much corrupted in that Ordinance as appears from that place Ezek. 44.7 therefore to baptize our children to succeedâ—ng generations iâ— the Parents wicked because the visible unbelief of Parents cuts off their seed and their visible believing ingraffs them in And thus we finde John repulst visible unbelievers that came to be baptized upon the account of Abrahams covenant so that it appears that M. P. is aâ— ignorant of the ground of our practice as he is of the truth of his own 4 Neither is it the setting up again of the partition wall betwixt the natural branches and those that are wild by nature For the partition wall was the legal-Ordinances Eph. 2.14 15 given to the Jewâ—sh Nation onely and shuâ—ting out all Nations besides so much is implyed by Paul Rom. 9.4 To them appertained the giving of the Law and the Oracles that is to them and none else so Rom. 11.12 Mat. 28.19 which Commission was inlarged upon Christs taking away that partition wall and copyed out according to the tenor of Abrahams covenant Gen. 12. In thee shall all Nations of the earth be blessed Therefore go teach all Nations Therefore also by natural branches we are to understand the Jewish believing Parents and seed These were the branches of the covenant cut off for unbelief His blood be upon us and our children Mat. 27.25 and Rom. 11.15 20. because of unbelief they were broken off What they The first place tells us Parents and Children and ver 17. and if some of the branches were broken off implying that as Parent and seed were branches so some of those branches were not broken off but still remained in Abrahams covenant Therefore 2 By wild branches or branches wild by nature we are to understand the Gentiles Parents and seed called wild by nature because Israel that were Gods Vineyard Orchard Garden and so inclosed were dress'd and prun'd by Christ in his Ministry who was the vine-dresser thereof when as the Gentiles grew wild as a Tree in a wilderness and so were without God in the world thus the natural branches were cut off That the branches wild by nature might be graffed in The Sun at noon day hath not so cleer a light as this Scripture hath to prove the covenant right and interest of believers and their seed In what therefore he affirms in pag. 81. that taking in of children is a setting up the partition wall betwixt the natural branches and bâ—anches wild by nature he shews himself more blind then that poor man that saw men as trees walking For by natural branches he understands onely adult professors and by branches wild by nature little infants when as the word of God tells us that we are to understand by branches Parents and Children By all which it is apparent that he understands not what the partition wa l is or what the natural branches or branches wild by nature signifies Thus far we have examined the t uth of his Church-matter The next thing is the form Therefore P. The holding of this opinion that believers seed have a right to the covenant makes people live in a neglect of the Lords baptism contenting themselves with a counterfeit baptism instead thereof and thus the Church comes to be constituted of good and bad promiscuously and then he calls for our rule to justifie it A. The Reader may here observe to what height of spirit this man is sweld that he durst charge all the Churches of Christ through the world with a counterfeit baptism as if the onely light of this truth did shine in Rivers It hath been already proved in answer to his Essentials that the Lords Baptism was not by dipping Therefore believe him not yea the Lord Christ will be a swift witness against him that he abhors such a practice for the reason before laid down And whereas be saith that it makes the Church a promisâ—uouâ— body consisting of good and bad I answer 1. So doth Christ himself Mat. 13.47 where he likens the kingdom of heaven i. e. the Church to a net let down into the sea which gathered of all kinds both good and bad yet I hope he will not be so bold to say a charge of imputation upon Christ himself 2 It hath been also proved that such a mixture as is made by taking in believers and their seed is no more then what the word of God bars out upon the account of Abrahams covenant and to call it a mixture is to call that common which is clean 3 Neither do I believe but if their own Societies were sifted there would be found more chaff then wheat and that their Congregations would not appear more strict then ours I speak not this by way of boasting for I doubt we have not so much cause on either hand But let him that glorieth glory in the Lord. P. p. 82. He tells us of going in an untrodden path because we baptize children and receive them into the Church as members and yet deny them the Sacrament And then asks us when we will give it them or why they have a right to one priviledge and not to another A. Though a child may not be fit to sit at the fathers Table yet he may be fit to suck at the mothers breasts And if you will know when they shall come to the Lords Table the Apostle tells you when they can examine themselves 1 Cor 11.28 Look back to Israel though their seed did receive the seal of the covenant and were admitted then in Christs kingdom yet they were not presently fit for the passover which was also a spiritual feast and a prefiguration of the Lords Supper 1 Cor 5.7 8. as the Israel of God then in which children were included was a prefiguration of Gods Israel now therefore though baptism and the Lords Supper are both priviledges of the covenant as Circumcision and the Passover were then yet the infant-seed of the kingdom may be fit for the one though not fit for the other as the infant-subjects of the kingdoms of the world they are subjects but not fit for all the priviledges of a kingdom which consideration doth answer his cavils though much more might have been added upon another account As to that Scripture Act. 2.41 42. That all that were baptized continued in breaking bread I answer They were such there spoken of that were capable of hearing the word and which gladly received it that were converted from Judaism The like to which is practised upon the conversion of any unbaptised persons at this day and this makes therefore for us for though their children were admitted in upon the account of Abrahams covenant The promise is to you and your children yet we do not finde they were admitted to the Supper because the same promise belonging to them and their seed under the Law yet the seed were not capacifyed for the Passover By all which therefore it appears our path lies plain and open that we may see which way the
be sanctifyed in the husband and the husband in the wife a strange word to be used amongst heathens that every marryed couple were sanctifyed one to another so likewise to put the word Holy in opposition to uncleanness of birth is too high a tearm and such a way of speaking as is not to be found in Scripture Adding this likewise that the holy Ghost would have spoken so as not to be guilty of tautology for then the words must have run thus Else were your children bastards and there it would have broken off because the next words had been superfluous but now they are holy so that by this we see what an unseemly unbecoming interpretation he gives and what indignities he puts upon the spirit of God whereas if we look upon the words in that other sense wherein is implyed a federal holiness by Abrahams covenant which ever hath taken in Parent and childe it is a strong Argument inducing to imbrace the Gospel and carries with it a full sail of comfort to godly parents Else were your children unclean but now they are holy Thus also this place stands immoveable notwithstanding any thing he hath said or can say to the contrary If therefore children are holy by vertue of Abrahams covenant then you that are believers get into the fold of Christ that your children may receive the seal of the covenant baptism which is the mark of the flock CHAP. XVI Rom. 11. vindicated from false glossings Pag. 110. THe next place he opens is Rom. 11.16 17. but with what evidence of truth will be seen when it hath undergone the Test If the first fruits be holy the lump is also holy if the root be holy so are the branches P. He grants that by root is meant Abraham but yet in a double capacity Abraham as considered in the covenant of works And so working Abraham is the root of all the natural branches and so legally holy as Abraham was who was the first-fruits and the natural lump was all Israel so holy till that covenant of works was abolisht by the death of Christ and then this covenant being put an end to it must needs be that such branches who were onely natural must be broken off 2 Abraham is to be understood a root considered as believing Abraham in a spiritual covenant and so in this sense holy and thus onely the spiritual branches are said to be holy and by lump also must be understood all the spiritual seed in this spiritual covenant these distinctions duly noted will inlighten the soul to understand the place Rep. These are wild notional distinctions and not to be found in Scripture it hath been already proved that Abraham as a believer had never two covenants made with him nor is there the least word of two covenants in the chapter any farther then that gross mistake of the Romans who were looking after a justification by works as thinking the Law had been given by God to make men righteous legally these distinctions therefore of believing Abraham and working Abraham a spi itual root a carnal root Abraham in a covenant of works Abraham in a covenant of Grace a carnal and spiritual lump instead of inlightening the soul to understand the place rise like a dark smoak out of the pit of error that the truth is not to be seen in them therefore I may say of him as it was said of Reuben Thou art the first-born unstable as water thou shalt not excel the vanity of such stuff will appear by this that follows 1 If Abraham in a covenant of works be the root from whence the natural branches are broken off then the Gentiles that are ingraffed are put into a covenant of works because the Apostle cleers it that such who are ingraffed are put into the same stock from which the other were taken ver 17. and calls it a graffing in amongst them So ver 19. they were broken off that we mâ—ght be ingraffed 2 Then also when God shall re-ingraff the Jews they must be put into Abraham considered in a covenant of works and so the covenant of works must continue till this day because there cannot be an ingr ffiâ—g where there is no stock ver 24. 3 If the covenant of works be made the root or Abraham in that covenant then the casting off the Jews from that covenant could never be called the reconciling of the world because the world could not be reconciled by a covenant of works and that the world was reconciled by that covenant is cleer ver 11. 4 If the covenant of works now be câ—ast since Christs coming as he implyes the Gentiles could not be ingraffed into the spiritual part of the covenant till that was taken away which indeed he having confest in page 114. doth hereby contradict himself in what he hath before affirmed pag. 91. with many other places that Job and Jobs friends were all in the sâ—iritual covenant which was made as well to all nations as the Jews and they had as much benefit thereby as had the Jews 5 If the ingraffing of the Gentiles be to be understood onely of the spiritual lump as he saith then also is that spiritual lump ingâ—affed into a covenant of works from whence the naturâ—l branâ—hes were cut off For none of that spiritual lump of Israel were ever câ—â—â—ff as himself confess th thus we may briefly see what exâ—crable stuff he introduceth by such wild notional d stinctions P. In pag. 15 he explâ—ins Isai â—5 23 They are the seed of the blessed of the Lord and their off spring with them which saitâ— M. 〈◊〉 meâ—nt one y of the righteous off-spring i. e. such as are in the â—piritual covenant A. It is strange that a man should be so wilfully ignorant to gâ—ve a sense of Scripture so directly contrary to the Scope and Anaâ—ysis thereof For by off-spring is to be understood Inâ—ants as wi l aâ—pear by viewing the scope of the place which speaks of the conversion of Israel into that Gospel-state that shall be called the new Heavens and new Earth when they shall be brought to re-inhabit their own land under the Messias and enjoy the fruit of their labours And gives this as the reason why they should rejoyce with God and God with them Because they are the seed of the blessed of the Lord and their off-spring with them As if he had said though you and your off-spring have been discovenanted and cast off from being a people scattered upon the face of the earth yet as you and your off-spring were the seed of the blessed of the L. i. e. of Abr. to whom all blessings were given so you and your off-spring shal be as much ingraffed in all the blessings of Abraham as you were before For they are the seed of the blessed of the Lord and their off-spring with them which place doth fully parallel Rom. 11. when God shall ingraff the Jews again as natural branches into their own Olive-Tree P.
they have addicted themselves to the ministerie of the Saints That yee submit your selves to such and to every one that laboureth with us where saith Master Patient wee see they were all ministers and men that laboured with the Apostles therefore not Babes or Children Answ The Apostle doth not say they were all Ministers or such as laboured in the word and doctrine as he did himselfe But they are so said to Minister because they addicted themselves to the ministring to the Saints in a way of Hospitalitie for so the word is taken for releeving the Poor and so the same chap. refers to 1 Cor. 16. namely a free liberall and charitable collection for the poor Saints verse 1.2.3 and 2 Cor 8.4 chap. 9.1 now as touching the Ministring to the Saints 't is superfluous for me to write c. In which places the same word is used as here in this example of Stephanus and his house who addicted themselves to the Ministerie of the Saints by which it appeares that as the Apostle had boasted of others in the former chap. so in this also hee commends the freeness and Hospitalitie of Stephanus because in such actions there is much heart-sinceritie to be seen in entertaining poor Christians This being so Then t is no hard matter to know who is meant by the house of Stephanus which Paul Baptized For though the servants 't is likely might be gracious and full of love to poor Christians yet by the word house is property meant Parents and Children and 't is very unlikely the servants of the house should be so free and hospitable of their Masters goods And as for the Children they were taken in by their Parents Actions and so the whole house is commended For the hospitalitie of Stephanus and his yoakfellow as 't is usuall in such causes to say such a house is noble and free when 't is meant onely of the heads and chief of the family and these were the persons that Paul presseth the Church to honour and esteem and to submit to such And not to such onely but to every one also that helpeth with us and laboureth But 't is a stretcht inference to say that because his house addicted themselves to the ministrie of the saints therefore they were all preachers and such as laboured in the Gospell and the Church was to submit themselves to all the houshold i. e. servants and all as ministers therefore no Children The like also the Apostle prest them in the following verse to submit to Fortunatus and Achicus who came with a seasonable and refreshing releef and supply to their wants therefore acknowledg ye them that are such verse 18. i. e. such who minister releef to Christians in necessitie So Matth. 8.15 't is said that Peters Wives Mother ministred to Christ Master Patient surely will not be so far besides himselfe to think that she preacht to Christ as a minister from what then hath been also said to this instance 't is abundantly clear to any sober spirit who is willing to search after truth and not take things barely upon the count of Master Patients word Our opposites have not so honestly quitted themselves in al their writings in interpreting this text to lay a snare or decoy to intrap or intice people into the lake of error by saying that here was none but Adult-beleevers in this house when as the tenor of those Scriptures hitherto which related to housholds hath still run to the children upon the parents beleeving Quest But how shall I know whether when the Scripture speaks of house there were any Children for the word is not exprest they might be housholds and yet no Children Answ 'T is the common way in finding out the mind of God in Scriptures to compare them that so what is darke in one may be cleard by the other And since the spirit of God at the first tender of the Gospell did delight to speak to Jew and Gentile in the Old Testament Dialect as to say of Lydea She and her House the Jaylor and his House Cornelius and his House Stephanus and his House Zacheus and his house so Crispus believed in God with all his house the house of Aristobulus the house of Narcissus it is as if he had said If you would know what I mean by this word house then look back to my First will and Testament for what it was then it is now Therefore when upon review we shall finde in the Old Testament there were Children mentioned and chiefly included It will be then an undoubted truth to say and maintain That in all these houses mentioned to be baptized there were Children which properly gave the denomination and they all baptized whilest little ones upon the Belief or Covenant-right of their Parents See Gen. 12.3 In thee shall all the families of the Earth be blessed Who are so properly the Family as Children Chap. 30.30 And when shall I provide for my own house also Who was that house that Jacob was bound to look after and provide for but his Wife and Children And Chap. 45.18 19. Then said Pharaoh Say unto thy Brethren take your Father and your Houshold and come unto me And Verse 19 it is explained to be heir little ones Wives and Fathers So Num. 3.15 2 Sam. 23.5 Josh 24.15 So the Apostle He that provides not for his own house i. e. His Children is worse then an Infidel and hath denied the Faith 1 Tim. 5.8 What denying the Faith can this be for such as profess Christ if it be not the Faith of that Covenant of Grace into which Believers and Professing-Christians with their Seed are admitted The neglect of a Heathen-Parent in not providing for his Children cannot be called a denying the Faith but the denying the Law of Nature But the neglect of Christians in not providing for their Children is a denying the Faith because visibly within the Covenant Exod. 1.1 Prov. 31.11 1 Sam. 20.15 2 Sam 9.3 9. 1 King 17 1â— 13 21 22 23. Psal 127.1 3. Prov. 12.7 Hos 1.4 1 Tim 3 4 5. 5.4 8. 2 Tim. 1.16 A full Text also is That where the Prophet speaks of Israels conversion and gathering under the Faith of Christ yet to be fulfilled Jer. 1.1 At that time saith the Lord will I be the God of all the Families of Israel and they shall be my people A Text so remarkable that it is enough to convince any man that look what God was to Israel and the Families of Israel in blessing them as their God i. e. aged in Covenant with them and their â—eed so he will be the same God again to Israel and their Families in Gospel-days Which â—ime is near at hand and they and their Seed whilst Babes shal be his people so that either our opposits must oppose that doctrine of the Jews conversion when both they and their Children shall be brought into the Faith of Christ or else of necessity they must acknowledge the
within Abrahams covenant for we cannot imagine that all the Apostles baptized were really called for the Sorcerer before mentioned doth sufficiently confute it therefore still he mistakes the question which is thus whether all that are called are really justifyed 2 Neither can it be reasonably thought that there were no hypocrites amongst those three thousand mentioned and that they were all so called as he speaks of but the Apostles intention was to let them know by what way they might get in to Abrahams covenant again from which both they and their seed were cut off Therefore Repent and be baptized for the remission of sin and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost For the promise is to you and your children c. That is remission of sins and the gift of the Spirit comes still in the way of Abrahams Covenant as it did before Gal. 3.14 Therefore if you will get into the way of the Spirits working you must repent and be baptized he doth not say that all baptized do really repent for upon the ground Mr. Patient goes none should be admitted to baptism but such as really Repent and are really called and really justifyed when as yet he forgets his own ignorance That he is not able to discern thâ—m Thus we have sifted all his cavils brought against this Text as not to countenance Infant-Baptism And upon the whole we finde it to be a tender of Abrahams Covenant in all the blessings of it even to children of visible believers either Jews or Gentiles Therefore the seal of that Covenant is their due Right and Priviledge P. The next Text is 1 Cor. 7.14 which he saith we abuse to make it speak for Infant-holiness Else were your children unclean but now they are holy God takes persons into Covenant two ways either by an external typical Covenant of Works as he did Israel and so a people may be said to be holy by separation as the carnal Jew being separated from the world and thus the vessels of the Temple were holy and the Priest were holy 2 Secondly A new-Covenant holiness when God writes his Laws in the heart and sanctifies their Nature and there is no other kinde of holiness that relates to the new Covenant but this Hypocrites may have this in appearance but the Elect onely have it in truth therefore it is impossible that a believers carnal seed should be so holy by Birth And no other sanctification the Scripture speaks of belonging to the new Covenant The other was abolisht by the death of Christ A. Whereas he knows no other holiness belonging to the New Covenant but real holiness it is rather an Argument of his ignorance then any confirmation of the truth of what he saith for that New-Covenant had such a holiness of separation belonging to it from Adam to Christ And it is the sâ—me that we have onely the holy things are changed yet so as that whatever Ordinance God hath given his Church now is holy Israel as separated from the world was a holy people so is the Church of God now Act. 10 13 28. 2 Cor. 6.17 Therefore the Apostle writing to the Churches as separated people calls them Saints or holy ones at Rome Corinth Galatia c. Not that they were all holy by an internal work of sanctifâ—cation for the Romans had many that were fallen to Judaism and Corinth had many profane persons amongst them yet as they were a Chuâ—ch they all carry the denomination of holy ones so that the Church stands upon the same terms of separation now as then from the world Therefore the casting out of the incestuous person was as one polluted and unclean which is opposed to such a holiness as makes a person fit for Church-Communion Thus also it was with Israel when there was either a Moral or Typical uncleanness they were cast out as not fit for Communion thus the bread and wine in tâ—e Lords Supper and water in baptism are holy by vertue of separation or institution thus the function of the Ministery is holy or else every man might preach baptize and administer the Supper alike And notwithstanding ceremonies are abolisht yet a holiness of separation by vertue of divine institution remains still or else the word of God were no more holy then another Book Nor the Gospel-Sabboth more holy then another day thus are the Infants of a believer holy else were your children unclean but now they are holy yea let me add that it is impossible that any man can be found in the faith and amongst the rest Mr Patient for one either to Scripture Sabboths or Gospel-Ordinances except they grant a holiness of separation both in persons and things P. The words are grounded from Ezra 9. and Deut. 7. It being an express Law for a Jew not to marry with a stranger therefore they were to put away their strange wives because not lawfully marryed and the children that were born of them were to be lookt upon as illegitimate The Church upon this writing to the Apostle to be resolved whether such of them aâ— had unbelieving yoak-fellows might dwell together and whether it was not unclean or unlawful To this he ansâ—ers Let them dwell together bâ—cause now there being no Law against it the marriage was therefore justifyable and the unbelieving wife is sanctifyed to the believing husband that is set apart by the Law of marriage to him onely else were your children bastards but now they are lawfully born A. There is no such thing mentioned in either place that their children were Bastards Then had Moses son by Zipporah the Egyptian been a Bastard yea the contrary is evident because the Scripture calls them wives And is it not a wilde expression to call her whore that Gods word calls a wife And would it not be as strange to think that so many Priests and Levites should be whoremasters which yet must be if such an interpretation were true as Mr. Patient gives But therefore the ground of putting away their strange wives was because Israel was a separated people and so not to have any affinity with strangers And though it was Israels sin to many a stranger yet it was not their sin to match with an Israelite which had it been whoredom the very light of nature would have condemned it besides this scruple did not lye betwixt Jew and Gentile For this was a Gentile Church a people converted from heathenism to profess Christ They had therfore no ground to think that the marriage they had before conversion was unlawful And had the taking in of the believer into communion with the Church made the unbeliever a whore or a whoremaster and the children bastards or had any such ground of scruple been given it had been enough to have frightened the heathens from being Christians It cannot be therefore that any dis-satisfaction shâ—uld rise in their spirits from those Texts by him quoted considering also the nature of the phrase the wife should
way it genders to bondage and makes you fruitful to hell so leaves you under the curse of God v. 24 25. look upon Jerusasalem and her children that is upon all those amongst them that lived under the works of the Law and were mistaken as you are Are they not all in bondage and doth not Gods wrath lye upon them at this day ver 25. Then again look the other way See to Jerusalem which is above the Church in heaven or the Church that hath her conversation in heaven she is free she got heaven by faith and was justifyed by faith and not by works she is our mother ver 26 so before was not Abraham our Father justifyed by faith And here Is not the Church our mother got to heaven by faith And what shall we think to be justifyed by our works No saith Paul it is a mistake for the desolate i. e. the Gentile-Church shall have more children then the warryed wife i. e. the Jewish Church therefore let the Gentiles rejoyce rather and be thankful that God hath made them more fruitful then to fall back to a covenant of works and then again he brings in Isaac Look to him For as he was we are children of promise As if he had said we are to look to Abrahams covenant and how the promise was made with him and his seed The present condition of this Church resembles that family though he had many children yet there was but one Isaac to whom the covenant was conveyed therefore away with this Justification by works cast it out it will not make you heirs so then brethren we are not children of the bond-woman but of the free Thus you have briefly the natural meaning of the places after all those unheard of parallels and confused constructions wherewith it hath been intangled to make it speak for a knocking of that little nail of Infants out of that sure place of Gods house The next Scripture that falls in to be considered is Act. 13 45 46. when the Jews saw the multitude they were filled with envy and spake against those things that were spoken then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold and said it was necessary the word of God should be first spoken to you but seeing you put it away and judge your selves unworthy of everlasting life Lo we turn to the Gentiles for so hath the Lord commanded us P. From this Text it is cleer that when Christ the true seed was persecuted by the Jews and the Gospel rejected all those children of the covenant of works were cast forth of Gods Church the Apostles hâ—ving left them A. Though Paul and Barnabas had left the Jews yet Peter James and John who were the Apostles of the circumcision Gal. 2.7 8 9. had not left them but continued therefore this proves nothing at all for the discovenanting of children 2 Suppose they had been wholly left by the Apostles and so were all in bondage with their children as that 's the drift of his words then their rejecting the Gospel which caused the Apostles to leave them was the ground of theirs and their childrens falling into bondage The Apostles bringing that Gospel to the Gentiles supposeth that upon the imbracing of that Gospel they and their children were freed from such a bondage or take it in his own phrase though the covenant of works and her children were cast out of the Church yet the covenant of Grace and her children are still remaining in Gods Church P. Therefore whereas M. P. tells us in pag. 145. that the forementioned Objection is answered and that we have no ground in Gods word for Infant-baptism A. He hath not given the least shew of an Answer to the Objection but it still stands in force as is by this manifest and notwithstanding all his vain distinctions workings and counterworkings of Scriptures to make them speak a word of comfort to his practice doctrine and opinion and of confutation to us they still cry out in the behalf of childrens right to the seal as those little ones did who met Christ with branches of Palm-trees Blessed is he that cometh to us in the name of the Lord Hosanna in the highest Reader we are run through the main body of all his Arguments and Scriptures what remains behind is very little onely heats of spirit against such as will not follow him to the Rivers side and so like those blind men Christ speaks of follow a blind guide till they both tumble into the water But because the temper of his spirit shall be seen I shall therefore briefly touch upon the remainder as it comes to hand CHAP. XX. Contains the Answer to many Scriptures by him abused to the end Pag. 145. HE quotes Ezek. 14.2 3 4 5. The word of the Lord came to me saying Son of man these men have set up their Idols in their hearts and put the stumbling block of their iniquity before their faces should I be inquired of by these c P. In which place you see when souls set up an Idol in their hearts God doth answer them according to that Idol Therefore such as defend Infant-baptism from a covenant of Grace in the flesh they defend and maintain a dangerous error and consequently it must be rotten and false A. Well argued Sir is it not who is it that hath set up an Idol in his heart what all the Churches of Christ throughout the world Surely were not your heart swell'd with pride though yet pretending a voluntary humility to catch souls into your snares you durst not speâ—k such condemning words to abuse the way and Word of God P. Pag. 146 He gives another result childrens baptism hath no ground from the word of God either command or example but only a consequence so that it is meerly a tradition of mens setting up in the room and place of the commands of God to wit baptism of believers and thus they make void the commands of God Mar. 7 7 and thâ—s is the very sin of those that plead for Infant-baptism when Gods word sâ—ith Repent and be baptized and arise why tarryest thou be baptized These and many more are made void by christening of children and thus poor souls are nurst up in ignorance c. A. It had been far better to have overturned our pract ce by dint of Aâ—gument Scripture and Reason and to have left cut all such superfluity of naughtiness which tendâ— onely to reviling these Texts have been already answered and our practice hath appeared to be warranted from the covenant of Grace and the pleasing consent of Scriptures which is undenyab e to any man that is not partinacious in his errors it is an Ordinance that the Churches of Christ stand possest of and doth he think to perswade good men from their Religion Râ—ason and Conscience by telling us it is a teaching for Doctrines the Traditions of men He must therefore come to a new result and tell us when the Tradition began
said to wash himself in a River though he only dips in his hand and casts water about him which is most frequent and usual both in our practice and acceptation of the word either in our vulgar or in Scripture dialect Were a man to wash his face or head must he needs dip it and so of any other part or the whole body But let us search the Scriptures Mark 7.4 Except they wash they eat not and Luke 11.30 They marvail at Christ that he had not first washt before dinner Is any man so void of reason to think that before the Pharisees sate down they plunged themselves And Christ who well knew what the word to baptize or wash signified gives them such an answer as relates to the powring out of water so washing onely the outside of things verse 39. Had their cups and platters tables and beds been dipt and so washt then had inside outside and every side been washt The word then hath a promiscuous acceptation some times taken one way some times another as Sidnam clears this Budeus Scapula Pasor Grotius do give the sense of the word Therefore to no purpose is this unlearned Authors Appeal to the Greek Latin and English Churches Though yet 't is considerable that he should acknowledge such as Churches whom his words and practice do so much cry down therefore I doubt his charity is much of the same nature with those of the late fifth Monarchy who though they would use the word of Protestant Churches yet they did look upon them but as the outworks of Anti-Christ which were first to be storm'd For there is scarce a Book extant of the Anabaptists but hath a touch thereof such is that Peece called The Storming of Antichrist which came out long since and others of the like stuffe Secondly he tells us that the phrase in which Baptism is rendered doth usually and necessarily import such a thing And therefore when mention is made of Baptizing 't is commonly translated in or into and therefore suits most with dipping and not that preposition with which suits most with sprinkling and when our translation tells us that Iohn Baptized with water he would correct it within water and instead of ye shall be baptized with the holy Ghost and with fire it should be rendred in the holy spirit and in fire Answ Wâ— may see to what height ignorance is mounted when he that knows not what a preposition is shall undertake to mend translations what property of speech can there be in that phrase Mark 1.8 to say hee shall baptize you in the holy Ghost and in fire when the word is with is it possible for a man to be dowst drown'd or plung'd into the holy Ghost methinks he might blush to shew his ignorance But to make this clear let 's view and compare the place with Acts. 1.5 For Iohn truely baptized with water so Mark 1.8 I have baptized you with water and Math. 11. I indeed baptise you with water but ye shall be baptized with the holy Ghost and with fire would it not be strange to read it into fire considering also that these words relate to the pouring out the holy Ghost spoken of Acts 2.3 and there appeared unto them cloven tongues like unto fire and it sat upon each of them they did not sit in the fire but the holy Ghost like fire sate upon them and then in verse â—7 the Apostle Peter who very well knew what was meant by the word Baptize interprets it by Ioell 2.31 to be the powring out of the spirit prophesied of And thus when Christs tells them of their being Baptized with the spirit it appears to be meant of the spirits pouring out so that from hence its evident that Iohns Baptism was by pouring out water and not plunging into water or else it would not have been so conjunctively plac'd with the the manner of the spirits Baptism Iohn truely Baptized with water but ye shall be Baptized with the holy Ghost For as the pouring out the holy Ghost was the true Baptism of the Spirit so Iohn truely Baptizing with water was by powreing it out also let but any Englishman reade it that knowes but how to make sence of what he reads it must of necessitie gives a dash to all their plunging Let therefore such as have been deluded into so groundless a practice consider it and repent thereof A second paralell instance to confute this practice of dipping is that of Israels being Baptized in the clouds in the Sea 1 Cor 10. which by Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles as before Peter was of the Iews is called a Baptism and by what principle of reason or conscience can any man think that Israel was plung'd into either cloud or sea when the word of God tels us they marcht through the sea upon drie land Exo 14 22. the waters being divided yea Davids relating to this very march of Israel Psalm the 77.15.17 tells us that this Baptism which Paul so calls in which beleevers and their seed were Baptized was by pouring out water and not plunging into water For thus the word runs the clouds poured out water If men therfore will not harden their hearts against the truth and blind their owne eyes here is light enough to shew us what is meant by this word Baptize the Authoritie of Peter and Paul both eminent Apostles bearing witness to this truth yet wee must be deluded from the truth by ignorant men against not onely the very light of nature but of Scriptures also As for that other Preposition example which he brings in that page of baptizing in the Wilderness and in Jordan he tels us it would be improper to render it with the Wilderness and with Jordan and therfore would urge it to be as improper in that other place I answer the Reader may from hence also gather how sadly fit this man is for a minister who to make our practice speake nonsence doth not himselfe know what belongs to a sense For because the preposition with is by us maintained proper when it relates to the matter or manner therefore he would have it also as proper when it relates to the place as if I should say Master Patient hath baptized with the milpool with Dublin for in the milpool in Dublin 4. In Pag. 9. his next place he brings to maintain his dipping is that of Paul 1 Cor 10. already touched on they were all Baptized to Moses in the Cloud and in the sea not with the clouds and with the sea Answ Which is most proper to say Israel were Baptized by pouring out water from the cloud and by sprinkling from the sea or to say Israel was Baptized by plunging into the cloud and into the sea for then they must be all over-whelmed with both And David in the place before-quoted tells us it was done by pouring out water was it improper to say Israel was Baptized in the sea when they
that of Lydea Acts 16.14 15. And a certain woman named Lydea a seller of Purple of he City of Thiatira which worshipped God heard us whose heart the Lord opened that she attended c. And when she was baptized and her houshold she besought us saying If ye have judged me faithful to the Lord come into my house and she constrained us Which Family Mr. Patient saith were all Believers Verse 40. which Paul and Sylas went to visit Answ The consideration of the words preceding the Text and the several circumstances will give a clear light to finde out the truth by him and many Scribes of a late edition of that party obscured and darkned First The persons that were met together were onely women Secondly Of all those Women met we finde onely Lydea converted Thirdly Upon her conversion we finde her houshold baptized and that at the same time By which it is apparent that she took with her her family to the place of worship for thus the words run And when she was baptized and her houshold she besought us saying If you have judged me faithful to the Lord come with me c. Both she and her houshold were baptized before they went home by which also we may very lawfully gather 1. That there were no men at the meeting 2. That therefore those Brethren afterwards mentioned could not be then at that time converted because had there been men and they wrought upon the Holy Ghost would not have overslipt them to take notice onely of the Female Therefore it is evident That those Brethren spoken of Verse 40. were either some of the Family afterwards converted or some other of the City then met at her house which were after Lydea's conversion wrought upon because we finde Paul and Sylas were committed to prison and it is likely it was upon that converting work which the Gospel made amongst them accordiâ—g to the voice that called them come over and help us Or 3. they might be believing Brethren from other parts that came to buy Purple because we finde the Spirit of God taking such exact notice of her profession Vers 14. But that those Brethren were converted at that time when she and her houshold were baptized is against the express Letter of the Text as any observant Reader may see This Text therefore makes against Mr. Patient for if Lydea and her houshold were baptized when we finde onely Lydea converted And if by house is meant Children as I shall afterwards prove it is then it is â—greeable to the very minde of God to say That her believing gave her Children aright to Baptism because we do not finde any that believed but her and yet we finde all her houshold baptized Thus then this place breaks forth with much clear light dispelling those foggs of error that scribbling pens have cast upon it Secondly The next place hee brings is the Jaylor and his house Acts 16. who rejoyced in God with all his house hee beleeving For so the words are truly rendred by which it doth not appear the whole house beleeved but the whole house rejoyced and yet both he and his whole house were Baptized Secondly 't is observable the exhortation given the Jaylor runs in the very strains of Abrahams covenant Gen. 17. walke before me And I will bee thy God and the God or thy seed so here beleeve and thou shalt be saved and thy house so Acts 2. when they were prickt in heart as this Jaylor was Repent and be Baptized the promise is to you and your Children so here verse 33. hee was Baptized he and all that were of him A fuller expression could not well be used to set out his Children by who may properly be said to bee of their Parents and none but they Therefore if the Jaylor and all that were of him were Baptized when onely the Jaylor beleeved though all rejoyc'd then he and his Children were Baptized unless any man can be so unreasonable as to say that those that were of him were not Children which to affirme will but rather discover weakeness then Eclipse the truth Thirdly A third example which holds forth a clearer light to the preceding is that of Zacheus Luke 9 who was a Gentile-Publican yet upon Christs calling him hee useth this argument to day I must abide at thy house and in verse 9. this day is salvation come to this house For as much as hee also is a Son of Abraham In which word also the very covenant of grace made with Abraham and his seed is confirmed to him and his house though a Gentile that had no relation to Abrahams seed by birth yet thou also though a Gentile art the son of Abraham and therefore salvation is come to thy house Note-worthy are the collections of faithfull Sydenham from this place whose little peece hath made their water-workes totter and remains not onely unanswered but unanswereable though the spattering of a scratching pen hath given a late attempt to little purpose His collections are these first that assoon as Zacheus beleeved Christ applyed Abrahams promise to his house And it there had not been something more in it he would have said onely salvation is come to thee For the spirit of God doth not put a syllable more in the Scriptures then is usefull and necessarie Secondly Hee opens Abrahams covenant not onely to him but his house and argues the priviledg from his being a son of Abraham though a Gentile shewing that Abrahams covenant hath as large an extent amongst the Gentiles as it had amongst the Jews to a beleever and his seed otherwise it had been enough to have said salvation is come to thee but to mention his house with himselfe and to bring them into the blessing and give this as a reason because thou also art a son of Abraham is as much as to say that the priviledges of Abrahams covenant are the same to thee a Gentile and thy house as they were to Isaac for as much as thou also art a son of Abraham as well as hee Now for Christ to speak in this dialect and to tell them of their houshold and his favour to them and that in the beginning of the Gospells planting and yet at the same time to exclude their infants from all outward signes of the promise which they ever had in darkest dayes of Grace is a strange policie unsuitable to the simplicitie of the Gospell These are such plain examples that I marvell what kind of conscience men pretend to have when they shut out the sun that shines in these scriptures and cry out they are full of darkness Fourthly The next place and example brought by this Author is the house of Stephanus whom Paul Baptized A Triumphant place so thought to prove that there was no Children in those houses mentioned 1. Cor. 11.6 chap 16.15 the words run thus I beseech you brethren you know the houshold of Stephanus that it is the first fruits of Achaia that
still remain within Christs kingdom except our opposits can shew us how when and where they were out-law'd Secondly His insisting upon the Command Matth. 28. Go teach and Baptize doth not at al cross this consequence as hath been already proved therefore no consequence of ours is forc'd to oppose the new Testament Thirdly But such without which his practice is not Gospell because it shuts up the tender bowels of our Lord Jesus in a narrower compass then ever the Law did and the fancies and burthens Master Patient would put upon our shouldiers in that which they call the Ordinance would be heavier then ever the Loyns of the Law were As to that Instance he brings of Peter in Page 26. to prove consequencies against commands unlawfull because he would have disswaded Christ from suffering in these words Far be it from thee Lord Answ Instead of handling the word like a Minister he stretcheth the strings of Scripture till they crack what kind of consequence could this be or from what place of Scripture or against what command was this a consequence to say Far be it from thee Lord Surely the most any English Grammarian can make from thence is That it was a dissuasive but no consequence However by this we may Judg how feeble this mans Judgment is when he thinks God hath Chosen him as one of those that shall confound the wise of the world that doth not yet understand what a true or right consequence is Master Patient afterwards tells us that all such consequencies and books and arguments as are brought against commands to prove Infant Baptism which is cleerly implied he may say of them as Christ to Peter Get the behind mee Satan thou art an offence to me Page 6.27 Answ Alas poor man if the Physicks of truth offend his stomack which should cure him 't is a sad signe hee is near past recovery How ever take this extract from his own Instance that so far as any man shall disswade others from truth and cause them to apostatize from the ways of Christ hee Acts the Divels part Ergo This I say not Get thee behind me Satan but this I say that book by him publisht in which he so bitterly reviles the good old wav of God for the ends aforesaid The state would doe well to have all such books though in Folio put into an Index Expurgatorius amongst the whole Rabble of Erroneous and Hereticall peeces that have been printed in these Licentions book-days and so condemn them to the fire as they have done others not fit to be suffered And by this meanes all Protestant Churches through the world will know what Religion wee are of In Page the 27 he pretends to come nearer the consequence and grounds thereof but doth not close till Page â—8 And then hee tells us of the danger of the practice of Infant-Baptism that if it be maintained in all it's dimensions upon the Ground of the Covenant it will shake the very foundation of the Gospell Answ All these are but great swelling words of vanitie fit for nothing but to delude the simple of which we have been slong since foretold by the Apostles of Christ but to the busines of the Covenant at last hee comes where at length we shall find with what grosse ignorance hee gropes about to find a new way but is mistaken CHAP. VII The two Covenants answered PAge 28. In handling this consequence and to cut off the interest of Children and right to the Covenant hee reduceth the method into these four heads as before the Controversie of Baptism was into four Essentialls First To prove there are two Covenants held forth in Scripture a Covenant of Works and a Covenant of Grace Secondly That the Covenant of Circumcision was not of Grace but works Thirdly That none but beleevers ever had or shall have a right to the Covenant of Grace Fourthly To answer such objections and Scriptures as are usually alledged to defend a Covenant of life in the flesh To prove the first of these hee brings severall Scriptures the main of which is Jer 31.32.33 34. but to what purpose it will afterwards appear the words are these Behold the days come that I wil make a new Covenant with the house of Israel the house of Judah Not according to the Covenant I made with their Fathers when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the Land of Egypt which my Covenant they brake though I was to them a husband saith the Lord. where saith Master Patient we find an old Covenant and a new Covenant the old broken therefore of works the new was not like the old therefore of Grace c. Answ Before I shall come to answer the Scriptures by him quoted I shall briefely premise what a Covenant of Grace is The Answer will be this It 's a gracious engagement betwixt God and his people upon Gospell terms requiring duties from them in promising mercy to them what that mercy and duties be and how far Conditionall shall largely appear in its due place this definition of the Covenant importing a Condition is often denied by our opposites and sometimes Granted so that to bee as a stable foundation to build upon I thought it most fit for this place And according to this definition I shall doe two things First Give a brief Epitome or Analysis of Abrahams Covenant Secondly The whole ensuing discourse with all his Scriptures that he brings will be from hence answered and so his weapons brought against us and many more added to them shall be made use of to prove Abrahams Covenant in every part thereof to be a Covenant of pure Grace which I am sure as t is the best fortification I can make to secure the truth so the incursions that shall be made from hence upon his confused and new doctrine will give a rout thereto Abrahams Covenant had two parts Gen. 17.2 4 6 7 8 9 10 14. First Gods part this consisted in blessings carried on in a way of promise and that twofold 1. Inward and Spirituall I will be thy God and thy Seeds God to give grace and Glory 2. Outward and Temporall specially in three things 1. In multiplying his seed as the Stars 2. In making them blessings to families and Nations 3. In giving them the Land of Canaan for an everlasting possession Secondly Mans part and this respected duties to be done and that twofold 1. Inward walke before mee and be thou perfect 2. Outward and this also in three things especially 1. In keeping to the seale or token which then was circumcision as now Baptism therefore in every Generation 2. In keeping the Morall Law 3. All those Typical ceremonies relating to Worship By all which we shall hereafter see 1. That here are not two Covenants spoken of 2. That the Covenant of Grace is Conditional First it hath Gods part and that consists of promises and blessings Spiritual and Temporal Secondly mans part consisting of
order to their Justification the thing these Jews wanted so that Abrahams covenant conveyd in the bowels of it justification by faith to sinners so most suitable to the distemper The promise is to you and your children 2 Consider wherefore these words are brought in namely as a strong inducement to repent and be baptizâ—d and so it lyes in the â—orm of a Motive for the Promise c. As if he had said Let this incourage you to repent and be baptized for the promise is to you and your children i. e. you shall not onely injoy blessings but your children also if you embrace the Gâ—spel For the Apostle very well knew with whom he had to deal and what Arguments would be most prevalent with the Jews and had not this been the meaning of the Holy Ghost the putting in the word children had rather proved a rock of offence and a stone of stumbling For what could the Jews imagine upon a free tender of Grace to them and their children but if they did repent and were baptized the extent of Abrahams promise should be the same as formerly it was to them and their seed especially when it came in their own Scripture dialect The promise is to you and your children And to them afar off even as many as God shall call therefore 3 To cleer this latter part from this â—bsurd interpretation which M. P. gives that the promise is restrained in the whole v. when he saith Even so many as God shall call I A. With Mr. Sidenham we have in this verse an exact distribution of the world into two parts Jews and Gentiles and to these two â—â—rts the Apostle distributeth the promise Onely he restrains it â—â—en he speaks of the Gentiles afar off For so they are called Eph. â— 1â— 13. in bringing in these words Even so many as the Lord â—ur God shall call which words cannot be referred to the former â—rt of the verse for in that he applyes the promise to the Jews and â—heir children in the present Tense because they were then under the call of the Gospel as if he had said Repent and be baptized now whilst you have grace and mercy tendered for the promise is to you and your children but when he comes to speak of either the â—en Tribes as M. P. will have it or the Gentiles he turns the Tense in to the future because they were yet afar off and not called the promise is to them also as many as God shall call So that if this clause should limit the whole verse then to what purpose should the Holy Ghost bring in the word children for that had been superfluous because Jews and Gentiles comprehended the whole world And then the words must have run thus the promise is to you Jews and to them afar off as many as God shall call or if the word children be kept in as the Holy Ghost hath plac'd it then thus the promise is to you Jews when God shall call you and to your children when God shall call them and to as many as are afar off when God shall call them might not they have replyed why what need all this Tautology If the promise belongs to us upon our being called and to the Gentiles upon their being called you need not tell us it belongs to our children upon their being called for we knew that before But therefore the word children is kept in to shew the special priviledges God hath given them when the parent is converted And then the sense runs cleer Repent and be baptized For the promise is to you and your children and to them that are afar off even as many as the Lord our God shall call in a smooth Honorable stile becoming the Gospel thus we see that rather then he will make his sense stoop to Gods word he will make the Holy Ghost stoop to his Non-sense From which therefore we may gather notwithstanding his insinuating perswasions that this Text makes against us it is abundantly cleer that this promise here spoken of is that of Abrahams covenant which the Apostle Gal. 3. explains to be a Gospel-covenant and was confirmed by Christ 430 yeers before the Law so that still the result amounts to this That if it be Abrahams covenant it must convey the blessings of the covenant to all within the covenant that is to the spiritual seed spiritual blessings to the temporal seed external priviledges onely but still by one covenant IV. To come to the Scriptures before brought his intent thereby was to prove that the promise of remission of sins and the gifts of the Holy Ghost and so justification to life belongs to all those which God shâ—ll call A. He errs not observing the Scriptures nor the distinctions thereof Gods call is two fold External and internal yet so as that the latter is conveyed in the former and sure a man must needs grosly mistake to affirm that all that are called are justifyed and their sins remitted for then Judas had been justifyed and Simon the Sorcerer saved for they were both called and both baptized yea all that are called everywhere to repent would then be justifyed and all those Apostates that are in these days fallen from the truth would be all saved for they were all called so the foolish virgins were called 2. Let it be considered that the promise of Abrahams covenant is here held forth Now all that are visibly called to embrace the covenant are not effectually called though nevertheless all that are effectually called are within that covenant The Church at Rome Corinth Galatia Ephesus the seven Churches of Asia were all called visibly within the covenant but we know they were not all effectually called we may then still see how sadly M. P. mangles the Scriptures when he brings proofes that relate to an effectual call to prove that all that are called without any distinction shall be justified and saved so that if he can but finde out the word call in a Text t is enough no matter how it is applyed P. Pag. 130. This Text is cleer to prove that those Jews and proselytes that then heard him and their children also the ten Tribes and Gentiles afar off the promise did belong to so many of them as Gâ—d should call Therefore except souls be given up to a spirit of delusion will any dare to affirm that the promise of the spirit and remission of sins and eternal life do belong to any other or will they be so ignorant to judge those promises did belong to the generation of the Jews though they were called or not called c A. We never affirmed that remission of sins or eternal life belonged to any but such as are effectually called therefore the spirit of delusion and ignorance yea the spirit of impudence hath seized upon him so to affirm But this we say that all that are visibly called to embrace the tenders of the Gospel by a visible subjecting thereto are
well as an Isaac Isaac had Esau as well as Jacob and so through the Scripture God brings forth a generation of wicked from the godly and a generation of godly from the wicked indefinitely A. That we have good grounds to judge their parents godly hath before been made appear but if this were all the difference methinks a sober is more becoming then a censorious judgement By kingdom of God we are to understand the visible Church most properly of such is the kingdom For otherwise it had not been a suitable reproof for their offence in that it lyed in their not suffering children to be brought to him to receive an outward favor and blessing They could not have hindered them from the kingdom of glory but from the visible Church they might therefore Christ takes them up roughly Suffer them to come unto me and forbid them not In which there is a double command implying much heat of spirit against such an action and much love and tender affection to the babes as if he had said do you that are my disciples reject them because they are children I would have you know for time to come they are as capable of blessings as your selves For of such is the kingdom of God my church kingdom is made up of such as well as of men and women Methinks Christ here looks with a chiding countenance upon the Anabaptists of our times who are guilty of the same offence II. P. But how wide is that which remains from the business where he saith the greatest number of believers seed never belonged to Gods kingdom when as we know the very instances by him cited do sufficiently prove that the seed of believers though they have proved vile and wicked yet they did belong to the visible Church and kingdom till by casting out they were discovenanted Did not Cain belong to the Church as well as Abel see Gen. 4.3 4 5. Heb. 11.4 So in Noahs Family were not Ham and Japhet as well baptized in the Ark and so members as well as Shem was not Ishmael as well a Church-member in Abrahams family as Isaac so Esau the like as well as Jacob These are his own examples by which we see from the very first preaching of the Gospel the seed of believers have ever had a visible right of Church-membership till cast out and of such was the kingdom and saith Christ of such is the kingdom so that if the kingdom was of such and is of such then for shame acknowledge them to be subjects P. If children be admitted into the kingdom of God by vertue of a covenant of life made by faith and generation then this crosseth the doctrine of the New-birth Joh. 3.5 A. The contrary hath been already proved for if that were true how came that doctrine of the New-birth to be taught in Israel by the place cited and yet their seed were then admitted Church-members as now I refer the Reader to my former Answer to the third fundamental As for the making a covenant of life by birth we abhor it as hath been often said it is onely a visible right we plead for and that which they ever had P. p. 135. The place before cited is explained by Mat. 18.3 4 5 6. He that offends one of these little ones that believe in mâ— where it is spoken of children in grace and whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall not enter therein that is such like in grace as these in nature A. That the words are spoken of Infants is cleer for Christ took a little child and set in the midst of the disciples and tells them that such did believe 2 The resemblance cannot hold for children are pettish cross and froward by nature therefore that example had been very unsuitable but Christ shews the right such little ones had to the kingdom because they had faith And whosoever receives not the kingdâ—m of God as a little child that is as a little child receives it cleerly implying that such children are capable of receiving admission into the kingdom Therefore it doth not at all relate to a parity P. And whereas he afterwards tells us to expound it of believers adult is most agreeable to the Analogy of saith and that the whole Word of the Lord disclaims the contrary as destructive to Gods truth A. The Analogy of faith hath ever taken in children into the Church and kingdom therefore his high language is but like a flash of lightning and fitter to take with children and boys then with men of Reason and Conscience What he hath said hitherto hath been examined and not a word in Gods book makes against it But the whole tenor of Scripture with much pleasant harmony doth agree to give believers seed a name in Gods house And whereas he saith such a practice destroys the truth of God it hath been also sifted and it pleads to his Charge Not guilty CHAP. XIX The Word Administration carpt at by M. P. justifyed and Gal. 4. answered and cleered Obj. p. 137. BVt this which you call a covenant of Works consisting of temporal Promises Laws and Statutes is to be understood of a form of administration of the covenant of Grace and not a distinct covenant of Works P. I know this Objection some bring but if it be well weighed it is inconsistent with their own Arguments for if that be true then was there no covenant made with Abrahams seed but onely the administration of a covenant therefore ill do they affirm that the covenant was made with them therefore the Administration This Objection is false and groundless as appears by several express Texts of Scripture which do evidently prove it two distinct covenants A. He here quarrels with the word administration because he understands it not for though it be so cald by reason the spiritual part runs therein yet it loseth not the name of a covenant because it is mans part of the covenant and called Gods covenant and yet it is Gods administration to man For his grand mistake is in that he thinks the covenant of grace hath no conditions but absolute the contrary to which is before proved The Rainbow in the clouds is called Gods covenant Gen. 9. As here circumcision is called his covenant but surely M P. will not deny but it is an administration wherein Gods favor to the world is manifested how else can it be called a token of the covenant and a sign thereof as a so is circumcision called a sign and seal and token of the covenant And when God saith this is my covenant he means not a distinct covenant from the other but that part of the other which related to mans duty And so it was Gods Administration Office to the world I need not stand much upon this because it is so fully spoken to before in proving circumcision no covenant of works For the leprosie that overspreads all his book ariseth from that I