wilfully rejected the Covenant of Grace 2. So are many of the rebaptized ones though under the outward administration many of them in a sad and deplorable condition and damnable state though taken for saints by others therefore doubtless there is no force in that Argument Obj. Circumcision was a seal onely to Abraham a sign to his posterity An. Are there not signs exhibitive as well as significative and wherein did such signs differ from seals 2. May not seals be to confirm a future as well as a present benefit Or 3. Is that seal Rom. 4.11 applyed to Abraham alone and not written for those hereafter that shall beleive Rom. 4.23 It was not written for his sake alone saith the Apostle that it was imputed to him for rightousnes but for us also to whom it shall be imputed if we believe 4. Was not the promise to Abraham to be heir of the world that is of Canaan included in that promise Was it not I say through the everlasting Covenant and not through the works of the law which the carnal Jew rested in Rom. 4.13 5. Did not Abraham's posterity stand in as much need of a seal to strengthen their faith as Abraham did Abraham was troubled with doubtings and the Lord again and again strengthened his faith If he that was so eminent for believing was so put to it what shall we say to the poor shrubs Psal 105. Will the Lord be wanting to them in any thing that may strengthen their faith Obj. If this opinion be maintained That the Covenant of circumcision was a covenant of grace it shakes the foundation of the Gospel and overthrows many fundamental points of religion Ans Here are great swelling words but such do but verba dare there is no proof for what is asserted Dare any say in the presence of Christ when taking leave of the world That this doctrine destroys the foundation of Christian Religion Will they justifie this at the last day before the Lord Christ the Judge of quick and dead * Expectemus judicium tuum Domine Augustin We expect the judgment and determination of God himself in this controversie as Austin sayd in another case But let 's see their Arguments They say First The first fundamental point must needs be denyed Gal. 2.15 Jews by nature Quia promissio haereditariam bâ—nedictioâ—â—m faciebat ideo naturâ â—ocatur Cal. in Gal. That all mankind by nature are the children of wrath Eph. 2.2 If all men by nature be the Children of wrath then are they not under this Covenant of Grace for to be under the Covenant of works and the Covenant of grace are contradictories which cannot be true at the same time Ans Contradictories may be true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a diverse respect 2 Kings 17.34 41. They feared the Lord and they feared not the Lord that is they feared the Lord in their way and the Gods of the nations also and therefore it 's sayd they feared not the Lord. Thus Elisha to Hazael concerning Benhadad 2 Kin. 8.10 He may recover howbeit the Lord hath shewed me that he shall certainly dy that is he may recover of this disease but he died notwithstanding by the hand of Hazael Sons in some sense are no sons Deut. 32.5 Their spot is not the spot of my children There are promises for grace 2. to grace children are under both in some sense yet saith the text they are children in whom is no faith 1 Kin. 2.26 Abiathar is a man of death and yet by the Kings favor he lives The Israelites at the same time were enemies for our sakes and yet beloved for the fathers sake Rom. 11.28 Paul was under the Covenant as being descended of Abraham and yet was by nature as he tells us Eph. 2.2 a child of wrath as well as others So children considered in their natural state as the sons of Adam are under wrath but considered as children of such gracious parents in Covenant with God so are they under grace and therefore under those divine Dispensations which they are capable of Gal. 2.15 We who are Jews by nature that is by descent from such parents cannot with all our birth-priviledg attain to rightousness Thus we say Such are naturally English that is by descent In this sense the Apostle useth the word Rom. 11.24 If the natural branches are broken off c. The Gentiles wanted this being by offspring sinners 〈◊〉 nature in Eph. 2.2 is taken for that corrupt qualification of nature which they draw out of their parents loyns Grace at first was connatural to us and had been propagated from parents to children ex traduce if Adam had stood as now corruption is As therefore the children of Israel were called the holy seed and yet some of them are stiled the children of the Sorcerer and the whore Ethiopians c. Esa 57.3 Amos 9.7 So may one and the same person be holy by way of Covenant and yet unholy in respect of those internal qualifications For there is a relative and a positive holiness though they want the later yet may they be under the former 2. Their children are under grace for are not many of them under the everlasting Covenant made between the Father and the Son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before these secular times therefore all time even from eternity Are not elect children given to Christ before all time Doth he not know them by name And having loved them with an everlasting love doth he not in time draw them with the cords of his love even with the cords of a man suitable to a rational creature out of the hands of sin Satan and this present world Doth he not swaddle them and bring them into the bond of the Covenant even into that Covenant called the sure mercies of David Doth he not gloriously irradiate with the beams of his countenance on their souls in heaven for their heaven is the face of God Will not Christ at the last day embrace such as he did on earth saying Here am I and the Children which thou hast given me And were they not under grace Is not all this a part of electing grace Surely this is the spring of all the first wheel that moves all the rest Rom. 11.7 and though there be a wheel in a wheel yet all shall tend to their good as all the wheels in a clock tend to make the clockstrike Obj. The second fundamental point that this error opposeth is the stability in the Covenant of grace they say The Covenant made Abraham's seed was conditional and broken by them but the Covenant of grace is absolute Ans The Covenant of grace is conditional as appears by the whole current of the scriptures Deut. 7.12 13. Wherefore it shall come to pass if ye hearken to these judgments and keep and do them that the Lord thy God shall keep unto thee the Covenant and the mercie which he sware unto thy Fathers Lev. 26.41 If then
propension to grace for they are naturally as stiffnecked as any people but in respect of the nature of the Covenant of grace given to their ancestors and their seed according to which God is more readily inclined to pour out of the spirit of his grace upon the seed and offspring of his covenanting people than upon strangers and aliens Now though the Gentiles in their first ingrafting may be said to be the wild Olive as the Iews at first were yet afterwards they were naturalized and their children become natural branches of the Olive tree i. e. the Church of God Psal 128. Thy children as Olive plants green and legitimate for the Olive tree admitteth no other graff Ains in Psal 128. The ablest of that opinion do grant That now in the days of the Gospel children are under the promise and that the promise Gen. 17.7 is a Gospel promise notwithstanding they denie the seal though the promise be made the ground of annexing the seal whatever is said by any to the contrarie See Mr Tombs Review p. 3. Others being convinced that the Apostle speaks of a visible Church which indeed is undeniablie true flie to their old distinction to wit the Covenant of Circumcision or the Covenant of works from which Covenant they say the Iews are cut off to this day to make this good they distinguish betwixt Abraham begetting and a working Abraham and a believing and faithful Abraham Thus they say The whole nation of the Iews were legally holy till that Covenant was abolisht I answer They make a distinction betwixt Abraham believing and Abraham working where none is to be made for did not his works 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 work together with his faith declaratively not onely before men but God were not these works brought in Jam. 2.18 Shew me thy faith saith the translation without thy works but it should rather be rendered by thy works 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is make thy faith appear out of thy works Iam. 2.18 as fruits of his faith which is the condition of the Covenant of grace for faith without works is dead how then can it justifie 2. Observe They say that Covenant mentioned Rom. 11. Heb. 8. is abolished as being a typical Covenant but we answer We have alreadie proved it to be an everlasting Covenant 3. What priviledge that is peculiar benefit was it to that nation to be under the Covenant of works Rom. 3.1 which is common to all nations considered as the sons of Adam but in Rom. 9. the Apostle speaks of that Covenant and the fulness thereof as a peculiar prerogative to that nation and not common to others 4. What prejudice could it be to them to be cut off from that Covenant nay it had been well for them if they had been cut off from the Covenant of works which neither we nor our fathers were ever able to bear The Apostle tells us they are hardened and the Lord hath sent a spirit of slumber v. 8. that he hath cast them away v. 15. and broken them off v. 17. and why because they did not cleave to the Covenant of grace which they were under Act. 3.25 and 4.4 but wilfully and obstinately rejected Christ being unskilful in the word of rightousness Heb. 5.13 that is not descerning aright that justification was held forth in the old Covenant but cleaving to the works of the law Rom. 9.31 32. comp Rom. 11.7 5. If that Covenant be abolished how can they be reingrafted into it for the Apostle here speaks of a reingrafting into the same Covenant which plainly argues it was no typical or carnal Covenant but a Covenant of grace still in force 6. Through unbelief they were broken off that is say they from the Covenant of works therefore according to their doctrine if they had believed they had continued in the Covenant of works to this day which is a contradiction and yet they affirm that Covenant ended with Christ it being a typical carnal Covenant as Canaan was But have not such cause to mourn that such a gross spirit of error should thus seiz on them and lead them into those false and bywaies certainly for building upon the foundation this trash wood hay and stubble they shall suffer loss 1. of their labor and 2. of their reward For the day shall reveal it and it shall be consumed as by fire 1 Cor. 3.13 Ah then retract with Austin and undeceive those poor souls you have deceived least the Lord be angry with you 3. Arg. Of such children is the Kingdom of heaven ergo they are inchurched Mar. 10. And they brought little children to him that he should touch them and the Disciples rebuked those that brought them but when Jesus saw it he was much displeased and said Suffer little children to come unto me and forbid them not for of such is the Kingdom of God Mark 10.12 1. Observe they brought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * Lev. 26.43 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 even because Mar. 10 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hence the word Proselyte thus the children of the Gentiles were Proselytes even babes to Christ this is recorded for our imitation Mat. 19.13 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 little children were brought 2. Christ saith Suffer little children to come to me See the like phrase Mar. 4.21 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Num lucerna venit i. importatur Is a candle brought to be put under a bushel that is to be brought to me Is not this maxim in force in all ages from Christ to the end of the world Doth not Christ now say to our dissenting brethren Suffer little children to come to me And how should we now visibly bring them to Christ but in that ordinance of baptism Media applicandi Christum non sunt alia quam verbum et sacran enia eâ— vel nullum datur ordinarium medium vel baptismus est medium I know no other way For the invisible coming of â—nvisible members falls not under the cognizance of the sons of men therefore such a prohibition had been incongruous 3. We are not onely commanded but charged Forbid them not 4. Christ was very angry with his own Disciples that offered to put them by for even Christs own dear people may be injurious to children as we see â—â— in our days but with these doubtless he is as much displeased as ever he was with them seeing that he hath the same tender bowels in heaven as he had on earth 5. Of such he saith is the Kingdom of heaven that is of children and such as are like to children according to the phrase of Nehemiah Shall such an one as I fly that is I or any in my condition For children are capable of being subjects of any Kingdom on earth Mar. 10.15 Whosoever receiveth not the kingdom of heaven as a little child that is as a little child receives it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he shall not enter into the kingdom of
arbitramur quia spiritus otiosus non est quemadmodum ratio etsi se non nisi paulatim exerat Idem Wal. the minor proposition is proved 1. From scripture Mat. 18.3 4 5. compared with Mar. 9.36 Whosoever shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me but whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me it were better that a milstone were hanged about his neck and he cast into the midst of the sea The opposition shews he speaks of children For it 's an undoubted maxim Where terms stand as opposits the one is to be taken in the sense opposit to the other Now it 's clear from ver 3 4 5. that he speaks of children whom we are visibly to receive in Christ's name to such Ordinances as they are capable of therefore the words are so to be taken ver 5. little ones that believe in me There is the like phrase Rev. 9.4 It was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth neither any green thing neither any tree but onely those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads Which exception shews you That by grass green things and trees he means men For the exception as we say must be of the same kinde Exceptio est ejus dem generis See Rev. 7.3 2. We may see this exemplified in many Psal 22. 9. Thou madest me hope when I hung upon my mothers brests This is true in the antitype Christ who had faith from the very womb it 's true also in David Psal 71.5 Thou art my trust from my childhood by thee I have been holden from the womb v. 17. Thou hast taught me from my childhood now also when I am grey headed forsake me not We see original sin lies dormant in the child for a while but quickly puts forth it being peccatum actuosum Psal 58. They go astray from the belly and why may may not faith put forth betimes in some as in Esaias ch 49. Jeremiah ch 1.5 and John Baptist the first in the new Testament Now the first in every kinde is the rule of all the rest I see no reason but when a child puts forth acts of reason he may put forth an act of faith and when he begins to know his natural he may also know his heavenly father though it wants that reflect act whereby it knows that it knows the former we have seen verified in many children in New-England and elsewhere 3. 〈◊〉 If some be sanctified from the womb then they have faith quicunque renascitur fidem habet Luther For all the graces are concatenated but some are sanctified from the womb for Christ as he sanctifies our natures so he sanctifies every age as Hos 12 4. Jacob being actuated by the spirit began to act betime and to wrestle with his brother Esau in his mothers womb for the blessing See Zanchy 4. Children have faith in heaven therefore in earth For 1. If the Lord irradiate upon the souls of children in heaven Quos pleno lucis suae fulgore illustraturus est Dominus cur non iis quoque in presens si ita libuerit exiguà scintillâ irradiaret Cal. Inst l. 4. c. 16. and they do behold the face of God which is an act of faith Heb. 11.27 then have they faith in heaven if so why not on earth 2. They rest in hope of the resurrection else they were miserable Psal 16.9 that is the soul doth rest in hope for the bodie properly is not the subject of hope now hope is the daughter of faith 3. There will be this use of faith in heaven to believe that which we cannot comprehend for faith is the evidence of things not seen even the infinite being of God who dwells in that light that none can approach unto therefore we conclude infants in heaven have faith and why may they not have the seed of it here seeing there is no grace in heaven which was not wrought on earth Hence it is that regeneration is called an earthly thing Ioh. 3. because as for other reasons so this it must be wrought on earth 4. The first Adam had power to convey grace as faith to his posterity and hath not the second Adam much more power Was not the faith of Adam of the like nature with the faith of believers though it do not put forth that act whereby we are justified 5. Can any live without faith or be saved for ever without it and shall we denie it to infants who stand in need of justification by faith as well as we Obj. How can they be justified by faith which cannot act Ans Faith may be said to be passive in our justification because the habit of faith is passive before it put forth any act now we are justified so soon as by the habit of faith we are alive in Christ in the first moment of our conversion before faith put forth any act Thus children are justified by the habit of faith for as we were guilty of Adams sin which is imputed to us before we were active in giving consent unto it so is the rightousness of Christ imputed to children before they put forth any elicit act of faith Therefore I say they are capable of that passive Ordinance of baptism Obj. Children have no knowledge therefore no faith therefore no interest in the Covenant or seal thereof Ans Are they not reasonable souls because for the present they make no use of reason and may they not have habitual knowledge lying dormant in them though no actual is it not Christ that enlighteneth every one not that is going out but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 coming into the world doth not the reasonable soul lie dormant in the body till organized doth it not live though it move not for the present when a man is asleep he acts not grace doth it therefore follow he hath none may not a child be included in a lease and conditions made which render him capable of the benefit of it if he perform the conditions therein specified though at the making of the lease he give no consent at all and were not the children in the Evangelist blessed by Christ because they understood it not or was Peter washed in vain because he knew not what Christ did as yet Mr Tombs saith If he knew an infant such an one as John was such a one he would baptize and farther he saith that such as Christ blessed might be baptized if therefore baptism belong to one infant it 's enough to confute them who denie it to all but according to this account if onely the elect and faithful are to be admitted to the Ordinance of baptism there is no subject left to whom we may dispense that Ordinance 6. Arg. Taken from examples in scripture whole families were baptized Observe the families are made the precedent If any one say here is a Synecdoche the whole being put for part We answer with
that was no warrant for them so to do Corah with his hundred and fifty Princes famous â—n the congregation men of renown and as it seems well reputed of among the people rose up against Moses and Aaron saying Ye take too much upon you seeing all the Congregation is holy making no distinction between Moses Aaron and the * Num 26.10 For a sign they are for a sign to all to this very day rest of the Congregation Therefore they usurped the Priests office But upon this the Lord appears and makes such a distinction between them and the Priests as never was made before for the earth opened her mouth and swallowed them up Now least any should preâ—end thâ—â— is an Old Testament * John 10. All that came before me are Thieves and Robbers Observe he doth not say they were but they are God looks at such as Thieves and Robbers in hell to this very day that ran before they were sent Proof the Apostle Jude tells you oâ— the like in the New Testament They perished in the gainsaying of Corah Iudâ— 11. Whence observe First there were in Jude's time such as denied the office of the Ministery Secondly the hand of God was signally on them In some cases private men may 1. In time of necessity when there is no other means to be had Or 2. In times of Persecution when the ordinary dore of enterance is shut as appears in that instance of WALDUS Rev. 14. a Merchant of Lyons As private men may not publickly dispense the word in an ordinary way so neither may they administer the Seals For to whom Christ gave commission to preach to them gave he commission to baptize and to them onely Mat. 28. Go Ye and teach all nations baptizing them c. And lo I am vvith you allvvaies to the end of the vvorld We have blessed be God a command and a promise of his presence they have no such command and therefore I verily believe they find little of the presence of God in their administrations either for conversion or otherwise I am sure they cannot challenge much at the hand of God For had I sent them saith the Lord Jer. 23. they should have profited this people had they stood in my councel and not ran before they â—vere sent running away as he said with the empâ—â— cart they should have turned them from their â—vil waies As for our Paedobaptism if it have nothing of Gods â—ppointment neither administrator matter form â—â—ght subject nor end surely God would not own it â—s he hath from heaven many a time and often Obj. Ananias Acts 9.10 being a Disciple baâ—tized I answer 1. He had a special command for the baptiâ—ing of Paul let them shew the like preâ—â—dent Iud. 6.20 â—ffer thou Thus the command made it lawfull which without a special command had been unlawfull Secondly It appears by the Ecclesiastical Story â—â—e was a Minister of Jesus Christ * See Corn à Lap in Act 9. First one of 70 Disciples afterwards fixed at Damascus and so indeed this word Disciple in hebrew â—s put for a teacher Thus much for the third head Fourthly It is the washing with waâ—er in or â—nto the name of the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost Acts 19. v. VVhen they heard this they vvere baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus I will not deny but that there being an error in the Foundation there may be a rebaptization it is very probable to some that those Disciples were baptized of Paul seeing that they were not baptized into the name of the Holy Ghost 1. They being asked whether they had received the Holy Ghost * Though others take it in another sense fee Joh 7.30 The Holy Ghost was not yet given is added to the text Ambrosius sentit illos adulteri no baptismate sub nomine baptismi Johannis non tam iinctos quam sordidatos See Mac. Musc Zanch. Deodat Erg. Nihil est in verbis euâ—â— n equè esse Lucae ac Pauli verba existenâ—mus nam quod ad particulas illas graecas attinct 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saepiùs in Scripâ—â— logitur et 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 subsequente et 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praeâ—â—â—e Rom 3 2. and 10.1 Col 2.17 Luk 11 3â— Act. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 et tamen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non praecâ—sserat Macc. Quere whether many Administrator in these days deny not the second and third persons in Trinity that is the gifts of the Holy Ghost They answered they knew no whether there were an Holy Ghost or no which words imply the existence or subsistence of the third Person iâ— Trinitie 2. Those were Jews now many of the Jews did not rightly understand the doctrine of the Trinity 3. It appears by the question Paul propounds ver 31. Unto what then were ye baptized Now no man is baptized into the gifts of the Holy Ghost but into the Holy Ghost himself 4. If that new interpretation be admitted there is a tautologie for who doth not by the words going before John verilie baptized with the baptism of repentance v. 4. understand that they were already baptized by John v. 3.4 To what purpose then should he say in the 5 v. When they heard this they were baptized into the name of the Lord Iesus Calvin seeing the force of this Argument saith They were baptized with extraordinary gifts of the Holy ghost But that is exprest in the words following when Paul laid his hands on them 5. That interpretation overthrows the grammatical sense of the words and seems to render them void of common sense for the words spoken by Paul to them are in the second person whereas these words they were baptiz'd in the name of the Lord Jesus are spoken in the third person Therefore cannot be the words of Paul to them but of Luke concerning them else the Apostle would have said when ye heard this and not as we have them when they heard this Besides it 's somewhat harsh to make the people whom John baptized and those twelve Disciples of Ephesus the same persons For the pronouns they and they in the 4 and 5 verses upon that supposition that both are Paul's words cannot be understood but of the same persons as is well alledged by some Therefore these words when they heard this must be taken as the words of Luke not of Paul importing the baptism of these Disciples upon the preaching of Paul and not of John 6. The Apostle Act. 194 doth plainly declare That John when he baptized did say that they should believe in him that should come after him which Paul interprets to be meant of Christ Jesus But if John had baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus explicitly In this sense some understand Cyprian denying the baptism of such hereticks which erred in Fundamentals why did not Paul say so rather than to
I am thy exceeding great reward the Lord leaves himself in pawn that I may so say till he had made good his promise to him But in cap. 17.22 he more fully explains the Covenant Eleventhly The V. Commandment is not carnal though it have a temporal promise annexed to it Eph. Deut. 5.16 Ut prolongent dies Potest verbum accipi impersonaliter prolongent pro eo quod est prolongentur Junius 6.3 Children obey your parents that it may be well with you and that ye may live long on the earth Surely none will say but that children are bound to obey their parents under the Gospel as well as the Jews were under the Law notwithstanding that motive Is there not the like reason for the Covenant May it not be spiritual though the Lord engage to Abraham and his seed to give them that temporal land of Canaan and shall we say this Covenant is a temporal and a carnal Covenant hath not godliness the promise of this life and that which is to come They might as well have said the ten Commandments belong not to us because Deut. 5. they are enforced with this consideration which brought thee out of the land of Aegypt though in a spiritual sense that may be applyed to us as literally to the Jews Twelfthly Abraham was heir of the world by virtue of the Covenant of grace and surely Canaan was included in that promise as being a little world in the great world Rom. 4.13 The promise that he should be heir of the world was not through the Law but through the rightousness of faith Where you see it 's plainly opposed to the Covenant of works Thirteenthly From the absurdities that will follow hereupon for then so many particular promises so many Covenants whereas a Covenant is but a bundle of promises solemnly sealed and confirmed The Papists having excluded the second Commandment Such as will deficere in necessariis will abundare in superfluis they are defective in the second Command therefore they superabound in the X whereas the text mentions but one Commandment as Moses one Covenant throughout ch 17. divide the tenth into two whereas they might as well make eight of it as first Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors house 2. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife 3. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors field 4. Nor his man servant 5. Nor his maid servant 6. Nor his ox 7. Nor his ass 8. Nor any thing that is his As they divide the Commandments so others divide the Covenant I will be thy God This they make a new Covenant or a Covenant of grace Gen. 17 to 6. and from 7. to 14. And to thy seed will I give this land a Covenant of works they grant the former to be the new Covenant or Covenant of grace and why not the later I will be the God of thy seed c. but they might as well according to all the particular articles in the Covenant multiply the Covenant into several species making every promise a Covenant and so many promises so many Covenants Fourteenthly If Circumcision was a seal of the Covenant of works then the seed of Abraham had no seal to the Covenant of grace at all for they say that relates to the land of Canaan which they hold to be given to the posterity of Abraham by a Covenant of works whereof Circumcision was a seal If this be granted then was the Lord wanting to his people for did they not stand in need of a seal of the rightousness of faith as well as Abraham much more Abraham though strong in faith was sore put to it as appears by the story being willing to sit down well contented with Ismael not having obtained the promised seed Yea cap 16.3 the holy Ghost seems to imply that he doubted ten years therefore he used unlawful means to obtain issue going inâ—â— Hagar Did Abraham stand in need of strengthening and did not his seed much more Had he a seal annexed to the promise and had not his seed the like or did God ever make a Covenant with his people and not seal it Hath any a just title to an inheritance and not a right to the seals and conveyances or had any ever a right to the Covenant of grace that had not an external right at least to the seal Fifteenthly Here is not onely an Husteronproteron for thus Abraham is first under the Covenant of grace and then of works long after but at the same time under both Covenants contrary to Rom. 6.14 Sixtenthly The Covenant of works admits of no repentance or mercy therefore cannot be renewed but this doth Deut. 4.7 12 13. Seventeenthly That Covenant was sealed with bloud for the letting out of the bloud did signifie the shedding of the bloud of Christ therefore it was not a Covenant of works Again it 's to thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for ever Gen. 17.10 11. Psal 105.8 Mr P. p. 43. The ever of the Law is to be understood of the time of the Gospel-state if these words to you and your seed in their generations be put in At negatur He gave that land for an everlasting Covenant even to a thousand generations Now from Abraham to Christ there was but 42 generations and therefore that Covenant ceased not when Christ came in the flesh as some say Jer. 25.5 Esa 24.5 Num. 25.13 Ex. 3.15 I am the God of Abraham the God of Isaac the God of Jacob this is my name for ever this is my memorial to all generations Eighteenthly If Circumcision were onely a seal signifying That God would give the seed of Abraham the land of Canaan what need was there of this seal after they were possessed of the land Obj. The subject matter of the Covenant is That they should be circumcised but in that all the works of the Law are included Ans Rom. 2.25 Act. 15. Circumcision profiteth if thou keep the Law saith the Apostle on Gods part it was a seal of all the gracious promises if on their part they did perform the condition which was to walk in obedience to his Commandments but it did not profit them if they kept not the Law as baptism now availeth not if men lead an evil life The Apostle speaks not by way of supposition as of a thing impossible to be done but as supposing it a thing possible evangelically to be done If he had spoken of the perfect keeping of the law legally which is impossible then all profitable use is denyed to Circumcision but he would not so much detract from that holy institution of God as to denie all profitable use thereof Circumcision indeed did bind them to keep the whole law perfectly but it did profit them if there were an endeavor and a care in them to keep it though imperfectly Cap. 3.1 What priviledg then hath the Jew what benefit then is there of Circumcision if the Jews were not justified by Circumcision