 3. 9. They which are of Faith are blessed with faithful Abraham Not they which are the Children of Believers And in the Text alledged If ye be Christ's then are ye Abraham's Seed not if ye be the Children of Believers Fourthly As to the Interpretation of that Passage taken from Ver. 16. The Promise is to Abraham and his Seed Besides what hath been said in Answer to the foregoing Objection It ought to be duely considered that the Covenant of Grace or the Gospel Covenant which God made with believing Abraham before his Removal out of his own Countrey Gen. 12. 1 2. was not made with Believers and their Seed but with Abraham and his Seed In thy Seed saith the Text shall all the Nations of the Earth be blessed Gen. 22. 18. compared with Gen. 12. 2 3. In thy Seed that is Christ For so the Apostle tells us expresly That to Abraham and to his Seed were the Promises made He saith not unto Seeds as of many but as of one and to thy Seed which is Christ Gal 3. 16. So that all Gospel Promises run directly to Christ the Inheriting Seed To him they are made In him do they all center and â—â— him alone all the Blessings in Promise are to be communicated to all his Members 'T is true in the Covenant of Circumcision which God made with Abraham Gen. 17. 7 8 9. which was a legal conditional Covenant As God doth therein promise to be a God unto Abraham so he had also a Noble Seed to whom the Blessings therein promised as an Inheritance did inure But under this Qualification as they were his Natural Seed priviledged under that Typical Administration by which this Prerogative was so setled Now to improve this aright the Heavenly Mystery vailed in this Dispensation must be sought out For although Abraham stood a common Father under the Law yet Christ is the only Father the Everlasting Father under the Gospel Administration And this Ancestour hath also his Seed more nobly descended than the Natural Seed of Abraham being all the Sons of God by Faith in Christ ver 16. Yea it is impossible that by any other Qualification men can come to be the Sons of this Ancestour than by being made one with him in the Participation of the Everlasting Grace of the Unchangeable Covenant Now then it is an incompetent Application of Persons to compare every particular Believer and his Children to Abraham the common Ancestour of a whole Administration and the Seed priviledged thereby And no less incompetent is the Application of the Qualification requisite in Persons to be accounted Heirs that because it sufficed to Abraham's Heirs that they were the Sons of his Natural Generation and that they were thereby made capable of an Inheritance in the Figure and Letter That therefore it sufficeth by being the Child according to Natural Generation of any Believer to be upon that account an Heir of God and joint Heir with Christ in the very Substance and Mystery which the former Administration did Prefigure Upon the whole then as to this We say that it is no right Reasoning to infer or suppose that the Infants of Believers are Joynt Heirs with Christ and their godly Parents under the Administration of Grace because of the Birth Priviledge given to Abraham and his Seed by the Law Objection 11. Those to whom the Gospel Covenant belonged to them the Seal thereof appertained But to Believers and their Seed the Gospel Covenant belonged Gen. 17. 7. I will be a God to thee and to thy Seed therefore to them the Seal thereof did appertain For the Faederati were to be Signati that is those that were in Covenant were to have the Seal thereof Gen. 17. 10. By way of Consequence therefore it naturally follows that if Circumcision the Seal of the Gospel Covenant belonged to the Seed of Believers under the Law then doth the Gospel Seal Baptism much more appertain to the Seed of Believers now To this we Reply First That there is no natural Consequence at all from this Scripture to infer the Baptizing of Infants nor any ground to build the Gospel Ordinance Baptism upon the command of the legal Ordinance Circumcision as hath been already manifested by what we have said in our Answers to several of the foregoing Objections wherein it hath also been made evident that neither the one nor the other are Represented in the Scripture as the common Seals of the New Covenant that being the peculiar Office of the Holy Spirit Eph. 1. 13. We shall therefore in Answer to the present Objection take occasion more particularly to consider the Nature and Scope of the Covenant God made with Abraham in the Text alledged Gen. 17. 7. And therein to enquire whether the New Covenant made with Believers under the Gospel and that be
one and the same In order to the Resolution whereof we must understand that as Abraham by Promise stood in a double Capacity viz. First As he was a natural Father unto the Jews who proceeded from him in a course of Natural Generation Secondly As he was a Spiritual Father in which respect he was the Father of many Nations comprehending the Spiritual Israel whether Jews or Gentiles throughout the World So accordingly the Promises made unto Abraham were of two sorts some respecting his Natural Seed whether Domestick or National which were Typical of the Spiritual as the Birth of Ifaac the Deliverance of his Posterity out of Egypt the possessing of the Land of Canaan with many other temporal Blessings and Benefits Annexed thereunto And others again respecting in a peculiar manner the Spiritual Seed the Family of the Faithful the Elect of whom through Christ he was the Father and which are Evangelical belonging in an especial manner to the Gospel Covenant As Gen. 17. 5. I have made thee a Father of many Nations And that which we find Gen. 15. 5. So shall thy Seed be In which it is promised That there should be of the Nations innumerable that should be Abrahams Seed by believing Rom. 4. 17 18. And again it was an Evangelical Promise that we find Gen. 12. 3. and Gen. 18. 18. And in thy Seed shall all the Families of the Earth be Blessed For in these is promised a Blessing to Believers of whom Abraham is Father Gal. 3. 8 9. And by Christ who is the Seed of Abraham Gal. 3. 16. And therefore Secondly It is of great moment in the present Case rightly to distinguish and truly to apply the several Promises God made unto Abraham according to their proper Subjects It being evident from what hath been already said that though under the Domestick or National Promises to Abraham peculiar to him and his Posterity by Sarah Spiritual Blessings in Christ were shadowed yet Circumcision was not a Token to every one Circumcised that the Promises whether National or Spiritual did belong to him Nor was Interest in the Covenant the Adequate Formal or proper Reason of the Circumcising of them For Ishmael was Circumcised and others were to be Circumcised to whom none of the Promises in that Covenant were made as is plain from Gen. 17. 21. Rom. 9. 7 8. Gal. 4. 28 29. It is no good Argument therefore to say they were in the Covenant therefore to be Circumcised For Females were in the Covenant yet not to be Circumcised Nor on the other side Males were to be Circumcised therefore they were in the Covenant For Ishmael and others were to be Circumcised yet not in the Covenant Whereby 't is plain that the true Reason why any were Circumcised was the Command not Interest in the Covenant Much less is it true that is suggested by some That Children are to be Baptized by Vertue of the Promise first to the Parents as Believers and in them to their Seed as subordinates For besides that there is no such Promise in Scripture that God will be a God to every Believer and his natural Seed So the Rule of Baptizing either Parents or Children is not Interest in the Promise by God's Promise to them But their Profession of Faith or being actual Disciples of Christ whom alone Christ hath appointed to be Baptized Thirdly As to what concerns the Covenant of Grace therefore or the Gospel Covenant which according to the foregoing Argument is said to be now made with Believers and their Seed as the ground of their Admission to Baptism We must know that the Covenant of Grace is to be considered either in respect of the Promises of Eternal Life made to all the Elect in Christ the which remains one and the same in all Ages though variously Administred in the times of the Old and New Testament or else in respect of the manner of its Administration For if the Covenant be understood in the first sence of the Promise of Eternal Life and Salvation made to the Elect in Christ That did never belong to all the Children born of Believing Parents as hath been already Instanced in Ishmael and Esau c. but only such as are Elected of them Rom. 9. 7 8 9. Neither because they are the Seed of Abraham are they all Children c. The Covenant of Grace being first made between God and Christ and all the Elect in Christ And therefore in Scripture it is called The Promise of Eternal Life which was made to the Elect before the World began who are therefore called the Heirs of Promise Which Promise had its first Promulgation to Adam in the Garden of Paradise where we have also the first Discovery of the Mystery of the two Seeds Now the Covenant of Grace in this Sense is not the Ground and Reason of Administring Ordinances to any Person whatsoever But the Law of Institution only is the Ground and Reason of visible Administrations For the Administration of Ordinances belongs not to the substance of the Covenant but depends meerly upon the Law of Institution without any other Consideration And hence we find that from the first Promulgation of the Covenant to Adam until God made the Covenant of Circumcision with Abraham there was no Ordinance to be administred to Infants Though some Infants as well as grown Persons both of Believers and Unbelievers might be comprehended in the Covenant Yet not to be Circumcised and so not to be Baptized for want of an Institution So the Promise Acts 2. 39. is said to be to them afar off in the present tense while uncalled And yet not to be Baptized before calling unless you will Baptize Gentiles in professed Gentilism And so the Jews some not yet born some not called have the Promise of God made to them Rom. 11. 27. For this is my Covenant unto them when I shall take away their Sins And yet they are not to be Baptized ' til Converted Nor indeed can the Covenant considered in its pute Nature be a Ministers Rule to Administer Ordinances by seeing it is unknown who are in the Covenant and who are not But that which is their Rule must be something that is manifest As for the External Administration of the Covenant as you have already heard that hath varied in several Ages according to the Will of the Law-giver for during all that period of time from Adam to Abraham there was no Ordinance to be Administred to Infants In Abraham's time indeed Circumcision was Instituted which Ordinance belongs peculiarly to the Old Testament Administration and was part of Moses's Law which is now Abrogated and done away And this was the first Ordinance that was Administred to Infants and not to all Infants but only to Male Infants Living in Abraham's Family if they did Live to the Eighth Day otherwise they had no right to this Ordinance though many of them doubtless in the Covenant of Grace and so Saved So we say of
can be a more plain Description of a Covenant of Works and that of God's own Designation and Appointment And that not in the way of a Partial imperfect Obedience But as it is Written Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the Book of the Law to do them Gal. 3. 10. which the Apostle quotes from Deut. 27. 26. Cursed be be that Confirmeth not all the words of this Law to do them And all the People shall say Amen § 3. So that the Jews were right enough in their Notion concerning the Law in reference to the true Nature thereof that it was indeed a Covenant of Works For Paul doth plainly acknowledge it to be such and God himself by the Mouth of his Servant Moses as plainly expresseth it so to be in the very first Sanction of it though they were out in respect of its proper use and intention which was not that any should attain unto Life and Righteousness thereby but as we have before observed to shew them the Nature of Sin and the Holiness and Righteousness of God to convince them of their Sin and Misery without Christ and their necessity therefore of a Saviour which they being ignorant of and still going about to Establish their own Righteousness which was of the Law and refusing to submit themselves unto the Righteousness of God which was now Manifested without the Law as it had been before Witnessed by the Law and the Prophets They Stumbled at that Stumbling-stone and were accordingly Broken and Snared and Taken Rom 9. 31 32 33. Chap. 10. 3. And this was the true ground of the Dispute between the Apostle and them § 4. But all this notwithstanding it is evident that the Law was a Covenant of Works still And it is also as evident that it was Appointed and Established by God as a distinct Covenant from the Promise of Grace and essentially different therefrom under which the Natural Posterity of Abraham were for a Season to be Subjected until the time appointed of the Father Gal. 4. 1 2 c. as the Fruit of infinite Wisdom who thought fit to impose this Burthen upon them notwithstanding or rather Additional unto those Discoveries of Grace For the Law is said to have been Added unto the Promise that had been otherwise Revealed unto them and whereby they were Saved So that the forementioned Objection notwithstanding it still remains Firm and Unshaken that the Law was no other than a Covenant of Works So it was designed and appointed by God himself and constantly in the Scripture is it Represented to us under that Character SECT V. BUt whereas the Apostle tells us that the Law is not against the Promises Gal. 3. 21. Mr. Sedgwick will needs hence conclude that the Law was not a Covenant of Works For saith he The Law is not against the Promises nor doth Faith make void the Law Both these can very well agree together but so they could not if the Law had been given as a Covenant of Works For now the Law would be Expresly against the Promises and Faith will certainly make void the Law The Promises of God are contrary to a Covenant of Works and Faith is Destructive to a Covenant of Works If therefore the Promises and Faith and the Law can consist then the Law cannot be set up as a Covenant of Works § 2. To this we Reply First That it ought to be duly Observed that the Law and the Promise having divers ends it doth not therefore follow that there is an Inconsistency between them For although there is nothing that can be clearer than this That the Law was set up and appointed by God as a Covenant of Works to the Jews to convince them of Sin and the necessity of a Saviour yet did God never intend it as a Means to give Life and Righteousness nor was it able so to do The end of the Primise was to give Life Righteousness Justification and Salvation all by Christ to whom and concerning whom it was made But this was not the end for which the Covenant of Works was Revived in the Covenant of Sinai For although in its self it requires a perfect Righteousness and gives a promise of Life thereon He that doth these things shall live in them yet it could give neither Righteousness nor Life to any in a State of Sin Rom. 8. 3. Chap. 10. 4. Wherefore the Promise and the Law having divers ends they are not contrary to one another Nay rather the Law even as it is a Covenant of Works instead of being against the Promise it tends to the Establishment of it by declaring the Impossibility of obtaining Reconciliation and Peace with God any other way but by the Promise For representing the Commands of the Covenant of Works requiring perfect Sin-less Obedience under the Penalty of the Curse it convinced Men that this was no way for Sinners to seek for Life and Salvation by And herewith it so urged the Consciences of Men that they could have no Rest nor Peace in themselves but what the Promise would afford them whereunto therefore they saw a necessity of betaking themselves So that though we affirm the Law to be no other than a Covenant of Works as the Apostle himself doth yet it doth not therefore follow that it is against the Promise it having so Blessed a Subserviency toward the Establishment thereof § 3. Secondly though the Apostle doth indeed tell us Gal. 3. 21. That the Law is not against the Promises The following Words do sufficiently clear his Meaning to be of quite another Nature than Mr. Sedgwick in his forementioned Discourse apprehends it to be Mr. Sedgwick indeed will by no-means allow that the Law was set up as a Covenant of Works and then it must of necessity follow that it is a Covenant of Faith But the Apostle seems to be of another mind For having told us ver 18. That if the Inheritance be of the Law it is no more of Promise But God gave it to Abraham by Promise And having answered the Question or Objection ver 19. Wherefore then serveth the Law To which himself gives this Resolution That it was added because of Transgressions till the Seed should come to whom the Promise was made He brings in this further Objection ver 21. against what he had before Asserted viz. That if the Inheritance be of the Law it is no more of Promise c. Is the Law then against the Promises God forbid saith he For if there had been a Law given which could have given Life verily Righteousness should have been by the Law But the Scripture hath concluded all under Sin that the Promise by Faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe In the first place then it is Evident and Undeniable that Abraham's Inheritance was not derived unto him through the Law For saith our Apostle If the Inheritance be of the Law it is no more of Promise
but God gave it to Abraham by Promise So that it clearly appears by the scope of the Apostle's Argument that the Law could not be a Covenant of Faith For if it had it would have been honoured as an Instrument for the conveyance of Abraham's Inheritance But saith he God gave it to Abraham by Promise not by the Law therefore the Law could not be a Covenant of Faith But is the Law then against the Promises God forbid saith he For if there had been a Law given which could have given Life verily Righteousness should have been by the Law but the Scripture hath concluded all under Sin that the Promise of Faith by Jesus Christ might be given to them that Believe So that the Law could not be a Covenant of Faith since the Apostle doth here so plainly distinguish between them setting forth the Weakness of the one and the Strength and Perfection of the other The Law saith he Could not give Life but the Covenant of Faith doth The Law indeed would but could not It promiseth Life but it could not perform it through the Weakness of the Flesh So there is no Repugnancy in the Law against the Promises but what the Law could not do the Covenant of Faith performeth For it not only promiseth Life but accomplisheth what it hath promised and sets the Soul in Safety § 4. According to the plain and clear Scope of the Apostle's Reasoning therefore the Law is so far from being a Covenant of Faith that it is quite another thing For if it had been a Covenant of Faith it would have given Life as the Covenant of Faith doth But it could not give Life therefore it could be no other than a Covenant of Works But is the Law then against the Promises God forbid saith Paul and so say we For supposing the Law to be as it is indeed a pure Covenant of Works yet through the Satisfaction of Christ there is no Repugnancy or Hostile Contrariety betwixt the Law and the Promises or between the Law and Faith which hath respect to the Promises There is only a difference of Deficiency in respect of that Strength that there is in the one to what there was in the other The one being Weak through the Flesh the other Strong and Powerful and goes through-stitch with its Work But what the Law could not do through our Weakness that Christ hath performed by fulfilling its Commands and submitting to its Curse on our behalf whereby God's Justice is satisfied and Everlasting Righteousness obtained for the Salvation of Sinners And indeed herein consisteth the Covenant of Faith here is the Object of it and in this path is the very Law and Justice of God it self most highly Glorified Shall we say then that because the Law is a Covenant of Works that it is therefore against the Promises God forbid For who shall lay any thing to the Charge of God's Elect so as to hinder the accomplishment of the Promises upon them The Law it self doth not cannot Impeach them since it is God that Justifieth Or Who shall Condemn them The Law it self cannot since it is Christ that Died. It is true the Law saith That the man that doth these things shall Live by them And indeed herein the very Essence of the Covenant of Works consisteth But the Covenant of Faith leads us to what Christ hath done and performed for us which the Covenant of Works doth not But though the Law leads us not to Christ yet Christ being made under it and giving it its due honour on our behalf hence it follows that the Law it self that was before our Enemy stands up as our Friend Even that Law that was before against us which was Contrary to us and which was in it self no other than the Ministration of Death and Condemnation even that Law stands up as our Friend through the Mediation of Christ whom God therefore hath set forth to be a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood to declare his Righteousness that he might be Just and the Justifier of him that Believeth in Jesus Rom. 3. 24 25 26. So that the Law through the Satisfaction of Christ though it be as it is indeed a Covenant of Works yet is not against the Promises there is no Real Repugnancy or Contrariety between them whatever there seems to be Which made the Apostle Propound the Question as he doth § 5. Besides the same Apostle that tells us The Law is not against the Promises doth also expresly Assure us That the Law is not of Faith but the Man that doth them shall live by them Gal. 3. 12. So that though it is true the Law is not against the Promises Since Mercy and Truth Righteousness and Peace are met together in Christ yet it is as true that the Law is not of Faith And if the Law is not of Faith then neither can it be a Covenant of Faith but of Works as the same Apostle doth plainly affirm it is Rom. 3. 27 28. And therefore neither could it give Life For if it could Righteousness should have been by it But saith he The Scripture hath concluded all under Sin that the Promise by Faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that Believe The Law therefore was not a Covenant of Faith For if it had it would have given Life and so Righteousness should have been by the Law But it could not give Life and so Righteousness was not by the Law therefore it was not a Covenant of Faith The like Inference may be clearly drawn from Rom. 10. 5 6 c. Moses saith the Apostle Describeth the Righteousness of the Law that the Man which doth these things shall live by them But the Righteousness which is of Faith or Gospel Covenant speaketh on this wise c. If thou Believest thou shalt be Saved Wherein we cannot but observe that the Apostle maketh a plain difference betwixt the Righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness of Faith The one saith he speaketh after this sort the other speaketh after quite another rate From whence also it plainly follows that the Law could not be a Covenant of Faith since the Righteousness of the one is here so plainly Opposed to the Righteousness of the other which yet it would not be had the Law been a Covenant of Faith nay though it had been so only more Darkly and not with that clearness of Demonstration as the Gospel Reveals it had it been so Subserviently only much more if it had been such for the Substance of it as it Affirmed For it cannot be imagined that if it had been a Covenant of Grace or a Covenant of Faith Subserviently much more if it had been such for the Substance of it that ever it would have been set in point blank Opposition to it as quite another thing as it is When the Apostle tells us therefore that the Righteousness which is of the Law saith Do this and Live but the Righteousness of Faith speaketh
in quite another Dialect It is plain there is a difference between them toto Genere or in the whole Kind or Substance thereof and not barely in the several Degrees of Manifestation as is suggested For as the Apostle Reasoneth concerning Election Rom. 11. 6. So it is here If it be of Works then it is no more Grace otherwise Work is no more Work And if by Grace then it is no more of Works otherwise Grace is no more Grace Either therefore the Law was a Covenant of Grace or it was a Covenant of Works If it was a Covenant of Grace then according to the scope of the Apostle's Reasoning it was not a Covenant of Works or it is no more of Works that is it is not of Works at all And consequently Moses doth not describe the Righteousness which is of the Law as he doth that the Man that doth these things shall live by them But if this be absurd and it be evident that it is as it is indeed a Covenant of Works For the same Reason therefore neither can it in any Sence be a Covenant of Gospel-Grace otherwise as the Apostle speaks Work is no more Work For these two Grace and Works or Faith and Works are constantly in the Scripture opposed the one unto the other in point of our Justification before God's Presence which is our present case and admit of no Mixture § 6. So that though the Law even as it is a Covenant of Works is not against the Promises that is there is no Repugnancy between them there being a sweet Harmony and Conjunction of all the Blessed Attributes of God in Christ in the way of the Salvation of Sinners yet the Law is constantly in the Scripture represented in a way of Contradistinction to the Promises and so it is in the words foregoing as hath been already observed ver 18. If saith the Apostle the Inheritance be of the Law it is no more of Promise but God gave it to Abraham by Promise And which is yet clearer the same Apostle doth also assure us Rom. 4. 14. That if they which are of the Law be heirs Faith is made void and the Promise made of none Effect Therefore the Law could not possibly be a Covenant of Faith but of Works SECT VI. ANd whereas the Apostle doth also tell us Rom. 3. 31. That we do not make Void the Law through Faith but Establish it This also is true and no way Contradicteth but is Consistent enough with what hath been Asserted viz. That the Law is no other than a Covenant of Works Forasmuch as Christ our surety hath fulfilled it for us given it its due Honour and satisfied its Penalty on our behalf So that we are so far from making void the Law through Faith that it is rather thereby Established as having received greater Honour by the obedience and Sufferings of Christ than ever could have been given it by us § 2. And yet further which is also Objected to the same purpole as before whereas the Apostle doth also tell us Rom. 10. 4. That Christ is the end of the Law for Righteousness to every one that believeth The Sence is Evident Forasmuch as what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the Flesh God sending his own Son in the likeness of Sinful Flesh and for Sin or by a Sacrifice for Sin Condemned Sin in the Flesh that the Righteousness of the Law might be fullfilled in us that is in the Person of our surety for us Rom. 8 3 4. And thus Christ is the end of the Law for Righteousness to every one that believeth by fulfilling its Commands and answering its Penalty on our behalf But doth it therefore follow that the Law is a Covenant of Faith It is Evident that Christ Submitted to it as a Covenant of Works And if it was so to Christ it was so to us and would have been so and the Curse thereof had accordingly lighted on us had not Christ Interposed for our Relief But saith the Apostle when the Fulness of time was come God sent forth his Son made of a Woman made under the Law to Redeem them that were under the Law that we might receive the Adoption of Sons Gal. 4. 4 5. From whence it clearly appears that the Law was not a Covenant of Faith For if it had what necessity was there for Christ to have Redeemed us from under it Can we imagine that Christ ever shed his Blood to Redeem us from being under a Covenant of Faith or from being under a Gospel Covenant The Law was therefore no other than a Covenant of Works from which Christ hath now Redeemed us by his Blood and Sufferings for us The Law indeed shews us our Sin and Misery without Christ but Relieves us not Rom. 7. 7 8 9 10. which the Covenant of Faith doth Rom. 10. 6 7 8 9. Nay the Law instead of Relieving or Curing us it brings us under the Curse which the Covenant of Faith delivers us from Gal. 3. 8 9 10. But though we are delivered from the Law as a Covenant of Life Do this and live yet it is also as true that All true Believers are still under the Law to Christ as a Rule of Life 1 Cor. 9. 21. SECT VII MR. Sedgwick doth indeed also tell us in his forementioned Discourse upon the Covenants p. 174. That that Covenant which God made with Moses and under which Moses stood was no Covenant of Works But Moses and the People of Israel were both under the same Covenant Exod. 34. 27. I have made a Covenant with thee and with Israel If any doubt under what Covenant Moses stood whether of Works or Grace let him peruse Heb. 11. 26. What a Description he shall there find of Moses He shall there find him to be a Choice and Eminent Believer in Christ Esteeming the Reproach of Christ greater Riches than the Treasures in Aegypt and having respect to the Recompence of Reward c. Now certainly such a Choice Believer in Christ was not under a Covenant of Works And p. 175 176. speaking of the immediate Introduction unto the giving of the Law Exod. 20. 2. I am the Lord thy God which have brought thee out of the Land of Aegypt Why saith he there is the very Covenant of Grace Here is God as our God And Blessed are the People who have the Lord to be their God And here is Jesus Christ the Mediator of the Covenant implied for in Christ doth God become our God And there is our Redemption from Sin and Satan intimated by their Deliverance out of Aegypt And presently there is the Worship of God Instituted and Appointed which if Acceptable to God must be performed with Faith For without Faith it is impossible to please God And saith he upon the Breaking of the Tables of the Covenant before they were Written again there is such a Preface made by God as can no way fit any Covenant but that of
the words of this Law to do them The promises I now make you are full and Glorious enough But these are the Terms on which you must Expect if ever you come to the Fruition of them This is the Substance of the Preface and after Explication that God himself makes unto and concerning the Covenant which he now made with Moses and with Israel even with the whole Body of that People which was by the Finger of God himself Written and Ingraven in Stones And is accordingly mentioned at large Exod. 20. In the several ten Branches Commandments or main Heads thereof § 4. In the next place if we Enquire into the Nature of this Covenant What sort of Covenant it was Whether a Covenant of Grace or a Covenant of Works As it is Evident that it could be no other than a Covenant of Works since we see it required perfect Obedience as the condition of obtaning the mercies therein promis'd wherein the very Essence of that Covenant Consisted So in order to a further discovery of the true nature of the Covenant in question We must compare some passages in Exod. 34. with 2 Cor. 3. and Col. 2. 14. In Exod. 34. 1. The Lord said unto Moses hew the two Tables of Stone like unto the first And I will Write upon these Tables the words that were in the first Tables ver 4. And he hewed two Tables of Stone like unto the first And Moses went up unto the Mount Sinai as the Lord Commanded him and took in his hand the two Tables of Stone ver 28. And he was there with the Lord 40 days and 40 nights and he Wrote upon the Tables the words of the Covenant the ten Commandments And it came to pass when Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two Tables of Testimony in Moses's hand when he came down from the Mount that Moses Wist not that the Skin of his Face shone while he talked with him And when Aaron and all the Children of Israel saw Moses behold the Skin of his Face shone and they were afraid to come nigh him If we will know therefore the true Nature of the Covenant we shall find that the Spirit of God by the Apostle doth give us a clear determination thereof in the fore-mentioned 2. Cor. 3. 5 6. Our Sufficiency saith he is of God who hath also made us able Ministers of the New Testament not of the Letter but of the Spirit that is not of the Law but of the Gospel For the Letter Killeth but the Spirit giveth Life But saith he ver 7. If the Ministration of Death Written and Engraven in Stones was Glorious so that the Children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the Face of Moses for the Glory of his Countenance which Glory was to be done away how shall not the Ministration of the Spirit be rather Glorious So again ver 9. If the Ministration of Condemnation be Glory much more doth the Ministration of Righteousness exceed in Glory Wherein we cannot but observe that the Apostle doth evidently Reflect upon the fore mentioned Passage in Exod. 34 28 29 c. Where we are told that Moses Received from God the two Tables of Stone wherein the words of the Covenant even the Ten Commandments were Written and Engraven by the Finger of God himself and this Expresly under the Denomination of the Covenant which God then made with Israel Deut. 4. 13. Which made Moses his Face to shine so that Aaron and all the Children of Israel were afraid to come nigh him 'T is clear then that this is the Covenant that Paul hear speaks of And what Character or Description doth he give thereof Why saith he The Law Written and Engraven in Stones how Glorious soever it was in it self was of a Killing Nature it was the Ministration of Death and Condemnation and that which was to be done away To which same purpose the same Apostle also tells us Col. 2. 14. That Christ hath Blotted out the Hand-writing of Ordinances that was against us which was contrary to us and hath took it out of the way nailing it to his Cross Where the Apostle speaks plainly of the same thing and to the same purpose as he doth to the Corinthians for there he speaks of the Law Written in Stones which saith he was a Ministration of Death and Condemnation And hereof the Hand-writing of Ordinances that was against us and contrary to us as the Law must needs be if it was indeed no other than a Ministration of Death and Condemnation as the Apostle describes it But is the Covenant of Faith of this Nature Or was the Covenant of Grace a Ministration of Death and Condemnation as the Apostle Affirms the Law written in Stones to be Was the Covenant of Grace against us Contrary to us and therefore now Blotted out done away taken out of the way and Nailed to the Cross of Christ as the Apostle speaks of the Hand-writing of Ordinances or the Law written in Stones These are Solâ—cisms too strong for Digestion It can never be imagined And yet all this must needs follow if the Law was a Covenant of Grace as is Affirmed 'T is true there was a Covenant of Grace that ran Current therewith as hath been before declared whereby Moses and all the Elect among that People were delivered from the Curse of that Fiery Burning Law that was thus given them But shall we therefore call the Ministration of Death a Ministration of Grace Or the ministration of Condemnation a Ministration of Life and Righteousness which the Apostle doth so plainly set in Opposition thereunto Or shall we say that that which was against us and contrary to us was a Covenant of Grace or for the Substance of it such The Apostle as we have already seen tells us the quite contrary And so he doth Rom. 7. 9 10. When the Commandment came saith he Sin Revived and I Died And the Commandment which was Ordained to Life I found to be unto Death And how then can it be justly Affirmed that the Law was a Covenant of Gospel-Grace or that it was such for the Substance thereof when the Apostle found it by Experience to be a Ministration of Death § 5. Indeed the World Groans under the Burthen of such Subtile Sophistical Distinctions whereby the Truths of the Gospel have been so long Obscured as they have been and are in respect of the present Point a Point of such vast Consequence and Concernment to the Church of God For what can be of greater Moment than the Two Covenants the Truths concerning which are as the two Master Veins that branch themselves forth and lye dispersed up and down throughout the whole Body of the Scriptures If therefore it shall be found that we have been all this while Mistaken in our Notion about the Covenants what they are and which they be or that we have given the Appellation of the Covenant of Grace to a Covenant of Works and hereon
then according to the scope of the Apostles Reasoning it is no more of Works And if so whence is it that Works are so plainly required as the Condition of obtaining the mercies therein promised and which the forementioned Objection doth give such a full demonstration concerning that it shines with a clear and convincing Evidence in the faces of those that assert it to be a Covenant of Grace If therefore it be as indeed it is a Covenant of Works and purposely so dispensed as to tender Life and Happiness upon Condition of Doing which Mr. Roberts himself grants How comes it to be a Covenant of Grace since the Apostle assures us that if it be of Works then it is no more Grace otherwise Work is no more Work So that we see the Scripture allows of no such Mixture and shews us 't is impossible that the same Covenant should be so dispensed as to tender Life and Happiness upon two such Opposite and Contrary Conditions as Faith and Works And yet this Absurdity all those must of necessity run into that affirm the Sinai Covenant to be a Covenant of Faith Since it is evident and cannot be denied but that Life and Happiness are therein frequently and plainly tendred upon Condition of Doing § 10. But saith Mr. Roberts in this Sinai Covenant those Opposite Conditions of Perfect Doing under pain of Curse and Death and of Believing in Christ are very differently Required and Revealed Believing in Christ is revealed very Sparingly and Obscurely Perfect Doing very frequently and plainly that by the way is well granted But saith he though these two Conditions of Perfect Doing and Believing he thus differently Revealed and Required in the Sinai Covenant yet Believing in Christ unto Life and Reighteousness was therein chiefly and ultimately intended and Perfect Doing only urged in subordination and tendency to Believing And that Believing in Christ unto Righteousness is chiefly and ultimately intended in the Sinai Covenant is plain from Moses himself drawing the Righteousness of Faith from that Covenant Deut. 30. 11 to 15. Compared with Rom. 10. 6 to 11. § 11. Reply But if Believing in Christ unto Life and Righteousness was chiefly and ultimately intended in the Sinai Covenant and Perfect Doing only urged in subordination and tendencie to Believing How comes it to pass that the Apostle doth so directly oppose the Righteousness of that Covenant to the Righteousness of Faith in the forementioned Rom. 10. 5 6. For Moses saith he describeth the Righteousness which is of the Law that the man which doth these things shall live by them But the Righteousness which is of Faith speaketh on this wise c. in a quite different strain and stile Wherein when he tells us that the Law saith Do this and Live How can it be understood but that his Meaning is that this is the Only Righteousness which the Law requireth in order to Life and Salvation Or this is that which it ultimately intends and no other way doth it propound in order thereunto For otherwise we cannot rationally understand him especially since he doth elsewhere assure us that the Law is not of Faith Gal. 3. 12. The Objection against which from Deut. 30. 11 c. Compared with Rom. 10. 6. c. from whence it is inferred that the Law requireth Faith in Christ in order to Life and Righteousness as well as the Gospel hath been already Answered in the foregoing parts of this Discourse where it hath been plainly proved that the 30th of Deuteronomy is taken up with the Description not of the Covenant at Sinai but of that New and Evangelical Covenant that God intended to Establish with Israel in after-times and is accordingly represented as a quite different Covenant from that at Sinai as plainly appears by the manner of Paul's allegation thereof Rom. 10. 6. And that chiefly for as much as it required faith in Christ in order to Life and Righteousness as the Apostle there interprets it Whereas the Sinai Covenant as both Paul and Moses himself describes it insists on Works onely that the Man which doth these things shall live by them And to say that these two opposite Conditions may be Required in one and the same Sinai Covenant is plainly to Contradict the Apostle who in his Interpretation thereof sets the Righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness of Faith in direct Opposition the one unto the other as Inconsistent in one and the same Covenant Moses saith be describeth the Righteousness which is of the Law that the Man which doth these things shall live by them But the Righteousness which is of Faith speaketh on this wise c. If thou shalt believe thou shalt be saved Whereby he would have us plainly to understand that these are two opposite Covenants Whereas had it been his meaning that the Law or Sinai Covenant was purposely so dispensed as to tender Life and Happiness upon two such opposite and contrary Conditions he would not have said that the Law requireth one thing and the Righteousness of Faith another But that the Law requireth both And therefore it must of necessity follow that the Apostle speaks of two contrary Covenants requiring two opposite Conditions It being indeed Impossible that one and the same Covenant should be so dispensed § 12. And here by the way it may be observed that though Mr. Baxter as hath been already noted in the foregoing part of this Discourse seems plainly to grant that the Law or Sinai Covenant was no other then a Covenant of Works requiring perfect Obedience as the Condition of Life unto which the Righteousness of Faith or the Gospel Covenant is opposed by the Apostle Rom. 10. 5 6. Which Gospel Covenant he supposeth to be insisted on both in the 29th and 30th Chapters of Deuteronomy and that from both the Apostle draws that Description of the Righteousness of Faith he speaketh of making no difference between the Covenants or Promises mentioned in those two Chapters Mr. Roberts on the other hand we see makes the Sinai Covenant and the Covenant of Faith to be all one For saith he that believing in Christ unto Righteousness is chiefly and ultimately intended in the Sinai Covenant is plain from Moses himself drawing the Righteousness of Faith from that Covenant Deut. 30. 11 to 15. compared with Rom. 10. 6 to 11. So that in thâ—s Respect Mr. Roberts or Mr. Baxter most of necessity be out of the way either the one or the other or both of them For to say as Mr. Baxter doth that though the Righteousness of Faith is by the Apostle opposed unto the Law or Sinai Covenant yet not unto the Covenant mentioned Deut. 29. reckoning that in the 30th Chapter to be all one with that in the 29th is widely different from the Truth Since it hath been already plainly proved that the Covenant mentioned Deut. 29. is of the same Stamp and Tenour with the Sinai Covenant and that both are Essentially different from the Covenant
in God that he will have to do with Men at any Rate yet that the Covenant from Mount Sinai was in any Sense or is by vertue of any proper Scripture Distinction to be understood as a Covenant of Gospel Grace whereof Christ alone is the Mediator This is that which for all those forementioned Reasons we utterly deny And this is the Point the onely Point which in the beginning of this Discourse we undertook to disprove And that as being of no small Consequence to the Church of God For upon this Hypothesis or Supposition That the Covenant at Sinai was indeed a Covenant of Grace or a Gospel Covenant for any other Notion of it will not serve the turn and consequently that the Covenant of Circumcision made with Abraham Gen. 17. 7 8 9. is of the same Nature the greatest part of the most plausible Arguments for the support of Infants Baptism are founded But if we have or câ—â— substantially prove that neither of these forementioned Covenants were Gospel Covenants no wonder if we make an Answerable Improvement thereof in its proper place by way of opposition to the forementioned Practice § 6 As for the Scripture before alledged 1 Tim. 1. 8. We know that the Law is good if a Man use it Lawfully It is indeed highly observable For as much as there is a Lawful as well as an unlawful use that Men may make thereof that is if we make use of it as the Rule of our Obedience then we make that Right Just Proper and Lawful use thereof which God requires For we know that in this Respect we are still under the Law to Christ And in this Respect it is true enough as the Apostle tells us that thâ— Law is Holy Just and Good For there is therein a Spiritual Discovery of the Holiness and Righteousness of Gods Nature and Being whose Image must be Ingraven upon us if ever we arrive unto true Blessedness But if we Preach it up or endeavour to Establish it as a Covenant of Life or as a Covenant of Faith and Grace which are Equipollent terms Let us distinguish as we please between a Covenant of Grace Absolutely and subserviently such and consequently are desirous in that Respect to be under it as the Apostle tells the Gallatians and which we cannot avoid if we reckon it to be a Covenant of Grace then according to the Apostles plain Scope in the whole Epistles to the Romans and Gallatians instead of using it lawfully we make an unlawful use thereof by perverting it to such a service as God never Intended it for And are guilty of mingling Law and Gospel together Life and Death and as we have said before a Ministration of Condemnation with that of Righteousness and Peace which would be no other than to overthrow both the Law and Gospel And this is the Apostles own Distinction given us as a Key to open this Controversie by Gal. 1. 6 7. SECT XIII BUT whereas it is yet further Objected That after this Rate both Moses and Abraham and all the Old Testament Saints were under two contrary Covenants at one and the same time from whence many Absurdites do follow As to this we dare not Impeach or Controle Infinite Wisdom We have onely declared plain matter of Fact so far as the Scriptures themselves do inform us For therein it is Evident as hath been already proved that both Moses and the whole Body of that People of Israel in the Wildernest were under the forementioned Covenant from Mount Sinai and that expresly as the Covenant which the Lord Commanded them to perform Deut. 4. 13. And that under the severest Penalties of a dreadful Curse upon every one that Confirmed not all the Words of this Law to do them unto which all the People were to say Amen Deut. 27. 26. This Covenant therefore they were absolutely under as being expresly made both with Moses and the whole Body of the Children of Israel without Exception of any Exod. 34. 27. which we have already argued at large could be no other than a Covenant of Works A Ministration of Death and Condemnation A hand writing of Ordinances that was against us contrary to us And therefore now Blotted out and taken out of the way being Nailed to the Cross of Christ When yet it is also as Evident from the same Holy Scriptures of Truth That at the same time both Moses and all the Elect among that People were under a pure Covenant of Gospel Grace as we have already proved when the Lord told Moses that he had found Grace in his Sight and that he knew him by Name and would make all his Goodness to pass before him and would Proclaim the Name of the Lord before him Saying I will be Gracious to whom I will be Gracious And I will shew Mercy to whom I will shew Mercy And when accordingly the Lord descended in the Cloud and stood with Moses there And Proclaimed the Name of the Lord The Lord God Merciful and Gracious Long-suffering and Abundant in Goodness and in Truth keeping Mercy for Thousands forgiving Iniquity Transgression and Sin Now we have already proved that these were two Distinct Covenants The one made with Moses and the whole Body of that People The other with Moses and those that were Elected among them onely And if these were two contrary Covenants and in themselves just opposite the one unto the other of them â—s indeed they were we have nothing to say but to Conclude with the Apostle in another case concerning the Call of the Gentiles and Rejection of the Jews that were once Gods onely Beloved People to whom pertained the Adoption and the Glory and the Covenants and the giving of the Law and the Service of God and the Promises O the depth of the Riches both of the Wisdom and Knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his Judgments and his Ways pâ—st finding â—ut Rom. 11. 33 34. § 2. However though 't is true New Testament Saints are absolutely freed from the Law as a Covenant of Works by the Sacrifice of Christ yet it is Evident that during the time thereunto appointed by the Father those before were under the Power and Tyranny thereof notwithstanding those Discoveries of Gospel Grace that were otherwise Revealed unto them To this purpose the Apostle tells us Expresly Gal. 3. 23. c. Before Faith came we saith he that is we Jews not we Gentiles for thess passages agree not with the Gentiles at all but we Jews were kept under the Law shut up unto the Faith which should afterward be revealed â—or as he had said before The Law was added because of Transgressions till the Seed should come to whom the Promise 〈◊〉 made Wherefore the Law was our School-master to Christ that we might be Justified by Faith But after that Faith is come we are no longer under a School-master So again Chap. 4. 1 2 3. c. Now I say that the Heir as long as he is a Child
differeâ—h nothing from a Servant though he be Lord of all But it under Tutors and Governours until the time appointed of the Father Even so we when we were Children were in Bondage under the Elements of the World But when the fulness of time was come God sent forth his Son made of a Woman made under the Law to Redeem them that were under the Law that we might Receive the Adoption of Sons So that upon the whole it is plain matter of Fact evident and undeniable Resolve we the Mystery thereof how we will That the Jews even the whole Body of that People without exception of any were for the time appointed of the Father under the Dominion and Tiranny of the Law and that as a Covenant of Works or a Bondage Covenant when yet it is equally as evident that at the same time all the Elect among them were under a Covenant of pure Gospel Grace whereby they were saved § 3. Wherefore we must grant that God's People were then under two distinct or essentially different Covenants We say we must do so provided always that the way of Reconciliation and Salvation was the same under both But it will be said and with great pretence of Reason for it is that which is the sole Foundation they all build upon who affirm the Legal and the Gospel-Covenants to be only a twofold Administration of the same Covenant That this being the Principal End of a Divine Covenant If the way of Reconciliation and Salvation be the same under both then indeed they are for the Substance of them but one And we grant that this would inevitably follow If it were so equally by vertue of them both If Reconciliation and Salvation by Christ were to be obtained not only under the Old Covenant but by vertue thereof then it must be the same for substance with the New But this is not so For no Reconciliation with God nor Salvation could ever be obtained by vertue of the Old Covenant or the Administration of it For by the Deeds of the Law there shall no Flesh be justified in his sight as our Apostle disputes at large Rom. 3. 20 c. though all Believers were Râ—â—oncâ—led Justified and Saved by vertue of the Promise whilst they were under that Covenant § 4. And how absurd soever it may seem to be to affirm that God'â— People were under two Contrary Covenants at one and the same time yet as we see the Scriptures do plainly assure us they were so it is evident that the absurdity is by far the greater on the other hand to affirm that the Sinai Covenant was purposely so dispensed as to tender Life and Happiness upon two Opposite and quite Contrary Conditions viz. Works and Faith Perfect Doing and Believing as if the same Foundaiâ—â—â— could at the same time yield forth bitter waters and sweet Which absurdity all those must of necessity run into that affirm the Sinai Covenant to be a Covenant of Faith in Christ Jesus As hath been already shewn SECT XIV ANd here we should have drawn up the sum of what hath been already offered on the present Subject but that there are four Arguments yet behind pretending to prove that the Sinai Covenant and that made with Adam in Paradise were not the same but widely different Covenants which remain therefore to be Answered Only by the way it must be remembred that two Arguments to the same purpose have already been dispatcht The First was That though the Sinai Covenant materially Considered is the same with Adams yet intentionally it is vastly different The Second was That the Sinai Covenant had a Mediator which Adams wanted Both which we hope have been Satisfactorily Answered in the foregoing parts of this Discourse It remains therefore that we proceed to the Consideration of those that follow The first whereof runs thus Arg. 1. Those Covenants that differ in the Subjects or Parties with whom they are made are not the same but different Covenants But so doth that at Sinai and that in Paradice The Covenant made with Adam was made with Innocent and Perfect Man able to keep it This with Lapsed Sinful Man utterly disabled to keep any one Precept of it Reply To which we Reply That the difference betwixt the Subjects makes no alteration in the Substance or Essence of the Covenants Especially since we have already by several Arguments substantially proved not only that they were Materially the same which your selves cannot but acknowledge but intentionally also And forasmuch as 't is undeniable That God hath not forfeited or lost his Right of Sovereignty or Dominion over us though we have forfeited and lost our strength and capacity of Obedience the Covenants in question therefore may very well be the same notwithstanding the difference betwixt their Subjects Arg. 2. Those Covenants that vastly differ in their Dedication are not the same but divers But so doth the Covenants with Israel and with Adam The Covenant with Adam taught no way of the Expiation of Sins by the Dedication of it so did that with Moses Exod. 24. 8. And Moses took the Blood and sprinkled it on the People and said Behold this is the Blood of the Covenant which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words Reply To this we Reply That it hath been already proved That though the Ceremonial Covenant was indeed dedicated with Blood and Sprinkling yet the Law written in Stones was noâ— So that if Adam's Covenant wanted Confirmation or Dedication with Blood shewing the Remission of Sins so did that written in Stones also And therefore in this respect there is no difference at all betwixt them True it is that the Ceremonial Covenant was â—o dedicated in which respect there is a plain difference betwixt that and the Covenant made with Adam But this alters not the Case For it is evident that the Law written in Stones was not so dedicated and that is enough to prove what we have all along asserted That the Covenant of Works made with our First Parent was renewed to that People in the Wilderness And though 't is true the Ceremonial Covenant being dedicated as it was did point unto Christ and the way of Salvation by him yet nevertheless it hath been already proved that it was a Covenant of Works as well as that written in Stones and therefore both of them now Repealed to make way for the New Covenant which was established upon better Promises And it having been proved that they were both no other than two several Editions of the same Covenant of Works and that neither of them can with any shadow of Truth or Justice be stiled a Covenant of Grace or a Gospel Covenant which cannot be affirmed without contradicting the whole Scope of the Scriptures it sufficiently serves the design we level at whether there be a Perfect Identity in every Circumstance between either of these and Adam's Covenant or no. For as Dr. Owen well observes Whatever variations
tells them Vers 45. That he would for their sakes remember the Covenant of their Ancestors whom he brought forth out of the Land of Egypt This must of necessity have Reference either to the forementioned Covenant with Abraham Isaac and Jacob Or the Promises mentioned Exod. 33. 34. And cannot possibly have any Reference to the Sinai Covenant For that was a Bondage Covenant Gal. 4. 21 22 c. A Ministration of Death and Condemnation 2 Cor. 3. 7 8 9. Against us and contrary to us And therefore now Blotted out Col. 2. 14. And is accordingly by Moses himself represented as a fiery Law that Proceeded from Gods Right Hand Deut. 33. â—â— So that that could not possibly yield any comfort unto them Whereas the forementioned Covenants did plainly give them hopes of Relief and Pardon But say you see Vers 46. and all is ended We have therefore accordingly Examined that Text But cannot discern that it speaks any thing by way of opposition to what we have Asserted For thus run the words These are the Statutes and Judgments and Laws which the Lord made between him and the Children of Israel at Mount Sinai by the Hand of Moses which can have no other Sense than this That this being the last Verse of the last Chapte save one of Leviticus wherein the Statutes and Judgments or the several branches of the Ceremonial Law had been particularly Rehearsed unto them These words in this 46th Verse contains therefore onely the general Sum thereof So that we cannot discern that it makes off or on as to the present Argument Arg. 4. The Fourth and last Argument runs thus Those Covenants which have Seals annexed of vastly different Nature are not Absolutely or just the same but widely different Covenants But so have these two Covenants Ergo not the same The Tree of Life was the onely Sacrament Annext to the first but the Passover and Circumcision to the last Both holding forth Christ and Salvation by him The first a plain Type of Christ in the Paschal Lamb. The other a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith Reply First as to what concerns the Tree of Life which you say was the onely Sacrament annext to Adams Covenant That it was either a Sacrament or a Seal annext to that Covenant the Scripture gives us no Account thereof that we can find And as the Passover and Circumcision which you make to be the Seals of the Sinai Covenant the Scripture is as silent even in that Respect also As for the Passover it was indeed as you say a plain Type of Christ as many other things then were But we do not find that it is ever called a Seal of the Sinai Covenant Nor do we find that Circumcision is ever called the Seal thereof It is indeed called a Seal of the Righteousness of the Faith that Abraham had yet being uncircumcized Rom. 4. 11. But the same Apostle expresly tells us Gal. 3. 12. That the Law is not of Faith And if the Law is not of Faith then neither can it be a Covenant of Faith And then it doth also as plainly follow that Circumcision which is by the Apostle termed a Seal of the Righteousness of Abrahams Faith could not be the Seal thereof And in this Respect therefore it is highly observable That though Circumcision is frequently called a Token of the Covenant mentioned Gen. 17. 7 8 9. to the generality that were under it yet the Scripture no where tells us That it was a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith but unto Abraham onely For indeed none else had ever before or after their Circumcision such a Faith that Entituled them to such Singular Promises and Prerogatives as Abraham had But of this we have already said so much toward the Resolution of the present Point in the Seventh Branch of our Answer to the Eleventh Objection in the Second Part of this Discourse foregoing and have yet so much to say in what follows where we shall have a further occasion purposely to handle this Argument that we shall need to say the less of it here SECT XV. FOR a Conclusion of the present Point we shall onely Collect the sum of the foregoing Arguments already Insisted on proving that the Legal Covenant was not a Covenant of Faith But was indeed and in truth no other than a Covenant of Works For First That Covenant that is not of Faith cannot possibly be a Covenant of Faith But the Apostle doth expresly affirm that the Law is not of Faith Gal. 3. 11 12. Therefore neither can it be a Covenant of Faith Secondly That Covenant which is now Repealed could not be a Covenant of Faith But the Apostle doth plainly affirm that the first Covenant for the faultiness thereof is now Repealed Heb. 8. 7 13. 2 Cor. 3. 7 11. Col. 2. 14. Heb. 7. 18. Therefore that Covenant could not be a Covenant of Faith Thirdly That Covenant that could not give Life could not be a Covenant of Faith But the Law could not give Life Gal. 3. 21. 22. Therefore it could not be a Covenant of Faith Fourthly That Covenant that is opposed to the Covenant of Faith as quite another thing could not be a Covenant of Faith But the School-mastership of the Law is by the Apostle plainly opposed and contradistinguished unto the Covenant of Faith as quite another thing Gal. 3. 23 24 25. Therefore it could not be a Covenant of Faith Fifthly That Covenant the Righteousness whereof is opposed to the Righteousness of Faith cannot be a Covenant of Faith But the Righteousness of the Law is plainly by the Apostle opposed to the Righteousness of Faith Rom. 10. 5 6 c. Therefore it could not be a Covenant of Faith Sixthly That Covenant that could never Justifie any that were under it could never be a Covenant of Faith For being Justified by Faith we have Peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ Rom. 5. 1. But the Scripture doth expresly Testifie That by the Deeds of the Law there shall no Flesh be Justified in his Sight Rom. 3. 20. Therefore that Covenant could never be a Covenant of Faith Seventhly That Covenant under which though many were Justified yet none were ever Justified by it or by vertue of it could never be a Covenant of Faith But such is the Nature of the Law that though many were Justified under it yet none were ever Justified by it or by Vertue of it Rom. 3. 20. Therefore that Covenant could never be a Covenant of Faith Eighthly That Covenant that saith Do this and Live Or that the Man that doth these things shall Live by them cannot possibly be a Covenant of Gospel-Grace but of Works Since the Apostle Informs us That to him that worketh is the Reward reckoned not of Grace but of Debt Rom. 4. 4. But the same Apostle doth expresly tell us That Moses describeth the Righteousness of the Law that the Man which doth these things shall live by them Rom. 10. 5.
Therefore that Covenant could be no other than a Covenant of Works Ninthly That Covenant that is plainly and in direct terms opposed unto Grace cannot be a Covenant of Grace But the Law is by the Apostle directly opposed unto Grace Rom. 6. 14. Sin shall not have Dominion over you For ye are not under the Law but under Grace Therefore that Covenant could never be a Covenant of Grace Tenthly That Covenant that was not onely by the Jews Estimated as a Covenant of Works but was so by Gods own Appointment must needs be a Covenant of Works But the Law was not onely by the Jews so Reckoned but by Gods own Appointment it was expresly so designed Lev. 18. 4 5. Deut. 27. 26. Rom. 10. 5. Gal. 3. 10 12. Therefore that Covenant must needs be a Covenant of Works Eleventhly That Covenant through which Abrahams Inheritance was not derived could not be a Covenant of Faith but of Works But the Apostle doth expresly tell us That if the Inheritance be of the Law it is no more of Promise But God gave it to Abraham by Promise Gal. 3. 18. Therefore the Law could not possibly be a Covenant of Faith but of Works Twelfthly That Covenant through which had the Inheritance been conveyed would have made void Faith and made the Promise of none effect could not possibly be a Covenant of Faith But the Apostle doth expresly tell us That if they which are of the Law be Heirs Faith is made void and the Promise made of none effect Rom. 4. 14. Therefore the Law could not possibly be a Covenant of Faith Thirteenthly That Covenant from the Curse whereof we were Redeemed by Christ could not be a Covenant of Grace but of Works But the Apostle Informs us That Christ hath Redeemed us from the Curse of the Law himself being made a Curse for us Gal. 3. 13. chap. 4. 4 5. Therefore the Law could not be a Covenant of Grace but of Works Fourteenthly That Covenant that is set forth by the Apostle as a Ministration of Death and Condemnation could be no other than a Covenant of Works But the Apostle doth assure us that the Law Written in Stones was a Ministration of Death and Condemnation 2 Cor. 3. 7 9. Therefore it could be no other than a Covenant of Works Fifteenthly That Covenant in which 〈◊〉 the Hand writing of Ordinances contained was against us and contrary to us which is therefore now Blotted out and taken out of the way being Nailed to the Cross of Christ could be no other than a Covenant of Works But such is the Nature of the Law Col. 2. 14. 2 Cor. 3. 6 7 8 9. Therefore it could be no other than a Covenant of Works Sixteenthly That Covenant which when it comes Revives Sin and kills the Sinner And which though it was Ordained to Life is by Experience found to be unto Death could not be a Covenant of Grace But Paul doth expresly tell us That when the Commandment came Sin Revived and he died And the Commandment which was Ordained to Life he found to be unto Death Rom. 7. 9 10. Therefore that Covenant could not be a Covenant of Grace but of Works Seventeenthly That Covenant that is a Bondage Covenant which gendereth to Bondage all whose Children also are in Bondage cannot possibly be a Covenant of Faith but of Works But the Apostle doth Expresly Inform us that Mount Sinai Covenant is a Bondage Covenant that is gendereth to Bondage and that her Children also are in Bondage Gal. 4. 21 22 23 24 26. Therefore Mount Sinai Covenant could be no other than a Covenant of Works Eighteenthly That Covenant that admitted not of Faith in the Redeemer nor Repentance of Sin Since Pardon of Sin and Curse for Sin are Inconsistent could not be a Covenant of Grace But the Scripture doth expresly assure us That as many as are of the Works of the Law are under the Curse For it is Written Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are Written in the Book of the Law to do them Gal. 3. 10. Therefore that Covenant could not possibly be a Covenant of Grace but of Works Nineteenthly That Covenant that had not Christ for the Mediator of it could never be a Covenant of Faith but of Works But the Apostle speaking of the Legal Covenant made with Israel at Mount Sinai tells us That Christ hath obtained a more Excellent Ministry by how much also he is the Mediator of a better Covenant which was Established upon better Promises Heb. 8. 6 7 8. 9. From whence it plainly follows that Christ was not the Mediator of the Legal Covenant Therefore that Covenant could never be a Covenant of Faith but of Works Twentiethly That Covenant that was not Confirmed by the Blood of Christ which alone can cleanse us from all unrighteousness but onely by the Bloud of Bulls and Goats and Calves and the Ashes of an Heifer sprinkling the unclean which onely Sanctified to the Purifying of the Flesh and could never take away Sins nor make him that did the Service perfect as pertaining to the Conscience could not be a Covenant of Faith But the Ceremonial Law was of this Nature and the Sacrifices thereof wherewith alone it was Dedicated Heb. 9. 9 10. 11 12 13 14. Chap. 10. 1 2 3 4 c. Therefore that Covenant could not possibly be a Covenant of Faith but of Works Twenty first That Covenant that was not confirmed by the Bloud of Christ No nor so much as by the Bloud of Bulls or Goats or Calves which was plainly Typical thereof could never be a Covenant of Grace but of Works But the Law Written in Stones was so far from being confirmed by the Bloud of Christ that it was never that we read of Dedicated with any other sort of Bloud whatsoever Therefore that Covenant could not possibly be a Covenant of Grace but of Works Twenty second That Covenant that is Represented to us in the Scripture as a Fiery Burning Law the Proclamation also whereof was attended with dreadful Thunderings and Lightenings with Blackness and Darkness and Tempest And such a Voice of Words as could not be endured which made Moses himself exceedingly to quake and tremble could not be a Covenant of Faith but of Works But such was the Nature and Quality of the Legal Covenant at Mount Sinai Exod. 20. 18. 19. Deut. 33. 2. Heb. 12. 18 19 20 21. Therefore that Covenant could not be a Covenant of Faith but of Works Twenty third That Covenant that is just opposite to the Gospel Covenant which the Scripture represents unto us as a Covenant of Peace and Liberty making a Joyful found and speaking with a small still comfortable and alluring Voice in the Ears and to the Hearts of Sinners that hath also Jesus for the Mediator thereof and speaketh better things than the Bloud of Abel Proclaiming the Lord the Lord God Gracious and Merciful Abundant in Goodness and in Truth forgiving Iniquity
him to make his Name Great that he should be a Blessing that in him should all the Families of the Earth be Blessed that he should be the Father of many Nations according to that which was spoken so shall thy Seed be Gen. 12. 2 3. Gen. 15. 5. And it is evident that these were the Promises upon the account whereof we are told that he believed in the Lord and he counted it to him for Righteousness Gen. 15. 6. Circumcision therefore was a Seal only unto Abraham and that of the Righteousness of the Faith which he had in respect of the Promises made him long before his Circumcision and that for this very purpose that he might be the Father of all them that believe which was his Prerogative alone For none besides him had ever before their Circumcision such a Faith which entituled them to such singular Promises § 2. Upon the whole though it must be acknowledged that the Objection seems at first very Plausible How can it be but that the Covenant of Circumcision must needs be a Covenant of Faith since Abraham is said to have received the Sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith Yet we see when it comes to be duly examined there appears no such matter For the only Argument fairly resulting from Rom. 4. 11. can be no other than this That Covenant or those Promises in respect of which Abraham is said to have received the Sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith must needs be a Covenant of Faith But the Scripture is express that Abraham received the Sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of the Faith which he had yet being Vncircumcised which must of necessity be understood in respect of the forementioned Promises that had been made him long before his Circumcision and upon the account of which we are expresly told that he believed in the Lord and he counted it to him for Righteousness Gen. 15. 6. Therefore that Covenant or those Promises must needs be a Covenant of Faith But then as hath been already observed it follows not that the Promises made unto him and his Seed after him in their Generations upon Condition of his and their Circumcision mentioned Gen. 17. 7 8 9 10. were any part of the Covenant of Faith since the Apostle is express that Faith was not reckoned to him for Righteousness when he was in Circumcision but in Vncircumcision § 3. Circumcision therefore as we have said was a Seal only to Abraham and that in respect of the Promises made him yet being Vncircumcised whereby he was Confirmed in the Assurance of that Peculiar Prerogative that had been before conferred on him and which the Apostle here expresly mentioneth He received saith he the Sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of the Faith which he had yet being Vncircumcised that he might be the Father of all them that believe In respect whereof it is evident that Circumcision was that to the Father of the Faithful in its Extraordinary Institution and in his Extraordinary Circumstances that it could not be to any of his Natural Progeny in its Ordinary Vse It was indeed appointed as a Sign or Token of the Covenant Gen. 17. 7 8 9. and that both unto Abraham himself and the rest that were under it and so the Spirit of God himself expresly stiles it vers 11. Whereby they were obliged unto a Perfect and Universal Obedience to the whole revealed Will and Law of God Gal. 5. 3. For I testifie to every man that is Circumcised that he is a Debtor to do the whole Law and hereof 't is true it was a Sign or Token It being no other than the Restipulation of the Covenant on their part Gen. 17. 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 Every man-child among you shall be Circumcised But it doth not therefore follow that because it was a Token of that Covenant on their part in respect of their Duty that it was also intended as a Seal unto them of the same Covenant on God's part in respect of God's Promise It being a Seal only unto Abraham and that in respect of those Peculiar Promises made him in Uncircumcision Nor was every ones Circumcision so much as a Token to him of his Right to any of the Promises therein contained as is evident in Ishmael and others the Servants born and bred in Abraham's Family and Strangers bought with Mony who were all to be Circumcised to whom yet nevertheless none of the Promises in that Covenant were made as is plain from Gen. 17. 7 8 20 21 23 27. whereby it is clear that the true Reason why any were Circumcised was the Command not Interest in the Covenant Much less was Circumcision a Seal to all that received it of their interest in the Righteousness of that Faith that Abraham had And it is equally absurd to say that Circumcision was a Seal unto all its Subjects of the Righteousness of Faith which they had while Uncircumcised since many of them were never Possessors of that saying Grace neither before or after as to affirm that it was the Seal of a Paternal Relation to all Believers unto every one that received it this being Abraham's Peculiar Prerogative and Incommunicable to any else And indeed Circumcision was so far from being a Seal of the Gospel Covenant or of their Interest in the Righteousness of Faith to the rest that were under it that it was rather Token unto them of Servitude and Bondage and such a Yoke that as the Apostles tell them neither they nor their Fathers were able to bear it Acts 15. 10 24. Gal. 5. 2. 3. Which yet it had not been had it been to them a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith or of the Gospel Covenant For that brings with it true Christian Liberty and Freedom Gal. 5. 1. SECT VI. AND therefore when the Apostle tells us Gal. 3. 16. that to Abraham and his Seed were the Promises made He saith not unto Seeds as of many but as of one and to thy Seed which is Christ He could not have the Covenant of Circumcision in his Eye as 't is generally concluded he had For as hath been plainly proved that was no other than a Covenant of Works or a Legal Covenant obliging all that were under it to a perfect Obedience to the whole Law Gal. 5. 3. And therefore as the Promise that Abraham should be the Heir of the World was not derived unto him or to his Seed through the Righteousness of that Covenant So neither was Christ the Mediator of it He having obtained a more Excellent Ministry by how much also he is the Mediator of a better Covenant which is established upon better Promises Heb. 8. 6. Better Promises not for the Substance of them in themselves considered For as God promised to be a God unto that People in
But saith the Apostle the Scripture foreseeing that God would Justifie the Heathen through Faith that is freely and without the Works of the Law Preached before the Gospel unto Abraham Saying In thee shall all Nations be Blessed that is in Christ the Promised Seed And this was indeed plain Gospel A pure Evangelical Covenant wholly free and Absolute containing glad Tydings even unto the Gentiles also as well as to the Jews And is the very Language of the Gospel Covenant before Rehearsed out of Gen. 12. 2 3. and Gen. 22. 17 18. And not a word or Syllable of the Expression or terms of the Covenant of Circumcision That being plainly a Legal Covenant and the Promises therein Contained bounded with Conditions impossible to be performed And in this respect it is that he speaks as he doth in what follows So then saith he Vers 9. they which are of Faith are Blessed with Faithful Abraham still the Language of the Gospel Covenant They which are of Faith saith he are Blessed But how are they Blessed Why they are Blessed a◠Faithful Abraham was Blessed And how was that Was it in the way of Faith or Works In the way of Doing or Believing Not in the Way of Doing but in the way of Believing And accordingly the Apostle tells us Rom. 4. 13. That the Promise that he should be the Hear of the World was not to him or to his Seed through the Law but through the Righteousness of Faith For saith he Vers 14. If they which are of the Law be Heirs Faith is made void and the Promise made of none Effect Therefore it is of Faith that it might be by Grace to the end the promise might be sure to all the Seed To which same purpose the Apostle further adds Vers 13 14. of Gal. 3. That as many as are of the Works of the Law are under the Curse For it is Written Cursed is every one that Continueth not in all things that are Written in the Book of the Law to do them But Christ hath Redeemed us from the Curse of the Law being made a Curse for us That the Blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ The Reason of which last Clause through Jesus Christ He renders Vers 16. to be forasmuch as all the Promises of the Gospel Covenant were first made unto Christ the Inheriting Seed by and through whom alone they are to be Communicated to all his Members Now saith he to Abraham and his Seed were the Promises made He saith not Vnto Seeds as of many but as of one And to thy Seed which is Christ In all which we have the very words and Language the Tenor and Terms not of the Covenant of Circumcision I will be a God to thee and to thy Seed after thee in their Generations as it is there plainly expressed in the Plural Number and restrained onely to Abrahams Natural Posterity and that upon Condition of Obedience impossible to be performed which was the Tenor of that Covenant But of the Gospel Covenant before mentioned which as it was every way free and Absolute and therefore sure and certain to all the Seed therein concerned Rom. 4. 13 14 15 16. So it was as Vniversally Extensible through Christ the Promised Seed taking in both Jews and Gentiles For in thy Seed saith God to Abraham shall all the Nations of the Earth be Blessed Wherein as Gods Heart and Mouth seems to be filled with Blessings through Christ toward both Abraham himself and all the Seed therein concerned So doth the Apostle Recite the very same Expressions of Blessing and Blessedness over and over again and that in the same Evangelical Style pointing out unto us as with his Finger what was that Covenant from whence all the Blessedness he speaks of was to descend upon the Gentiles which therefore is Represented unto us as the great Charter of the Gentiles hope and which being Confirmed as it is and that both by Word and Oath shall therefore never be dis-annulled § 2. 'T is true the Covenant of Circumcision is called also an Everlasting Covenant But that can be understood in no other sense than that wherein the Priest-hood of Aaron and his Sons under the Law was called an Everlasting Priest-hood Exod. 40. 15. which yet we know to be now Abollished And as likewise the Covenant made with Phineas was called the Covenant of an Everlasting Priest-hood Numb 25. 13. which yet is now also done away being onely intended during the Continuance of the then present Administration For as Mr. Pool tells us the word Olam rendered for ever doth not always signifie Eternity But a long Continuance as is evident saith he from Gen. 17. 13. and Exod. 21. 16. And thus was it in respect of the Covenant of Circumcision which forasmuch as it was not Confirmed both by Word and Oath as the Gospel Covenant made with Abraham was and forasmuch as Circumcision it self which was the very Sign and Token of it is now Repealed and more especially forasmuch as though God did indeed promise to Establish his Covenant between him and them for an Everlasting Covenant yet still it was provided they kept his Covenant and fulfilled the Condition thereof on their part in which respect it was as much a Covenant of Works as any of the other Covenants were that have been before Discoursed of From hence it inevitably follows that it is now revoked and done away Acts 15. 24. Col. 2. 14. Heb. 8. 7 13. whereas the Gospel Covenant being every way Free and Absolute it is therefore unchangeably sure and certain to all the Seed thereunto belonging as it is expresly affirmed by the Apostle Rom. 4. 13 14 15 16. And as it had been for the same Reason before asserted by the Prophet David 2 Sam. 23. 5. and by God himself Isa 55. 1 3. SECT X. BUT whereas we are told That it must needs have occasioned many clamours among the Jews and have been a great Bar against their Reception of the Gospel had they been told that the Covenant they so much trusted in was now repealed and their Seed cast out of the Church It is manifest to those whose Eyes are open that the Repeal of the Covenant of Circumcision which the Jews could not but sufficiently understand by the Removal of the very Sign and Token of it did indeed occasion no small Dissatisfaction unto them as is evident from sundry places in the Acts as well as also in the Epistle to the Galatians More particularly Acts 21. 20 21. where James and the rest of the Elders present tell Paul That many thousands of the Jews which believed and were all zealous of the Law had been informed of him that he had taught all the Jews which were among the Gentiles to forsake Moses saying That they ought not to Circumcise their Children neither to walk after the Customs And it is plain that he had taught this Doctrine unto them which had occasioned no
if Circumcision the Seal of the Gospel Covenant belonged to the Seed of Believers under the Law Then doth Baptism much more appertain to the Seed of Believers under the Gospel We Reply by denying the Consequence of the Argument For though it should be granted that the Covenant of Circumcision mentioned Gen. 17. 7 8 9. is indeed a Gospel Covenant and that all the Infants of Believers are therein comprehended with their Parents Yet it follows not that they are therefore to have the Seal thereof For the consequence must be proved from this Vniversal All that are in Covenant must be Sealed Which is not true If it were true it must be so either by Reason of some necessary Connexion between the Terms which is none For it is but a common Accident to a Man that hath a Promise or a Covenant made to him that he should have a special Sign for the confirmation thereof It may be present or absent from the Subject God made a Special Promise to Joshua that he should bring Israel into the Land of Canaan To Phineas a Covenant of an Everlasting Priest-hood without any special Sign or Seal distinct from the Covenant Or else it must be so by reason of GOD's Will declared concerning the Covenant of Grace But that is not true The Promise made to Adam which was the same in substance with the Covenant of Grace had no special Sign or Seal annexed to it Noah and Abel were within the Covenant of Grace yet no special Sign appointed them Therefore it is not God's Will that all that are in the Covenant must be Sealed If they had it had been Wâ—ll Worship God not appointing it to them And if you say All that are in Covenant since Abraham's time should be Sealed But neither is that certain since we find no such thing concerning Melchâ—sidek and Lot that Lived in Abraham's time nor concerning Job that it s conceived lived after his time You will say but it is true of those that were in Covenant in Abraham's Family But neither is that true For Male Children before the eighth day and Women though in Covenant yet were not to be Sealed So that you see it is so far from being universally true that all that are in Covenant must be Sealed that this is all which is true All the Male Children of Abraham 's Family if they were eight days old must be signed with the Sign of Circumcision which will never be able to prove the Consequence of the Argument That therefore All the Children of Believers Males or Females must be Baptized unless there were an Express Command or Example in the New Testament signifying God's mind unto us therein The Covenant of Grace was Ratified and Confirmed unto Abraham a considerable time before the Covenant of Circumcision was given to him viz. about twenty five years before it and had then no outward Sign or Seal annexed thereunto And indeed that which hath been of late affirmed That the Covenant of Grace always had an Outward Sign or Seal added to it is so wide a Mistake that on the contrary it may be affirmed That although the Efficacy of its Grace did reach Believers in all Ages yet it was not filled up with Ordinances of Worship proper and peculiar to it self until the times of Reformation nor had till then any outward Sign or Token immediately belonging thereunto For had it been so this Sign or Token as the Covenant it self had remained without change and not vanished away with the other Shadows of the Mosaical Oeconomy Mr. Cox in his Discourse of the Covenants p. 83 84. If it be said That though the sign of Circumcision was Actually applyed only to the Males yet it must be understood that the Females were virtually Circumcised in them as the Nobler Sex We answer That the Conclusion to be proved is that Infants are to be Sealed Actually not Virtually For if a Virtual Sealing or Baptizing were all that you would prove we might grant it we may say Infants are virtually baptized in their Parents and yet it may be unlawful to Baptize them Actually as it would have been unlawful to have Circumcised Women Actually had they been capable thereof notwithstanding their Virtual Circumcision For it had been a Will-Worship there being no Command to do it And indeed to speak exactly Women were not Circumcised Virtually in the Males For he is said Virtually to have a thing by another as by a Proxy or Attorney that might receive it by himself yet according to the Effect of Law another's receiving it is as if he had received it But so the Males did not receive Circumcision for the Females For the Females had they been capable might not be Circumcised in their own Persons It had been their Sin if they had received it God not appointing it as it had been a Sin for a Child to be Circumcised before or after the eighth day in them that altered or swerved from the Appointment of God So that the Conclusion remains yet to be proved that all the Infants of Believing Parents are to be Actually Signed or Sealed by the Ordinance of Baptism unto which you give the term of the Gospel Seal For as there is no Command for the same in the New Testament nor any Example that may give hint unto us of the mind of God therein So neither can it be proved by any just Analogy or Proportion between that and Circumcision Together with which it must be considered that there are other signs of the Covenant besides Baptism As Circumcision and the Pass-over of old so the Lord's Supper now If then we should grant the Conclusion in general that the Infants of Believers are to be Signed yet you would say they are not to be Partakers of the Lord's Supper because it is not appointed for them So in like manner it follows not that they are to be Baptized unless you can prove that it is appointed to them And indeed there is as much reason for the one as for the other For if we must Examine our selves before we be admitted to the one wbich you say Infants cannot do So Faith and Repentance are required as the Condition of the other which Infants are as uncapable of and therefore cannot be duely admitted to either without some Express signifying God's Mind unto us therein For though it may be good to argue thus It is God's Mind therefore it is to be done yet it is too much for us to argue This should be and therefore God hath appointed it Inasmuch as no Reason of ours in Positive Worship such as Baptism is but God's Will alone gathered by some Express Command or Example in the New Testament can acquit an Action so performed from the Guilt of Will-Worship Seventhly Whereas you conceive that Circumcision and Baptism are appointed by God as common Seals of the New Covenant this is affirmed without Proof For no where doth the Scripture give that Character to them that
being the peculiar Work or Office of the Holy Spirit as hath been already proved 'T is true Abraham's Circumcision in his own Person is by the Apostle Rom 4. 11. Termed A Seal of the Righteousness of the Faith which he had yet being Vncircumcised that he might be the Father of all them that believe But so it cannot be said of Infants that had no Faith much less could any of them pretend to that Prerogative that Abraham had Indeed from hence to conclude that Circumcision was appointed by God as a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith or of the Covenant of Grace to the Generality that were the Subjects thereof is groundless For neither Isaac nor Jacob nor any besides had before or after their Circision such a Faith which Entituled them to such singular Promises It cannot be justly affirmed of Isaac Jacob David or any of the other Patriarchs That they received the Sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of the Faith which they had yet being Vncircumcised that they might be the Fathers of all them that believe as it is of Abraham This being a peculiar Honour that is by the Spirit of God conferred on Abraham alone and is indeed Incommunicable to any else how famous soever for Faith and Holiness much less can it be affirmed of the Generality of the Jewish Infants that were the ordinary Subjects of Circumcision We deny not that the Circumcision of others than Abraham was a Token as the Spirit of God himself expresly terms it of the Covenant then made with Abraham But it doth not therefore follow that every ones Circumcision was to him a Seal of his Right to any of the Promises thereof as is evident in the Case of Ishmael and many others the Servants born and bred in Abraham's Family and Strangers bought with Money who were all to be Circumcised to whom nevertheless none of the Promises in that Covenant were made as is plain from Gen. 17. 7 8 20 21 23 27. Much less was Circumcision a Seal to all that received it of their Interest in the Righteousness of that Faith that Abraham had for then they had been all saved It was therefore intended only as the Restipulation of the Covenant made with Abraham and his Seed after him on their Part or as a Sign or Token of their Duty to God not as a Seal of God's Promise to them Gen. â—7 9. Thou shalt keep my Covenant therefore thou and thy Seed after thee in their Generations Ver. 10. This is my Covenant or this is the sign of my Covenant which ye shall keep every Man Child among you shall be Circumcised Besides it is evident that by Circumcision they were obliged unto a perfect and universal Obedience to the whole Revealed Will and Law of God Gal. 5. 3. For I testifie to every Man that is Circumcised that he is a Debtor to do the whole Law And that under the Penalty of the Curse upon the least Transgression or Disobedience Gal. 3. 10. Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the Book of the Law to do them which perfect Obedience was yet impossible to be performed Gal. 3. 11. Rom. 3. 19 20. So that Circumcision was so far from being a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith or of the Gospel Covenant to the Generality that were under it that it was rather a Token of Servitude and Bondage and such a Yoke that as the Apostles tell the Jews Neither they nor their Fathers were able to bear it Acts 15. 10. Gal. 5. 1 2 3 4 5. Which yet it had not been had it been to them as well as to Abraham himself a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith For that brings with it true Christian Liberty and Freedom Notwithstanding the Promises made in the Covenant of Circumcision faith Mr. Cox in his Discourse of the Covenants p. 152 153 154. and the Separation of Israel to be the peculiar People of God in pursuance of them yet that Covenant did not confine the solemn Worship of God by Sacrifices or otherwise to Abraham's Family Nor were other Holy Men then living under any Obligation to Incorporate themselves thereinto by Circumcision or at all to take upon them that Sign or token of that Covenant that God then made with Abraham which yet without doubt they should have done if it had been a Seal of the Covenant of Grace For then by reason of their Interest in that Covenant both in point of Duty and Priviledge it had equally belonged unto them as to the Seed and Family of Abraham But from the sacred History it is evident that the command by vertue of which Circumcision was Administred extended no further than to Abraham and his Family And therefore we have no ground to conclude that Lot though nearly Allied to Abraham was Circumcised Seeing there is nothing in the Command of God or first Institution of Circumcision that obliged him thereunto or interested him therein and yet there is no doubt to be made of his Interest in the Covenant of Grace Neither was Lot the only Righteous Man then living in the World besides those of Abraham's Family For of the Patriarchs Heber Salah and Shem were then living and as they had their distinct Families and Interests so there is no question but the pure Worship of God was maintained in them and they promoted the Interest of true Religion to the utmost of their Power while they lived Yea Melchisedeck was in being about this time whether he were Shem before named or another it concerns not us to determine but this is certain that it was he who was the Priest of the most High God and King of Salem and in both these Respects the most Eminent Type of Jesus Christ that ever was in the World a Person greater than Abraham For Abraham paid Tythes to him and was blessed by him Now considering that he was both King and Priest there is no doubt but there was a Society of Men that were ruled by him and for whom he Ministred For a Priest is ordained for Men in things pertaining to God And this Society was at this time as much a Church of God as Abraham's Family was and as truly interested in the Covenant of Grace as any therein yet were they not concerned as Parties in the Covenant of Circumcision nor to be signed thereby From whence it is manifest that Circumcision was not applied as a Seal of the Covenant of Grace nor did an Interest therein render a man the proper subject of it Again It is no ways difficult saith he to conceive that Circumcision might have a different Respect according to the differing Circumstances and Capacity of its Subject It was to Abraham a Seal of the Righteousness of the Faith which he had c. But this arose from the peculiar and extraordinary Circumstances and Capacity that he was in For it is not possible to conceive that Circumcision should be a Seal
24. For so it vvas to the Jevvs that is to shevv them the Nature of Sin and the Holiness and Righteousness of God to convince them of their Sin and Misery vvithout Christ and their necessity therefore of a Saviour Rom. 7. 7 12. 13. And for this purpose it still serves to all Men in an unregenerate State Rom. 3. 19. But though the Lavv doth indeed shevv us our Necessity of Christ and our Misery vvithout him yet it doth not bring us to Christ as our Translation hath it for that is the Work of the Covenant of Faith only Rom. 10. 6 7 8 9. And that as it stands opposed unto the Legal Covenant ver 5 6 c. § 4. There is a double Enquiry made by the Apostle saith Dr. Owen on Gal. 3. vvith respect unto the Law or the Covenant of Sinai 1. Vnto what end in General it served 2 Whether it were not contrary to the Promise of God Unto both these the Apostle ansvvereth from the Nature Office and Work of that Covenant For there vvere tvvo things in it First a Revival and Representation of the first Covenant of Works vvith its Sanction and Curse Secondly A Direction of the Church unto the Accomplishment of the Promise From these tvvo doth the Apostle frame his Ansvver unto the double Enquiry laid dovvn And unto the first Enquiry Vnto what â—nd it served He Ansvvers It was added because of Transgressions The Promise being given there seems to have been no need of it Why then vvas it added to it at that Season It was added because of Transgressions The fulness of time vvas not yet come vvherein the Promise vvas to be Fulfilled Accomplished and Established as the only Covenant wherein the Church was to Walk with God or the Seed was not yet come as the Apostle here speaks to whom the Promise vvas made In the mean time some Order must be taken about Sin and Transgression that all the Order of things appointed of God vvere not Overflovved by them And this vvas done tvvo vvays by the Lavv. 1. By Reviving the Commands of the Covenant of Works vvith the Sanction of Death it put an Avve on the minds of Men and set Bounds unto their Lusts that they should not dare to run forth into that Excess vvhich they vvere Naturally inclined unto It vvas therefore added because of Transgressions that in the Declaration of God's Severity against them some Bounds might be fixed unto them For the knowledge of Sin is by the Law 2. To shut up Vnbelievers and such as vvould not seek for Righteousness Life and Salvation by the Promise under the Povver of the Covenant of Works and Curse attending it It concluded or shut up all under Sin saith the Apostle ver 20. This vvas the end of the Lavv for this end vvas it Added as it gave a Reviveal unto the Covenant of Works Dr. Owen's Exposition on the Hebrews 3 d. Vol. p. 231. § 5. It is true that Scripture Gal. 3. 24. vvhere the Apostle tells us that the Law was our School-Master to Christ that we might be Justified by Faith is strongly urged by some to prove that the Law must needs be therefore a Covenant of Faith But it is Evident that the School mastership of the Lavv and the Covenant of Faith are tvvo quite different things as appears by the Words before and after ver 23. Before Faith came saith he we were kept under the Law shut up unto the Faith which should afterward be Revealed ver 24. Wherefore the Law was our School-master to Christ that we might be justified by Faith ver 25. But after that Faith is come we are no longer under a School-master So that the Schol mastership of the Lavv is one thing and the Covenant of Faith another For vvhen the one cometh the other ceaseth When the one takes place the other vanisheth The Lavv therefore could not be a Covenant of Faith it being here so plainly Opposed or Contra distinguished thereunto Accordingly the Apostle elsevvhere assures us that the Law Written and Engraven in Stones was a Ministration of Death and Condemnation 2. Cor. 3. 6. 7. 9. And consequently gave no hopes of Relief to the Miserable Sinner as the Covenant of Faith doth It convinc'd him indeed of the dreadful Nature of Sin and of the Infinite Purity and Holiness of Gods Nature and Being against whom it had Sinned but it left no Room for Repentance For Cursed is every one saith the Law that Continueth not in all things which are Written in the Book of the Law to do them Therefore it is calld the Hand-writing of Ordinances that was against us which was contrary to us which Christ took out of the way nailing it to his Cross Col. 2. 14. So that the Law could not possibly be a Covenant of Faith It being constantly represented to us in the Scripture as being of a vastly different Nature therefrom and that in the very Essence or Substance thereof The one being a Ministration of Death and Condemnation the other a Ministration of Life and Peace SECT III. WE are told indeed by Mr. Obadiah Segdwick in his Discourse upon the Covenant of Grace p. 175. That the Covenant made with the People of Israel at Mount Sinai was at least subserviently the Covenant of Grace a Covenant of Grace for the Substance of it though propounded in a more dark way and in a manner fitting for the State of that People and that present time and condition of the Church § 2. But this is but an Evasion and serves for no other purpose than to darken the Truth For the thing is plain that the Law was as much a Covenant of Works as that made with our First Parent The Jewish Legal Covenant saith Dr. Annesly in his Sermon upon the Covenant of Grace Morning Exercise p. 122 Neither admitted of Faith in the Redeemer nor Repentance of Sin For Pardon of sin and Curse for Sin are Inconsistent Gal. 3. 10. As many as are of the Works of the Law are under the Curse For it is Written Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are Written in the Book of the Law to do them As many as depend upon the Works of the Law for Justification are under the Curse And the Law saith he discovered no other way of Justification but by Works Mr. Cooper also in the same Morning Exercise p. 117. tells us That Moses his Law is opposed to the Covenant of Grace as another Covenant upon this very distinguishing account of Obedience and Faith Works and Grace as you may see saith he at large among other Places Heb. 8. 6 7 8 9 10 c. § 3. The Law therefore was not so much as Subserviently a Covenant of Faith much less for the Substance of it so for it is quite another thing and is constantly so represented unto us in the Scriptures The Apostle saith indeed The Law was our School-master to Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He doth
not say to bring us to Christ as our Translation hath it For as we have already said that is the Work of the Covenant of Faith only And therefore that Notion that the Law was Subserviently a Covenant of Faith hath no Foundation Those Words to bring us being unduly added to the Original Text and are accordingly put in a Different Character in our Translation thereof But saith the Apostle in the words immediately following After that Faith is come we are no longer under a School-master But how can that be if the Law was a Covenant of Faith Must the Covenant of Faith cease at least in this World Must the Covenant of Faith Vanish be Blotted out taken out of the way and done away as the Apostle speaks of the Law Or was the Covenant of Faith against us and contrary to us as he speaks of the Hand-writing of Ordinances that is now Blotted out And indeed therefore neither could the Law be so much as Subserviently a Covenant of Faith For if it had the Apostle would never have described it as hath been now declared § 4. And 't is in vain to say That the Law was a Covenant of Faith though propunded in a more dark way and in a manner fitting for the State of that People and that present Time and Condition of the Church as Mr. Sedgwick speaks For the Apostle Expresly affirms that the Law is not of Faith It is not of Faith Absolutely not Comparatively but the man that doth them shall live in them Gal. 3. 12. The Law therefore was no other than a Covenant of Works since not only the Apostle doth here assure us that it is not of Faith but also the same Rule Do this and Live is that still retained therein as at first And it is therefore different from the Covenant of Faith not barely in respect of the Degrees or clearness of the Revelation of Gospel-Grace as is commonly Suggested For the Law as hath been already proved discovers none at all but leaves the guilty Sinner wholly Remediless without the least glimps of Light or Comfort The Law therefore differs from the Covenant of Faith Specifically in respect of the whole Nature or Essence of it In which respect the Law could never be appointed as a School-master to bring us to Christ Well it may convince us of our Necessity of him but bring us to him it cannot § 5. So that then these are the Reasons which the Holy Spirit himself Suggesteth why the Law was added Or why the Covenant of Works was Revived after Man's Fall and even after the Proclaiming of the first Promise concerning the Womans Seed Gen 3. 15. which was renewed to Abraham Gen. 22. 18. It was added saith the Apostle because of Transgressions till the Seed should come to whom the Promise was made And it entered that the Offence might abound It being appointed as a School-master to Christ to convince the Jews of their necessity of a Saviour And since it cannot be denied but that all the Sons and Daughters of Adam must of Necessity be under one or another of the two Covenants either that of Works or that of Grace And since all Men by Nature are Children of Wrath Eph. 2 3. And since it would be utterly absurd to affirm that such are under a Covenant of Grace till-Converted It of necessity follows that unto such the Covenant of Works is still in force and under it they are till wrought upon by the Grace of the Gospel the Law abating nothing but still exacting the utmost Farthing Neither from the Impossibility of Man's yielding that perfect Obedience which that Covenant requires can we justly conclude that therefore it is not still in Force For God hath not forfeited or lost his Right of Dominion though we have lost our Strength or Capacity of Obedience So that it is evident that the Law given upon Mount Sinai to the People of the Wilderness or the Law written in Stones which was a plain and clear Manifestation of the Law written in the Heart of Man at the first was no other than a Covenant of Works Thus it was to the Jews and thus it still continues in its full Power Force and Virtue to all Men in an Unregenerate State For what things soever the Law saith it saith to them that are under the Law that every Month may be stopped and all the World may become Guilty before God Rom. 3. 19. SECT IV. NEither was the Law by the Jews only Interpreted as a Covenant of Works but as it is evident by Moses himself and by Paul also We are told indeed by Mr. Sedgwick in his fore-mentioned Discourse upon the Covenants p. 173. That we must distinguish between the intention of God in giving the Law and the Abuse or Perverting of the Law We grant saith he that many of the Jews did set up a Legal Righteousness for their Justifications and rested upon the Works of the Law as if Life came by them against which Paul doth notably Argue in his Epistles to the Romans and Galatians But this saith he was not the intention of God in the Sanction of Law They could never find a justifying Righteousness by the Law or Works of the Law under the Notion of a Covenant of Works nor did God ever propound it for that end § 2. For Answer hereunto we say That since by Mr. Sedgwicks own confession the Jews could never find a Justifying Righteousness by the Law or by the Works of it From hence it inevitably follows that it could not be a Covenant of Faith Sure it is that the Covenant of Faith Justifies all that are under it For being Justified by Faith we have Peace with God c. Rom. 5. 1. That Covenant therefore that could never Justifie any that were under it could never be a Covenant of Faith But the Scripture is Express that by the deeds of the Law there shall no Flesh be Justified in God's sight Rom. 3. 20. Therefore that Covenant could never be a Covenant of Faith And yet again that Covenant under which though many were Justified yet none were ever Justified by it or by virtue of it could never be a Covenant of Faith But such was the nature of the Law that though many were Justified under it yet none were ever Justified by it or by virtue of it Rom. 3. 20. Therefore that Covenant could never be a Covenant of Faith And if the Law was not a Covenant of Faith then â—t must of necessity follow that it could be no other than a Covenant of Works And indeed so it was appointed and declared by God himself Lev. 18. 5. Ye shall therefore keep my Statutes and Judgments which if a man do he shall live in them And this the Spirit of God by the Apostle Paul takes special notice of Rom. 10. 5. For Moses saith he describeth the Righteousness which is of the Law That the man that doth these things shall live by them And what
Confirmation thereof As neither had the Legal Covenant at Mount Sinai for the Confirmation of that But the Promise which the Apostle here speaks of hath a plain Reference unto the Evangelical Covenant before mentioned which was first made with Abraham before his Removal out of his own Country Gen. 12. 2 3. which was afterward Repeated and Confirmed unto him by an Oath Gen. 22. where God tells him Vers 16. 17 18. By my self have I Sworn saith the Lord that in Blessing I will Bless thee the same words the Apostle useth and in Multiplying I will Multiply thy Seed as the Stars of Heaven and as the Sand which is upon the Sea Shore And thy Seed shall Possess the Gate of his Enemies And in thy Seed shall All the Nations of the Earth be blessed which is a full and a plain Repetition of the Covenant which God first made with Abraham Gen. 12. 2 3. Saying I will make of thee a great Nation and I will Bless thee and make thy Name great and thou shalt be a Blessing And I will Bless them that Bless thee and Curse him that Curseth thee And in thee shall all the Families of the Earth be Blessed In both which Scriptures we have a fair and full Recital of that truely Evangelical or Gospel Covenant which God made with Abraham And upon which all the Hope and Comfort of Believing Gentiles is firmly built and founded And it is plain that this is the onely Covenant which the Apostle speaks of and as it were points with his Finger unto it Reciting the very words and expressions of it without taking any notice at all of the Covenant of Circumcision or of any Expressions therein contained as having been Confirmed before of God in Christ Gal. 3. 17. And that as he here tells the Hebrews both by word and Oath that by two Immutable things in which it is impossible for God to lie there might be strong Consolation afforded unto all the Heirs of Promise § 2. No wonder therefore that the Apostle tells us as he doth Gal. 3. 16. Now to Abraham and his Seed were the Promises made not a single Promise onely but the Promises For as it is evident that there is a Plurality of Promises and Blessing◠contained in this Gospel Covenant in reference to Abraham The like we cannot but observe in reference to Christ himself the Promised Seed Unto whom God doth not onely here Promise That in him should all the Nations of the Earth be blessed But also That he should Possess the Gate of his Enemies Both which are most full and Comprehensive Promises And that as well in respect of the Blessings of this World as of that which is to come Upon which account it is highly observable That as all the Promises both of the one sort as well as of the other do all run unto Christ the Inheriting Seed so from and by him alone they are to be Communicated to all his Members Forasmuch as he needs them not for himself And therefore when God told Abraham That in his Seed should all the Nations of the Earth be Blessed as he doth therein promise to be our God through Christ the Mediator And by him to bless us with all Spiritual Blessings by giving unto us an Inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that fadeth not away which is reserved in Heaven for us So in like manner When God tells Abraham That his Seed should Possess the Gate of his Enemies God doth herein Promise to give unto us through Christ the Blessings even of this World also For so it is Explained in Reference to Christ himself Psal 2. 1 6 7 8. Why do the Heathen rage c. Yet have I set my King upon my Holy Hill of Sion I will declare the Decree The Lord hath said unto me Thou art my Son this Day have I begotten thee Ask of me and I shall give thee the Heathen for thine Inheritance and the uttermost parts of the Earth for thy Possession To which same purpose we are also told Rev. 11. 15. That upon the Sounding of the Seventh Angel there were Great Voices in Heaven saying The Kingdoms of this World are become the Kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ and he shall Reign for ever and ever From both which we may clearly discern the meaning of that Promise That Christ should Possess the Gate of his Enemies Even that the Actual Soveraignty of the whole World should at length be Committed unto him as King of Kings and Lord of Lords For which very purpose he now sitteth at the Right Hand of God from henceforth expecting till his Enemies be made his Footstool Heb. 10. 12 13. which Promise as it is plainly made unto Christ himself so it is of mighty Consequence unto his People also Since upon the foot of this Promise depends all their happiness in this World As upon the other their happiness in that that is to come For if Christ be Exalted in this World so shall his People also And if the Kingdoms of this World are to become The Kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ so also shall the Kingdom and Dominion and the greatness of the Kingdom and Dominion under the whole Heaven be given to the People of the Saints of the most High Dan. 7. 27. So that since Christ is here promised that he shall Possess the Gate of his Enemies upon the same bottom have his People sufficient ground to expect that they shall Possess the Gate of theirs also Forasmuch as the same Blessedness that i◠Conferred upon the Head shall in due Season be derived to all his Members And indeed for this Reason are all the Promises first made unto Christ himself that he might have the single Honour in the Distribution of the Blessings therein Contained among his Servants and followers Rev. 5. 9 10 11 12. They sung a New Song Saying Thou art Worthy to take the Book and to open the Seals thereof For thou wast Slain and hast Redeemed us to God by thy Blood out of every Kindred and Tongue and People and Nation And hast made us unto our God Kings and Priests And we shall Reign upon the Earth Therefore Worthy is the Lamb that was Slain to receive Power and Riches and Wisdom and Strength and Honour and Glory and Blessing SECT IX MOreover That the Gospel Covenant before mentioned and that alone is the great Charter of the Gentiles hope is yet further evident from Gal. 3. For the Scripture foreseeing saith the Apostle Vers 8 that God would Justifie the Heathen through Faith Preached before the Gospel unto Abraham The Gospel What Gospel Was it the Promises contained in the Covenant of Circumcision wherein God promised Abraham that he would be a God unto him and to his Seed after him in their Generations By no means For that was plainly a Covenant of Works and concerned onely Abraham and his Natural Posterity which could yield no Comfort therefore to the Heathen
Gentiles are not at all concerned in that Covenant as being no way concerned in Circumcision the Condition thereof The Promise therefore that Peter intends must needs be the Free Promise or the Gospel Covenant before mentioned Whereof as Christ is the Alone and Only Mediator So he is also the only Seed therein immediately concerned From and by whom all Gospel Blessings must be derived unto all his Spiritual Offspring And in this Covenant the Gentiles are indeed concerned as well as the Jews For therein all the Kindreds Families and Nations of the Earth are promised to be Blessed even in Christ the Promised Seed And therefore well might the Apostle tell them as he doth That the Promise he now spake of to them was not only to them and to their Children but to all that were afar off also even as many as the Lord our God shall call For so Paul tells the Galatians also That Christ hath Redeemed us from the Curse of the Law that the Blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ Gal. 3. 13 14. Not upon the Jews only but the Gentiles also § 2. And that this is the Gospel Covenant that Peter here Preacheth unto these Bleeding Jews is yet further evident from what he tells them in Chap. 3. 25 26. You saith he there are the Children of the Prophets and of the Covenant which God made with our Fathers saying unto Abraham And in thy Seed shall all the Kindreds of the Earth be blessed unto you first God having raised up his Son Jesus sent him to bless you in turning away every one of you from his iniquities Where we have the very Words and Terms of the Gospel Covenant recited as it was at first made with Abraham Gen. 12. 2 3. and Gen. 22. 16 17 18. You saith he are the Children of the Covenant What Covenant Doth he mean the Covenant of Circumcision in which God Promised Abraham saying I will be a God to thee and to thy Seed after thee upon Condition that thou and they be Circumcised c. No saith Peter I do not mean that Covenant but the Covenant which God made with our Fathers saying unto Abraham And in thy Seed shall all the Kindreds of the Earth be Blessed The Covenant of Circumcision concerned your selves alone and was plainly Conditional and therefore failable But the Covenant that I speak to you of is a Free Covenant Sure and Certain and that which concerns not you alone but all the Kindreds of the Earth Wherein we are duly to observe that instead of directing them to the Covenant of Circumcision made with Abraham Gen. 17. 7 8. whereof there is not the least Word or Syllable expressed in Peters present words to the Jews nor in all the New Testament besides that being no other than a Bondage Covenant Gal. 5. 1 2 3 4 Acts 15. 1 5 10. as the Covenant at Sinai was and so no Proper Remedy for the Removal of their Present Miserie he rather directs them to that most Comfortable Promise first mentioned Gen. 12. 2 3. And afterward by Solemn Oath Confirmed Gen. 22. 16 17 18. That in Abrahams Seed should all the Kindreds of the Earth be Blessed And this was home to the Point it being botâ— a free and a full Promise and therefore an Answerable Remedy for their present Malady For if God hath freely promised that in Christ who is Abraham's Seed all the Kindreds of the Earth shall be Blessed Why then there is ground of hope for you even for you also though you have been the Betrayers and Murderers of the Lord of Glory And not only is there ground of hope for you but even for your Children also on whom as well as on your selves you have wished his Blood to be And accordingly he Preaches Christ unto them in the very next words Vnto you first God having raised up his Son Jesus sent him to bless you in turning away every one of you from his iniquities wherein we are to note That as the Gospel Covenant is a Covenant of Blessing full of Blessings Heaps upon Heaps of Blessings Innumerable Blessings I will Bless thee saith God to Abraham and thou shalt be a Blessing I will Bless them that Bless thee And again Surely in Blessing I will Bless thee and in thy Seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be Blessed So in pursuance of the same Evangelical Promise and Covenant of Blessing saith Peter here God having raised up his Son Jesus sent him to Bless you in turning away every one of you from his iniquities Wherein that which was required before as a Condition is now become a Main Branch of the Promised Blessing For before the Promise was unto them that turn from Transgression in Jacob But God saith he hath sent his Son Jesus to Bless you by turning away ungodliness fom Jacob even in turning away every one of you from his iniquities § 3. It is undeniaby evident therefore that Peter instead of directing them to the Covenant of Circumcision for their present Relief He rather directs both them and theirs to have recourse to that Evangelical Covenant which God had made with their Fathers saying unto Abraham And in thy Seed shall all the Kindreds of the Earth be Blessed For this as it was every way full and extensive so it was as free and absolute And therefore the most Proper Remedy for the Relief of their Wounded Spirits Whereas had he directed them to the Promises contained in the Covenant of Circumcision that had left them still in Despair for that obliged them to Perfect Obedience as the Condition of obtaining the Mercies therein Promised which was impossible to be Performed To tell them therefore of the Promises contained in that Covenant was altogether beside his present Design which was to give I â—elief to their Wounded Spirits which the Promises of that Covenant thus Bounded as they were could never Accomplish SECT XII AND whereas Peter tells the Jews That the Promise was unto them and to their Children We are not to understand it as if the Gospel Covenant that Believers are now under was at all made with Abraham and his Natural Seed and consequently with them and their Natural Seed Or that any of the Promises thereof were immediately made unto him as the Promises contained in the Covenant of Circumcision were In which respect it is highly observable that aâ— the Spirit of God himself doth plainly inform us of a twofold Covenant made with Abraham the one a Covenant of Grace and the other of Works So he is pleased accordingly also to make a plain distinction between them as to the Persons or Parties therein respectively concerned For if we look into Gen. 12. We shall there find that the former is made between God and Abraham only and that with respect unto his Seed Christ and his Spiritual Offering Whereas the latter is plainly made between God and Abraham and his Natural Posterity The first account
which the Scripture gives us of the former we meet with as hath been before noted Gen. 12. 2 3. Where the Lord is pleased to enter into a Solemn Covenant with Abraham saying I will make of thee a great Nation and I will Bless thee and make thy Name great and thou shalt be a Blessing And I will Bless them that Bless thee and I will Curse him that Curseth thee And in thee shall all the Families of the Earth be Blessed To the same purpose also the Lord tells Abraham Gen. 17. 2. I will make my Covenant between me and thee and will multiply thee exceedingly vers 3. And Abraham fell on his Face and God talked with him saying As for me behold my Covenant is with thee and thou shalt be a Father of many Nations neither shall thy Name any more be called Abram but thy Name shall be called Abraham For a Father of many Nations have I made thee And I will make thee exceeding fruitful and I will make Nations of thee and Kings shall come out of thee Which is a plain Transcript or Rehearsal of the several Free Promises of the Gospel Covenant that God had before made with Abraham Gen. 12. 2 3. Gen. 15. 5 6. which are here gathered up together and plainly Represented unto him under the denomination of a Covenant and such a Covenant as God had made with Abraham himself alone not with his Natural Offspring For saith God vers 2. I will make my Covenant between me and thee And vers 4. As for me behold my Covenant is with thee and thou shalt be a Father of many Nations neither shall thy Name any more be called Abram but Abraham for a Father of many Nationt have I made thee So that this Covenant could have relation to no other it being no way applicable to any other Person whatsoever whether Isaac or Jacob or any else of his Natural Offspring to be Father of many Nations or as the Apostle explains it The Father of all them that Believe as Abraham was his Prerogative herein being singular and incommunicable to any else Whereas the Covenant of Circumcision was as plainly made between God and Abraham and his Natural Seed also as Gen. 17. 7 8 9. declare And saith God vers 7. Or Moreover as 't is in the Old Translation as proceeding to speak of another Covenant than what he had been before insisting on I will establish my Covenant between me and thee and thy Seed after thee in their Generations for an everlasting Covenant to be a God unto thee and to thy Seed after thee vers 8. And I will give unto thee and to thy Seed after thee the Land wherein thou art a Stranger all the Land of Canaan for an Everlasting Possession and I will be their God vers 9. Thou shalt keep my Covenant therefore thou and thy Seed after thee in their Generations vers 10. This is my Covenant which ye shall keep between me and you and thy Seed after thee every Manchild among you shall be Circumcised § 2. So that though the Promises of the Covenant of Circumcision were indeed made unto Abraham and his Natural Seed also yet the Promises of the Gospel Covenant we see were not and the Apostle expresly disowns it Gal. 3. 16. Now to Abraham and his Seed were the Promises made he saith not And to Seeds as of many but as of one And to thy Seed which is Christ For though God doth indeed tell Abraham Gen. 12. 7. Vnto thy Seed will I give this Land And Gen. 13. 15. All the Land which thou seest to thee will I give it and to thy Seed for ever And Gen. 15. 18. In that same day the Lord made a Covenant with Abraham saying Vnto thy Seed have I given this Land from the River of Egypt unto the Great River the River Euphrates Which are all plainly Gospel Promises and made unto Abraham long before the Covenant of Circumcision was made with him and therefore a part of the free Promise or the Covenant of Promise which the Apostle speaks of Gal. 3. 17 18. Yet by Seed in all these Promises we are plainly to understand no other than Christ himself For so it is explained to our hands not only in Gal. 3. 16. but also Gen. 22. 16 17. By my self have I sworn saith the Lord that in Blessing I will Bless thee and in Multiplying I will multiply thy Seed as the Stars of the Heaven and as the Sand which is upon the Sea shore And thy Seed shall possess the Gate of his Enemies Expresly in the singular number not the Gate of their Enemies but the Gate of his Enemies And accordingly it follows vers 18. And in thy Seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be Blessed Which must of necessity be understood of Christ alone And whereas Christ is here Promised That he shall Possess the Gate of his Enemies It is plainly Synonimous or of the same signification with the forementioned Promises Vnto thy Seed will I give this Land Gen. 12. 6. And all the Land which thou seest unto thee will I give it and to thy Seed for ever Gen. 13. 15. For to Abraham and his Seed saith the Apostle were the Promises made He saith not And to Seeds as of many but as of one And to thy Seed which is Christ And so again Gen. 15. 18. Vnto thy Seed have I given this Land from the River of Egypt unto the Great River the River Euphrates Which is by the Psalmist most plainly applied to Christ in the Person of Solomon Psal 72. 8 9. He shall have Dominion also from Sâ—a to Sea and from the River unto the ends of the Earth They that dwell in the Wilderness shall bow before him and his Enemies shall lick the Dust The Kings of Tarshish and of the Isles shall bring Presents The Kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer Gifts yea all Kings shall fall down before him all Nations shall serve him Where we have a clear Paraphrase upon the Promises made to Abraham and to his Seed when he was told All the Land which thou seest to thee will I give it and to thy Seed for ever And thy Seed shall Possess the Gate of his Enemies For as much as God hath by Promise given both unto Abraham and unto his Seed Christ also all those Countreys now possessed by his Enemies which we see is by the Psalmist interpreted not only as having relation to Canaan but unto his Universal Dominion over all the Earth For Christ is here promised not only that he shall have Dominion from Sea to Sea or as God told Abraham from the River of Egypt to the Great River the River Euphrates but from the River to the ends of the Earth That they that dwell in the Wilderness shall bow before him and his Enemies shall lick the Dust That the Kings of Tarshish and of the Isles shall bring Presents The Kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer