Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	call_v	day_n	lord_n	3,188	5	4.3142	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A39697	Vindiciæ legis & fœderis: or, A reply to Mr. Philip Cary's Solemn call Wherein he pretends to answer all the arguments of Mr. Allen, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Sydenham, Mr. Sedgwick, Mr. Roberts, and Dr. Burthogge, for the right of believers infants to baptism, by proving the law at Sinai, and the covenant of circumcision with Abraham, were the very same with Adam's covenant of works, and that because the gospel-covenant is absolute. By John Flavel minister of the gospel in Dartmouth	Flavel, John, 1630?-1691.	1690 (1690)	Wing F1205A; ESTC R218689	64,584	175

a Righteousness of his own in the way of doing was pleased to revive the Law of Nature as to its matter in the Sinai Dispensation which was 430 Years after the first Promise had been renewed and further opened unto Abraham of whose Seed Christ should come and this he did not in opposition to the Promise but in subserviency thereto Gal. 3. 21. And though the matter and substance of the Law of Nature be found in the Sinai Covenant strictly taken for the Ten Commandments yet the Ends and Intentions of God in that terrible Sinai Dispensation were two-fold 1. To convince Fallen Man of the sinfulness and impotency of his Nature and the impossibility of obtaining Righteousness by the Law and so by a blessed necessity to shut him up to Christ his only Remedy And 2. To be a standing Rule of Duty both towards God and Man to the end of the World But if we take the Sinai Covenant more largely as inclusive of the Ceremonial with the Moral Law as it is often taken and is so by you in the New Testament then it did not only serve for a Conviction of Impotency and a Rule of Duty but exhibited and taught much of Christ and the Mysteries of the New Covenant in those its Ceremonies wherein he was prefigured to them 5. Whence it evidently appear that the Sinai Covenant was neither repugnant to the New Covenant in its scope and aim The law is not against the promise Gal. 3. 21. nor yet set up as co-ordinate with it with a design to open two different ways of Salvation to Fallen Man but was added to the Promise in respect of its Evangelical purposes and designs on which account it is call'd by some a Covenant of Faith or Grace in respect of its subserviency unto Christ who is the end of the Law for righteousness Rom. 10. 4. and by others a Subservient Covenant according to Gal. 3. 23 24. and accordingly we find both Tables of the Law put into the Ark Heb. 9. 4. which shews their Consistency and Subordination with and to the method of Salvation by Christ in the New Covenant 6. This design and intention of God was fatally mistaken by the Jews ever since God promulg'd that Law at Sinai and was by them notoriously perverted to a quite contrary end to that which God promulged it for even to give Righteousness and Life in the way of personal and perfect Obedience Rom. 10. 3. for they being ignorant of Gods righteousness and going about to establish their own righteousness have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God Hence Christ came to be slighted by them and his righteousness rejected for they rested in the Law Rom. 2. 17. were married to the Law as an Husband Rom. 7. 2 3. and so might have no Conjugal Communion with Christ. However Moses Abraham and all the Elect discerned Christ as the end of the Law for righteousness and were led to him thereby 7ly This fatal Mistake of the Use and Intent of the Law is the ground of those seeming Contradictions in Paul's Epistles Sometimes he magnifies the Law when he speaks of it according to Gods end and purpose in its Promulgation Rom. 7. 12 14 16. but as it was fatally mistaken by the Jews and set in opposition to Christ so he thunders against it calls it a ministration of Death and Condemnation and all its appendent Ceremonies weak and beggarly elements and by this distinction whatsoever seems repugnant in Paul's Epistles may be sweetly reconciled and 't is a distinction of his own making 1 Tim. 1. 8. We know that the Law is good if we use it lawfully There is a good and an evil use of the Law Had you attended these things you had not so confidently and inconsiderately pronounced it a pure Covenant of Works II Position Secondly you affirm with like Confidence That the Covenant of Circumcision is also the same viz. The Covenant of Works made with Adam in Paradise This I utterly deny and will try whether you have any better Success in the Proof of your second than you had in your first Position and to convince you of your mistake let us consider what the general nature of this Ordinance of Circumcision was what its ends were and then prove that it cannot be what you affirm it to be the very same Covenant God made with Adam before the Fall but must needs be a Covenant of Grace 1. Circumcision in its general Nature was 1. an Ordinance of God's own Institution in the 99th year of Abraham's Age at which time of its Institution God renewed the Covenant with him Gen. 17. 9 10. 2. That it consisted as all Sacraments do of an external Sign and a Spiritual Mystery signified thereby The external part of it which we call the Sign was the cutting off the Foreskin of the Genital part of the Hebrew Males on the eighth Day from their Birth The Spiritual Mystery thereby signified and represented was the cutting off the Filth and Guilt of Sin from their Souls by Regeneration and Justification called the Circumcision of the heart Deut. 10. 16. And though this was laid upon them by the Command as their Duty yet a gracious Promise of Power from God to perform that Duty was added to the Command Deut. 30. 6. The Lord thy God will circumcise thy heart to love him c. just as Promises of Grace in the New Testament are added to commands of Duty 3. Betwixt this outward visible Sign and Spiritual Mystery there was a Sacramental Relation from which Relation it is called the Token of the Covenant Gen. 17. 12. The Sign and Seal of the Covenant Rom. 4. 11. yea the Covenant it self Acts 7. 8. 2. Next let us consider the ends for which Circumcision was instituted and ordained of God of which these were the Principal 1. It was instituted to be a convictive Sign of their natural Corruption propagated by the way of natural Generation For which reason this natural Corruption goes in Scripture under the name of the Uncircumcision of the heart 〈◊〉 9. 26. 2. It also signified the putting off of this Body of Sin in the vertue of Christ's Death Col. 2. 11. 3. It was appointed to be the initiating Sign of the Covenant or a token of their Matriculation and Admission into the Church and Covenant of God Gen. 17. 9 10 11. 4. It was ordained to be a discriminating Mark betwixt God's Covenanted People and the Pagan World who were Strangers to the Covenant and without God in the World And accordingly both Parties were from this Ordinance denominated the Circumcision and the Uncircumcision Col. 3. 11. 5. It was also an obliging Sign to Abraham and his Seed to walk with God in the Uprightness and Sincerity of their Hearts in the performance of all covenanted Duties in which Duties Abraham and the Faithful wa●…ked Obedientially with God looking to Christ for Righteousness but the carnal Jews resting in and trusting to

whether it be possible to put Words into a Frame more lively expressive of a Condition than these are Do but compare Mark 16. 16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned Do but compare I say that Scripture-phrase with the Words of Jacob's Sons which all allow to be conditional Gen. 43. 4 5. If thou wilt send our brother with us we will go down but if thou wilt not send him we will not go down and judge whether the one be not as conditional as the other More particularly Argument I. If we cannot be Justifyed or Saved till we believe then Faith is the Condition on which those consequent Benefits are suspended But we cannot be Justisied or Saved till we believe Ergo. The Sequel of the Major is evident for as was said before a Condition is the Suspension of a Grant till something future be done The Minor is plain in Scripture Rom. 4. 24. Now it was not written for his sake alone that righteousness was imputed to him but for our sakes also to whom it shall be imputed if we believe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Qibus futurum est ut imputetur to whom it shall come to pass that it shall be imputed if we believe And Acts 10. 43. Whosoever believeth on him shall receive remission of sins John 3. 36. He that believeth not shall not see life but the wrath of God remaineth on him with multitudes more Now Sir lay seriously before your Eyes such Scriptures as these that promise Salvation to Believers and threaten Damnation to all Unbelievers as Mark 16. 16. doth and then give a plain and clear Answer to this Question either the positive part of that Text promises Salvation absolutely to Men whether they believe or believe not and consequently Unbelievers shall be saved as well as Believers and the negative part threatens Damnation absolutely to Sinners as Sinners and consequently all Sinners shall be damned whether they believe or believe not or else if you allow neither to be absolute but that none can be saved till they believe nor any damned when they do believe is not that a conditional Promise and Threatning Argument II. If Gods Covenant with Abraham Gen. 12. 2 3. and that Gen. 17. 2 3. were as you say pure Gospel-Covenants of Grace and yet in both some things are required as Duties on Abraham's part to make him partaker of the Benefits of the Promises then the Covenant of Grace is not absolute but conditional But so it was in both these Covenants Ergo. The Minor only requires proof for which let us have recourse to the places and see whether it be so or not 1. For the first you instance in as a pure Gospel-Covenant made with Abraham Gen. 12. 2 3. I must confess as you dismember the Text pag. 229. by choosing out the second and third Verses and leaving out the first which was the Trial of Abraham's Obedience in forsaking his native Country and his Fathers House I say give me but this liberty to separate and dis-joyn one part of a Covenant from the other and it 's easie to make any conditional Covenant in the World to become absolute For take but the Duty required from the Promise that is made and that which was a conditional presently becomes an absolute Grant Suppose Sir that Abraham had refused to leave his dear native Country and nearest Relations as many do think you that the promised mercies had been his I must plainly tell you you assume a strange liberty in this matter and make a great deal bolder with the Scriptures than you ought and the very same usage the other Scriptures hath 2. For when you cite your Second Covenant with Abraham you only cite Gen. 17. 2 3. and then call it an absolute Gospel Covenant when indeed you made it so by leaving out the first Verse which contains the Condition o●… Duty required on Abraham's part fo●… thus run the three first Verses An●… when Abraham was ninety nine years old the Lord appeared to Abraham and said unto him I am the Almighty God walk thou before me and be thou perfect and I will make my Covenant between me and thee c. Here an upright Conversation before God is required of him at God's entrance into this Covenant with him but that is and must be omitted and cut off to make the Covenant look absolute I am really grieved to see the Scriptures thus dealt with to serve a design Argument III. If all the Promises of the Gospel be absolute and unconditional requiring no Restipulation from Man then they cannot properly and truly belong to the New Covenant But they do properly and truly belong to the New Covenant Therefore they are not all absolute and unconditional The Sequel of the Major is only liable to doubt or denial namely That the Absoluteness of all the Promises of the New Testament cuts off their Relation to a Covenant but that it doth so no Man can deny that understands the difference between a Covenant and an absolute Promise A Covenant is a mutual Compact or Agreement betwixt Parties in which they bind each other to the Performance of what they respectively promise So that there can be no proper Covenant where there is not a Restipulation or Re-obligation of one part as well as a Promise on the other But an absolute Promise binds only one Party and leaves the other wholly free and unobliged to any thing in order to the enjoyment of the good promised So then if all the New Testament Promises be unconditional and absolute they are not part of a Covenant nor must that Word be applied to them they are absolute Promises binding no Man to whom they are made to any Duty in order to the enjoyment of the Mercies promised But those Persons that are under these absolute Promises must and shall enjoy the Mercies of Pardon and Salvation whether they repent or repent not believe or believe not obey or obey not Now to what Licentiousness this Doctrine leads Men is obvious to every Eye Yet this absoluteness of the Covenant as you improperly call it is by you asserted pag. 229 230. there is say you no condition at all 't is wholly free and absolute as the Covenant with Abraham Gen. 12. 2 3. Gen. 17. 2 3. Thank you Sir for making them so for by cutting off the first Verses where the Duty required on Abraham's part is contained you make them what God never intended them to be And the same foul play ●…s in Deut. 30. where you separate the plain condition contained in vers 1 2. from the Promise vers 6. Or if the Condition vers 1 2. be not plain enough ●…ut you will make it part of the Pro●…ise I hope that after in vers 10. is too ●…lain to be deny'd As to the other Texts more anon Mean time see how ●…ou destroy the Nature of a Cove●…ant Object But say you pag. 233.