the uncircumcision declaring that Abraham received not circumcision before hee had this blessednesse wherefore he calleth Circumcision a signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith which he had before he was circumcised which importeth that all those who were circumcised then according to Gods appointment were in visibilitie blessed before and had this righteousnesse before even as all those who are baptized according to Gods appointment are righteous before and have in visible account the same blessing which those had who were circumcised according to the revealed will of God And he goeth on in the 13 14 15. verses and there telleth us who are the right heires And in the 16th verse he sayth that the promise is sure to all the seed not to that onely which is of the law but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham who is the father of us all And he further sheweth that this promise so shall thy seed be and that Abrahams beleeving Gods promise was imputed unto him for righteousnesse and was not written for his sake alone but for us also to whom it shall be imputed if wee beleeve on God Touching the other Scripture Rom. 9.6 7 8. Isaac was no mocker though he were mocked no persecuter though persecuted in his infancie which you alledge to prove your former position concerning the different constitutions of the Church of the Jewes and of the Church of the Gentiles it maketh nothing for your purpose neither but directly against you for there wee may see that though all are not Israel which are of Israel yet the Word of God taketh effect according to that in Rom. 3.3 Ishmaels mocking of Isaac did not argue that Isaac was also a mocker Isaac remained still a childe of promise though an Infant But if it be true as you would infer that the state was a state of bondmen and that an heire or Lord differed nothing from a servant of sinne and if it were constituted and stood meerly upon nature and circumcision of the flesh and not by faith and circumcision of the heart it argueth that the Word of God is without effect that all were Israel that were of Israel all mockers with Ishmael prophane persons with Esau c. which to thinke is very erronious for the word of God hath taken effect to retaine the holy Infants and cast out visible prophane persons and therefore the state wherein they were was a state of free-men God was well pleased with them and accepted of their sacrifices and promised unto them remission of their sinnes through Jesus Christ who was then to come and is now come Therefore I would have you to banish such evill thoughts out of your minde as if they had a false corrupt or carnall and not a spirituall constitution Againe consider That Church upon whom holy Baptisme was rightly administred was holy and spirituall But holy Baptisme was rightly administred upon the Church of Israel 1 Cor. 10.1 2. Psa 77.16 17 Therefore they were a holy spirituall Church as well as wee But peradventure you will say you mean that in their Apostacie they pleased not God and therefore their Church-state which they were in formerly had a carnall constitution and was not spirituall To which I answer That the like you may say concerning the Churches now which you acknowledge to be spirituall But you should consider that many are called but few are chosen Gods garden may have some plants therein which possibly may degenerate from their kinde and become wilde yet the garden is still the Lords but the husband-men ought when they discover such to weed them out So corruptions began to spring in the Church of Corinth 2 Cor. 7.11 and they cut downe the tender fruits thereof in time And God threatned the members of some of the Churches of Asia 〈◊〉 Rev. 2. 3. to execute judgement upon them if repentance prevented him not As for Coll. 2.11 which you have cited that the Church of Collossia was circumcised with the circumcision made without hands in putting off the body of the sinnes of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ This implyeth not but that the Jewes and Proselytes before Christs coming had circumcision of the flesh as an outward signe unto them that the Lord would circumcise their hearts and the hearts of their seed to love him more and more according to his gracious promise And seeing that the Apostle maketh circumcision heer the same in effect with our Baptisme it plainly argueth that as infants in former time were to receive circumcision so infants now in their infancie are to receive Baptisme the seale of the same covenant Whereas you say That was a state of bond men * Lin. 23. wherein an heire differed nothing from a servant this not of servants * Lin. 28. but of sonnes and free-men I suppose you mean by bond-men those who were bound-servants to Sathan and by free-men those who were set free by Christ In this respect then you have not done well in saying that such a one that was made free in this spirituall respect differed nothing from those who were visibly bond-slaves of Sathan Then it seemes Isaac differed nothing from a mocker nor the Proselytes infants from Heathens and Infidels And if you mean by servants those who are wicked in the Church I say they were to be cast out as they manifested evill fruits for though they were in the house a while and were as children yet they manifesting themselves afterwards to be servants of sinne were no longer to abide but those who are not servants of sinne are now as they were then to abide for ever therein so Ishmael was in covenant with Isaac and was circumcised but when he manifested fruits of unholinesse out he was cast And why was this Gen. 21.9 10. Not because he was Abrahams sonne according to the flesh but because he manifested himselfe afterward to be a servant of sinne and so degenerated from the righteous steps of Abraham Now you ought to know See before in this Treatise pag. 29 30 31 32 33 147 148 149. that the Church of the Jewes was constituted of free-men and there was not one sinner to be suffered in that church but when he was discovered either he must repent or be cut off therefore it plainly argueth that visible wicked persons bond-slaves of Sathan were not to be the matter of that Church in the first constitution they were such who in all outward appearance were not alliens from Gods covenants or promises or strangers to God but were such whom he knew and owned and such whom he would acknowledge as in the kingdome of grace heer so in the kingdome of glory hereafter It may be you thinke thus That if the Church of Israel were constituted of free-men why then were many of them manifested afterwards to be wicked Corah and his company a congregation of Rebels from whom Moses and the rest were commanded to
your selfe in answering them when you say * Pag. 13. lin 10 11 12 13 14. That Examination in respect of the Supper is required onely of men of yeares not of infants who are not able to performe it Further you tell us That if your Author nor memory faile you Children were admitted as well to the Supper as to Baptisme for many yeares in time past and over against in the margent of the page * Page 13. at lin 15. you name Parker on the Crosse Ans Indeed you may suspect your memory if you take your imagination to be your memory And you may expect that your Author can stand you in little stead in opposing the Baptisme of Infants A good object may faile a bad subject and so your Author may faile you especially he being neither an Author nor upholder of your errour which you labour by all meanes to uphold Next you say A. R. Lin. 17 18 19 And why not to the one as well as to the other seeing the same reasons are alike in both and will center into one if fully prosecuted I Answer This is but a begging of the Question I have told you why not to the one as well as to the other Because they are capable of the one in respect of a naturall capabilitie but not of the other And therefore I deny that the reasons are alike in both or will center into one though never so fully prosecuted Wheras you further oppose infants Baptisme saying that * Pag 13. li. 21 22. no Infant is required by God in Scripture to beleeve or to repent or to be baptized by any man c. The Infants of beleevers are not impenitent I Answer That this your speech is ambiguous and abominable and you may know that we stand not for the Baptizing of Infidells or those in whose hearts wee cannot rightly judge the foundation of repentance to be layd For God hath not required such to be baptized no more then he did command such to be circumcised in the time of the Law And you should know that faith is the gift of God so also is repentance and though the Saints of God are not required to manifest their faith and repentance actually so long as they cannot act yet for to say that therefore they have not faith and râ—pâ—ntance or that wee are not to judge them to have the gifts and graces of the Spirit because they cannot act is a meer idle toy and frivolous foppery But if you will say that though the infants of beleevers cannot manifest faith and repentance no more then Isaac could who was a childe of promise in his infancie yet they are to be judged to have faith and repentance notwithstanding Then you will agree with us in this truth But if you will say you deny it and will not assent unto it and that therefore the infants of beleevers ought not to be baptized Then I tell you you have your answer long agoe Christian Infants sayth Mr. Ainsworth * In his Censure upon the Anabaâ—tists Dia â—g pa. 70. lin 19. Have the grace they speakâ—â—f repentance faith regeneration c. Though not actually or by way of declaration to others yet they have through the worke of the Spirit the seed and beginning of faith virtually and by way of inclination so that they aâ—e not wholly destitute of faith regeneration c. though it be a thing hid and unknowne unto us after what manner the Lord worketh these in them Eâ—cles 11.5 Which Mr. Ainsworth doth further prove thus * In the same page lin 27. to page 71. If Infants naturally are some wayes capable of Adams sinne and so of unbeliefe disobedience transgression c. Then Christian Infants supernaturally and by grace are some wayes capable of Christs righteousnesse and so of faith obedience sanctification c. But Infants are capable of the former evills by Adam therefore they are capable of the later good things by Christ That they are capable â—f the former he proved in his treating of originall sinne from divers Scriptures as Psal 51. John 3. Rom. 5. c. The consequence to wit that infants are capable of the later good things by Christ he proveth thus * See his book page 71. lin 8. First Because the first Adam was a figure of the second Adam Christ So that as the sinne of the first Adam his fault disobedience and death for it came on all his Children both by imputation and infection or corruption of nature So the righteousnesse and obedience of Christ cometh on all his Children both by imputation and renewing of nature unto life and salvation as the Apostle compareth them Rom. 5.12.15 16 17 18 19.21 Secondly Because Infants being by Adam sinners Children of wrath c. mâ—st be borne againe of the Spirit or else they cannot see the kingdome of God Joh. 3.3.5 6. But the Christian Infants dying in infancie shall see the kingdome of God and not be damned as the Adversaries grant * The old Anabaptists doe graÌ„t that childreÌ„ dying in their infanciâ— shall see the Kingdom of God But some now that stand against the Baptisme of Infants say They are all in the state of damnation Others that withstand Infants Baptisme say They know not how to judge of them But I say by the Scripture Wee are to judge the infants of beleevers to be in the state of salvation â—nd those of them that die in their infancie are not damned but saved And as for other Infants even the infants of the wicked we have nothing to doe to judge them within but without Therefore by Christs doctrine they are borne againe of the Spirit and so must needs in some measure have repentance faith and holines without which there is no regeneration Againe That Infants have the faith and love of God in them And regeneration in their measure is thus proved They to whom God giveth the signe and seale of righteousnesse by faith and of regeneration they have faith and regeneration for God giveth no lying figne he sealeth no vaine or false Covenants But God gave to Infants Circumcision which was the signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith and regeneration Gen. 17.12 Rom. 4.11 2.28 29. Colos 2.11 Therefore Infants had and consequently now have faith and regeneration though not in the crop of harvest by declaration yet in the bud and beginnings of all Christian graces They that deny this reason must either make God the Author of a lying signe and seale of the Covenant to Abraham and his Infants or they must hold that infants had those graces then but not now both which are wicked and absurd to affirme Or they must say that Circumcision was not the signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith and then they openly contradict thâ— Scripture Rom. 4.11 Moreover As the Apostle in Rom. 5. compareth our naturall estate in Adam and our spirituall estate in Christ so may
wee in this case If wee cannot justly object against Gods worke in nature but doe beleeve that our Infants are reasonable creatures and are borne not bruit beasts but men though actually they can manifest no reason or understanding more then beasts yea a young Lambe knoweth and discerneth his damme sooner then an Infant knoweth his Mother then neither can wee justly object against Gods worke in grace but are to beleeve that our Infants are sanctified creatures and are borne beleevers not Infidells though outwardly they can manifest no faith or sanctification unto us And why should it be thought incredible that God should worke faith in Infants If it be because wee know not or perceive not how it can be let us consider that we know not the way of our naturall birth and other earthly things Eccles 11.5 Joh. 3.8 How then can wee know heavenly things If we make question of the power of God nothing is unpossible with him He made all things of nothing He can make the dumbe beast speak with mans voyce Numb 22. He can make the babe in the mothers wombe to be affected and leap for joy at the voyce of the words spoken to the mother Luk. 1.44 And can he not also work grace faith and holines in Infants Hath Sathan power by sinne to infect and corrupt Infants as is before proved and shall not God have power to clense from corruption and make them holy If wee makâ— doubt of the will of God herein behold wee have his promises to restore our losses in Adam by his graces in Christ as he sheweth in Rom 5. That he will circumcise our heart and the heart of our seed to love him Deut. 30.6 Wee have the seale of his promise in giving Circumcision to Infants to signifie and seale the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4 11. Gen. 17. And wee have assurance of all his promises and of that to Abraham and his seed in particular to be confirmed unto us not abrogated or lessened by Christ 2 Cor. 1.20 Luk. 1.72 73. Gal. 3.14 c. Wherefore they are but a faithlesse and crooked generation that notwithstanding all that God hath spoken and done in this kinde doe deny this grace of Christ to the Infants of his people and the seale or confirmation of this grace by Baptisme now as it was by Circumcision of old Next you say Secondly A. R. This reason is grounded upon a great mistake of the sense of the Text for the words are not unto them belongs the Kingdome but of such is the Kingdome that is of none else but of such as the next words which follow in these Texts doe manifestly declare for in Luk. 18.17 Mat. 10.15 In both places where Christ had said Suffer little Children to come unto me for of such is the Kingdome of God He presently confirmes it in the next words thus Verily I say unto you whosoever shall not receive the kingdome of God as a little childe shall not enter therein As also in Mat. 18.34 Christ speaking to his Disciples sayth Except yee be converted and become as little children yee shall not enter into the Kingdome of heaven Whosoever therefore shall humble himselfe as this little childe the same is the greatest in the Kingdome of heaven Whereby it is evident that when Christ sayth of such is the Kingdome of heaven his meaning is not of them nor of such as them in age nor understanding 1 Cor. 14.20 But of such as them in humilitie and such like qualifications Ans If you mean heer that the Seperates do ground their reason upoÌ„ a great mistake of the sense of the Text in saying that the Kingdome of God belongeth to the Infants and therefore Baptisme Then to your impertinent confused answer or groundlesse aspersion I reply First That it is not sufficient to say that the reason is grounded upon a mistake unlesse it be so which if it be not so then you are mistaken your selfe and that greatly both in the reason and in the sense of the Text also in charging us with a great mistake when it is not grounded upon any mistake much lesse upon a great mistake and least of all upon a great mistake of the sense of the Text as you unjustly speake and therefore your charge is but a treble evill surmise a meer supposition of that which is not and this may evidently appeare to be true because out of Christs owne words wee may gather that the Kingdome of heaven belongeth to the holy Infants for sayth he of such is the Kingdome of heaven Secondly Wee doe not say that the words are in expresse tearmes unto them belongs the Kingdome you shall not father this upon us but of such is the Kingdome of God and yet notwithstanding the sense is rightly taken according to the Text that the Kingdome of heaven belongeth unto the infants and therefore you cannot justly charge our reason to be impertinent or to be grounded upon any mistake at all much lesse a mistake of the Text So then it appeareth that the mistake is not ours but yours seeing you mistake your selfe and us and Christ and all Thirdly I doe not know your meaning when you rehearse Christs words Of such is the Kingdome of heaven and say that is of none else but of such You should know that the Kingdome of heaven belongeth to those that are past infancie as well as to Infants Aged persons are of the Kingdome of heaven as well as such children If you denie this you will denie your own enterance into the Kingdome or else say you are an infant which thing I suppose you will not doe But the drift of your interpretation is to prove that when Christ sayth Of such he meaneth such and none elâ—e but such therefore no Infants For so it appeareth by your words afterwards when you say Christs meaning not of them nor of such as them in yeares nor understanding a meer non-sense conclusion and your ground is Because Christ sayth of such and doth not say of them But herein you erre and are mistaken in the word such and your inferences therefrom are not according to truth which may appeare thus As for Instance When Paul sayth Rom 1.32 Those that do such things are worthy of death he mâ—aneth those things before specified in the same Chapter Suppose a person should come to you and before divers persons charge you saying Such persons who doe such things as you doe are worthy to be condemned I suppose the accusation toucheth your own particular person as much as any other and that so you will confesse and take it as meant of you But if upon examination of the accuser you shall find him to faulter say that therefore he meant not you nor any such thing which you doe c. would you not count him a knave or a foole or a lyar Againe He that should come and say Such an argument or arguments as you bring here are good
that Abraham was a father of many Nations and so was Noah and that not onely according to the flesh but also spiritually He was a father of many Nations according to the flesh because he was the father of Abraham * See Luk. 3. who was the father of many nations according to the flesh Spiritually Noah was the heire of Justice and Abrahams father as Abraham is sayd to be our father and the father of all those who walke in his steps And seeing that Christ came of Abraham and Abraham of Noah therefore Christ came of Noah so that it may be sayd in this respect of Noah as of Abraham that in his seed which is Christ all the Nations of the earth are blessed Further you say * Pag. 18. at lin 24. A. R. Therefore although the Covenant and promises were made to Abraham and his seed yet the consequence will not follow that the covenant is likewise made with all beleevers and their seed for beleevers onely are the seed and the seed onely and none of them a father in the Gospel sence nor any other save onely Abraham to whom and his seed the covenant and promises are made Ans That the covenant and promises were made to Abraham and his seed you cannot denie that the Proselytes and their seed were heires of the same covenant as well as Abraham and his seed the Scriptures are cleare Gen. 17.9.12 Exod. 12.48 Isa 56. So when Zacheus beleeved and so became the sonne of Abraham he had the same priviledges which Abraham had namely that the same time salvation was come to his house * Luk. 19 8 9. Therefore seeing that he was the sonne of Abraham his infants were in the covenant of Abraham And this is according to what the Apostle sayth Gal. 4.28 Now wee brethren as Isaac was are the children of promise if now the brethren are as Isaac was then their Infants are as Isaacs infants were and are to have the same priviledges of the covenant as Isaacs infants had But the former is true from the Apostles Testimony and therefore the latter is true also And therefore Baptisme being one of the priviledges of the covenant of God which they are as capable of as of circumcision they ought to be baptized as Isaacs infants were to be circumcised And seeing the same Covenant which was made with Abraham was made with Isaac and his seed and that beleevers are as Isaac was the children of promise The consequence then that the covenant is likewise made unto all beleeving parents and their holy seed is very true Whereas you tell us that Beleevers onely are the seed and the seed onely and none of them a father in the Gospel sence nor any other save onely Abraham I tell you that if Abraham had not been a beleever he could not have been the seed much lesse a father spiritually unto those who walke in his steps neither could Isaac the childe of promise have been as he was 2. Though Christ is the root of David * Rev. 5.5 yet he is also the off-spring of David * Rev. 22.16 so is he the root and the off-spring the father * Joh. 8.58 and the sonne of Abraham * Mat. 1.1 so that Abraham was Christs seed spiritually as all the Proselytes were and in this respect Abraham is our brother But you tell us Beleevers onely are the seed and the seed onely and none of them a father in the Gospel sence save onely Abraham but you should know that Noah was Abrahams father both spiritually and temporally and a beleever and so were the holy Patriarkes before him therefore they were the seed and yet wee will not say they were the onely seed in the largest extent for I thinke that all the Saints which are or have been are not yet the onely seed for there are no doubt many yet to come Now if by the onely seed and the seed onely you mean that God never accepted of any seed but such as they were spiritually I grant the same that such are the seed indeed and in truth and such a one was Isaac in his infancie and such are the Infants of beleevers now as those infants which Christ took up in his armes Mar. 10.16 and layd his hands upon and blessed And though the infants are not fathers but faithfull children of the faithfull yet they have the blessing of Abraham which lighted upon Isaac in his infancie and those that are blessed with faithfull Abraham are the seed of Abraham and children of the promise but the infants of beleevers are blessed with faithfull Abraham therefore they are the children of the promise Moreover You should not be ignorant that Enoch Noah Sâ—m Abraham Isaac and divers others were fathers spiritually But you would have Abraham to be the onely father for you say None of them is a father in the Gospel sence save onely Abraham so that you exclude all beleevers from the beginning unto this present yea to the end of the world from being fathers any of them in the Gospel sence But you should know that all beleeving fathers who have holy children are fathers in the Gospel sence and as they are holy so are their infants who have no more childreÌ„ then Isaac had in his infancie yet seeing they are heires of the Covenant which was made with Abraham they have his blessing So Paul termeth the children of beleevers holy * 1 Cor. 7.14 and so Peter sayth The promise is unto you and to your children c. which implyeth fathers and surely I thinke this is Gospel sence * Act. â— 39 if not Gospel it selfe Further you say Wherefore to affirme that every beleever hath now the same Covenant and promises made to him and his seed A. R. Pag. 18. at lin 30. as Abraham had to him and his seed is very absurd and is all one as to say that now every beleever by his beleeving doth immediately become a father of the faithfull as well as Abraham To which I answer as before that beleevers are in the same Covenant and therefore both they their seed have the same priviledges of the Covenant as the Proselytes and their seed had in former time And you should know that Abraham was not the father of Noah but Noah was the father of Abraham and he was before Abraham and therefore was not onely the father of Abraham but also the father of all beleevers after him spiritually Now though Abraham was not the father of so many beleevers as Noah was father of yet Abraham had the same priviledges in respect of the new covenant as Noah had Abraham sojourned in the land of Canan as a stranger but his seed did inherite it yet the promise of salvation was equally made both to him and his seed as it is to us and our seed So Jacob though he was not the father of so many beleevers w câ— Abraham was father of yet had
he the same priviledges in respect of the new covenant as Abraham had I will not say that Abraham had the same outward temporall priviledges which Noah had for Noah was the father of all Nations according to the flesh though not the father of Caine or those before him neither will I say that Jacob or Isaac had the same outward temporall priviledges in every respect as Abraham had for Abraham was the father of the Ismaelites and Edomitâ—s after the flesh And yet this doth not prove that every beleever upon his beleeving doth become a father of the faithfull no more then Isaac who was a father of the faithfull as well as Abraham And seeing your demand * Lin. 35. Where any seed are if all be fathers is grounded upon an if or supposition that all are fathers let it be a supposition still and so upon this ground when you bring suppâ—sâ—tions without distinctions builded upon your own imaginationâ— and prosecuted with such groundlesse cavillations you may expect that your building will fall to the ground as this doth Lin. 36 37 38 39. To your affirmation That their seed and their seeds-seed are all members of the Church and to be accounted faithfull and so to be all fathers of the faithfull as well as Abraham from generation to generation to the worlds end I answer That the infants of the faithfull are all members of the Church and they are not to be accounted unfaithfull though they die in their infancie And seeing Gods kingdome belongeth unto them though they have no children â—or are fathers of the faithfull 〈◊〉 Abrahams was yet they have the same precious priviledges as Abrahams infants had So that they are to be esteemed now tâ— be the sons of God and yet it is not manifested whaâ— they shall be when their terrestriall bodies being made like the glorious body of their sweet Saviour shall 〈◊〉 celestially in the kingdome of Eterniâ—â—â— Next you would make us beleeve that you will expresse your selfe more plainly Lin. 40. and in the intrim you promise this truth That there is now no difference between any circumcision or uncircumcision Pag. 19. lin 1 2. Jew or Gentile bond or free male or female but all are one in Christ Jesus Gal. 3.28 And to this I answer that Gal. 3.28 doth not prove that you have performed what you promised and called a truth for as you have layd it downe it is an untruth namely that there is no difference between any Circumcision or uncircumcision c. In this you have done evill and in fathering it upon the Apostle Paul you have done worse for Paul is no patron of this opinion it was no part of his doctrine that there is no difference between any Circumcision or uncircumcision c. But he putteth a manifest difference between Circumcision of the heart and Circumcision of the flesh as also between Jew and Jew namely he that is a Jew outwardly onely Rom 2.28 29. and he that is a Jew inwardly as also he putteth a difference between Gentile and Gentile namely an unbeleeving Gentile and a beleeving Gentile So that Paul maketh the beleeving Gentiles and the beleeving Jewes all one in Christ and not beleevers and unbeleevers all one in Christ for he applieth his speech to the Saints onely So that it appeareth you have quitemistaken the Apostle yea there is no Scripture which will beare you out in this your absurd affirmation And now I will come to what you call your plaine expression which is that If every beleever by his beleeving doth become a father of the faithfull as well as Abraham A. R. Pag. 19. at lin 3. then it must be at the very instant of his beleeving that he doth become a father of the faithfull as well as Abraham and if so where then will be any children to all these fathers for none can be children before they be faithfull and also at the same instant cease to be chilâ—â—en and become fathers which implyes a flat contradiction and then how â—an Abraham himselfe be father of all beleevers Rom. 4.11 12. Answ Who doth affirme that every beleever doth immediately become a father That which you say implyeth a flat contradiction Pag 19. lin 7. I thinke is builded but upon a supposition of your owne Isaacs fatherhood made him not cease to be Abrahams child no more then our fatherhood doth make us cease to be his Children as if they should affirme that beleevers upon their beleeving at the same instant cease to be children and become fathers And then upon this you aske how Abraham himselfe can then be father of all beleevers Which interrogation of yours implyeth rather a flat contradiction of the Scriptures of God as if Abraham was not both sonne and father 1. A sonne of Noah he was as wee are the sonnes of Abraham by faith in Christ 2. A father of the faithfull he was also So that Abraham was both a sonne and a father You doe not explaine your selfe * Lin. 9. when you aske how Abraham himselfe then can be father of all beleevers for you may know that Noah was father of more beleevers then Abraham Noah himselfe was a beleever before Abraham And if Abraham was not his father then he was not a father of all beleevers who went before him But it may be you meane by all beleevers all that came after Abraham and walked in his steps for if you mean by all belâ—evers all that ever have been are or shall be then by your owne ground there were no beleevers before Abraham was a father or else you must confesse that Abraham was not a father of them But theâ—e were beleevers before Abraham was borne and bâ—leevers there were and are after him therefore Abraham was and is both a father of some beleevers and a childe of other beleevers as wee are the children of him if wee derogate not from his steps and are the fathers of our posteritie after the flesh who doe not aberate from Gods commandements Next you say Or how can the promise be sure unto all the seed if beleevers childrâ—n be the seed for they will not affirme that all their children are saved But this is affirmed of all the seed to whom the promise is made Rom. 4.16 Heb. 6.16 17. Ans You thinke if beleevers children be the seed the promise cannot be sure to all the seed and why is this your reason is for th y will affirme that all their children are not saved But if this be a sufficient reason to prove infants not to be in the promise then it will prove that their parents are not in the promise nor any other and so upon this ground you must baptize none at all nor judge any to be in the promise though they professe faith never so much sith that many who are members and make a verball profession and ought to be baptized by Christs rule fall back like Judas
the ordinance of Circumcision and the right subjects thereof As all those doe who affirme that all the infants in the world from Adam to Abraham might have been circumcised if God had instituted Circumâ—ision then But this is to bring in the feed of Caine with the seed of Seth the infants of the idolatrous Heathens with the infants of Abraham and so to make a compounded mixture in the Lords Church which he alwayes laboured to keep from pollution by sequesterating them from the vile Furthermore You make answer to a position * Lin. 26. which is that God gaâ—e to infants Circumcision which was a signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith and regeneration Gen. 17.11 Rom. 4.11 And we know God giveth no lying signe nor sealeth a Covenant to any persons that are not therein Therefore infants are in the Covenant have faith and regeneration and so ought to be baptized now as well as circumcised then To this your answer is * Lin. 32. That it is true that God giveth no lying signe nor sealeth to any persons that they are in the Covenant when they are not therein To which I reply That I like it well that you will now confesse this truth But it appeareth by your following words * Lin. 12 13 14. that you take for granted a thing which you have not proved as if God declared and made knowne unto Abraham that Ishmael was not in the Covenant before he was circumcised And you cite Gen. 17.18 19 20 21. Which Scripture maketh nothing for your purpose for if you will say God established his Covenant onely with Isaac and none other and all the rest were out of the Covenant then it will follow that the rest of Abrahams children which Abraham had by Keturah yea and the Proselytes and their children were out of the Covenant by your ground But you should consider that God in establishing his Covenant with Isaac and setting him out for a singular person did give Isaac the preheminence as Sem had above Japhet * Gen. 9.27 and Judah Jacobs fourth sonne over his eleven brethren * Gen. 49.8 9 10 11 12. And God establishing the Covenant with Isaac as the root did establish it unto all those who were of the true Religion as the branches but if any departed from Isaacs banner they deprived themselves of Isaacs blessing Now for as much as it was the minde of God that Ishmael should be circumcised * Master Spilsbery granteth that Ishmael and Esau were by God commanded to bee Circumcised as well as any of the rest of Abrahams seed Gen. 17.10.13 See his Treat of Bap. pag. 7. lin 3 4 5 So Iscariot and Magus were commanded to be baptized as well as Peter and Paul and that circumcision was the signs and seale of the righteousnesse of faith It confirmeth it that in the account of man he was then to be judged worthy of it even righteous and in Gods covenant for God is not by your owne confession the author of a lying signe nor sealeth to any persons that they are not in the Covenant when they are not therein Now this is in respect of visibilitie * And so Mr. Spilsbery further granteth That though such were rejected as were not elected this made not the promise of God of none effect to those who stood firme in the Covenant by grace in Christ Jesus as branches in their root pag. 17. lin 21 22. for Simon Magus had Baptisme the outward visible seale of the Covenant and yet we cannot say that he was ever in Gods secret account in the Covenant But secret things belong to God And till God declared unto Abraham that Ishmael was not in the Covenant though he promised to give Isaac never so many priviledges yet Abraham was not to judge Ishmael to be out of the Covenant any moâ—e then others of his houshold till God had directed him so to judge Againe I suppose that Ishmael being come to yeares of discretion it was sacriledge in him to usurp the ordinance and a sinne in Abraham to impose the same upon him except he were in the Covenant so farre as men were to judge of which Covenant this by your own confession was no lying signe Now though Infants were not capable to resist or refuse to be circumcised yet those of elder yeares could and Ishmael was thirteen yeares of age when he was circumcised Therefore Ishmael submitting according as he and the rest of Abrahams familie were taught who were at yeares of discretion was to be esteemed to be in the Covenant Moreover That the children who were â—ircumcised according to Gods appointment were visibly in the Covenant before they were circumcised is apparent by Gen. 17. ver 14. God sayth The uncircumcised man childe whose flesh of his fâ—re-skin is not circumcised that soule shall be cut off from his people he hath broken my Covenant Which doth plainly argue that he was in the Covenant before else how could he breake that which he never had And Abrahams children then could not be sayd to be rent out of the Covenant which they were never in or rent froÌ„ a people who were never theirs but we may rather conclude that as Gods covenant was their covenant Gods people their people so God was their God as he had testified himselfe to be * And also I will be their God That is sayth Mr. Spilsbery their God whom they shall beleeve and obey upon whom they shall depend for the performance of all that I have promised unto them by which faith and obedience they shall acknowledge me to be their God See Spils Treat Bap. pag. 12. before they were circumcised circumcision was added as a signe for sealing or confirming of the same thing signified thereby But wheras God himself calleth circumcision his Covenant a Gen. 17.10 meaning expresly a signe of it b Ver. 11. and Paul calleth it a seale of the righteousnes of faith c Rom. 4.11 you say It was not by God ordained nor by Abraham understood to be to the persons circumcised a seale of their being in Covenant and much lesse of their being in the faith or regenerated * See A. R. Pag 21. l. 37 38 39. so by this it seemeth that you would make the words of Paul and of God himselfe to be false for you openly contradict them both as also that which you granted before namely that God giveth no lying signe nor sealeth to any persons that they are in the Covenant when they are not therein Next you say that Gen. 17.11 and Rom. 4.11 See A. R. must be understood * Pag. 22. that the circumcision which Abraham received both upon himselfe and seed was to him and them a signe and seale that righteousnesse should be not by the law or circumcision in the flesh but by the faith which Abraham had when he was yet uncircumcised That he should be the father of
see his Treat of Bap. pag. 20. lin 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14. consisted all of visible Saints Deut. 29.18 to be câ—rrupt For the like you said before in your book p. 4 That they stood meerly upon nature and circumcision of the flâ—sh not by faith and circumcision of the heart And here you oppose this nature unto grace the naturall seed unto the spirituall seed And thus it appeareth that you hold neither the matter nor forme of the Church to be spirituall then nor the persons graciâ—us but ungracious fleshly and carnall But the Scripture teacheth us that they were a holy nation and a peculiar people unto the Lord their God and so excellent that none were like unto them Great advantage had they every manner of way Vnto them was committed the Oracles of God And shall wee thinke that God committed his Oracles to a Church which had a carnall constitution or that he owned such for his holy peculiar people God made an everlasting covenant with Abraham that he would be a God unto him and his seed for ever And though the Law was added because of transgression yet it could not disanull the covenant and therefore not the Church or people of the covenant or the seale of the promise Now surely if that the Church had been constituted upon nature corrupted such as you have opposed to grace and upon the naturall not upon the spirituall seed * See before in this Treatise pag. 29 30 31. For there it is answered at large then there was no difference between the Israelites and the Heathens and then was the Church of Israel no communion of Saints but a mixt multitude which to thinke is very erronious as may appeare by these Scriptures Exod. 19.5 6. 22.31 12.48 49. Num. 9.14 15.15 Levit. 19.2 20.7 8. Deut. 7.6 14.1 2. 26.18 19. 1 King 8.53 Deut. 4.20 29.10 11 12 13. 10.15 Psal 147.14 But from this your groundlesse affirmation you would through an inference make another disparitie between the Church of the Jewes and the Church of the Gentiles You say That was therefore termed Israel according to the flesh and of the circumcision of the flesh this Israel according to the Spirit and of the circumcision of the heart Rom. 8 28.29 Rom. 9.6 7 8. Coll. 2.11 And to this I answer That your speech doth here import as if none who were Israel according to the flesh were Israelites according to the spirit but the Apostle sayth All are not Israel that are of Israel He maketh a manifest difference between Israel the Church of God and those who were not really Israelites though they came of Israels loynes according to the flesh But your speech crosseth the Apostles speech and tendeth to prove that all were Israel that were of Israel But what will you say to the Proselytes and their seed Were they Israel according to the flâ—sh Surely they were not therefore they were Israelites according to the spirit As well as others who were also Israelites both according to the spirit and flesh Moreover None were to be circumcised externally in the flesh but those who were in Gods covenant and were circumcised in heart so farre as mâ—n could discerne and those that were in Gods covenant were Israelites spiritually and so to be esteemed even as true members of the Church So David sayth Yet surely God is good unto Israel unto those that are pure in heart Deut. 30.6 Circumcision of the flesh sealed unto them the circumcision of the heart and this God promised both to them and their seed and then both male and female were all one in Christ * Exod 12.48 49. Num. 9.14 15.14 15 16. and so they are now ** Gal. 3.28 As for the Scriptures Rom. 2.28 29. Rom. 9.6 7 8 Coll. 2.11 which you cite they make nothing for your present purpose to prove That that was onely called Israel according to the flesh and the other onely according to the spirit The one constituted upon that nature which you have opposed to grace upon the naturall seed destitute of the spirit the other constituted on grace without nature and the spirituall seed of Abraham without the naturall seed Prove this and then you say something else it is nothing to your purpose But indeed the substance of what you say heer is answered at large in this Treatise pag. 29 30 31 32 33. And now I will proceed to examine the Scriptures which you have cited heer for confirmation of these your opinions As touching Rom 2.28 29. there the Apostle declareth who are the true Jewes indeed namely those that are Jewes inwardly and that the true Circumcision indeed is that of the heart in the spirit not in the letter whose praise is of God c. Now will you reason from this place that those who were the naturall seed not degenerating were not the spirituall seed and that because God accepted of the infants with their parents and commanded them to be circumcised that therefore the Church-state was built upon nature and not upon Christ Surely you cannot gather any such thing from the Apostles words in Rom. 2.28 29. nor from any other place of Scripture but rather the contrary Yea the Apostle in the following Chapter declareth that as for the advantage of the Jew and the profit of circumcision it was much every manner of way chiefly because that unto them were committed the Oracles of God For sayth he what if some did not beleeve shall their unbeliefe make the faith of God without effect God forbid And so he concludeth that both Jewes and Gentiles are justified by faith Seeing it is one God which shall justifie the circumcision by faith and the uncircumcision through faith Doe wee then make voyd the Law through faith sayth he God forbid yea wee establish the Law And in the fourth Chapter Paul treateth of justification by faith without workes and expoundeth Davids speech for whereas David sayth * Psal 32.1 2. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne and in whose spirit there is no guile Paul explaineth it thus Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without works From which places of Scripture much may be gathered against those who denie infants to have faith imputatively for the Apostle declareth that he to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne is a righteous person Now every person is either righteous or unrighteous for as righteousnesse is not imputed unto those to whom sinne is imputed So those whose iniquities are pardoned and their sinne covered the Lord imputing no sinne unto them he imputeth righteousnesse unto them without workes and this righteousnesse is that which justifieth before God It was faith which was counted unto Abraham for righteousnesse And so he proceedeth in the 9th 10th and 11th verses to prove that this blessing or blessednesse came not onely upon the circumcision but also upon