the doctrine of baptism/chapter 9

committed to historic Baptist & Reformed beliefs

history

documents

library

biography

A Plain Christian Treatise, explaining
the Doctrine of Baptism, and the two
Covenants made with Abraham, and
his two-fold Seed.

Circumcision Proved to be No Covenant of Eternal Life,
But a Typical and Carnal Covenant.

Now I come in the next place to prove that the Covenant of Circumcision is no Covenant of Eternal Life, but a typical covenant, yea a Covenant of Works. It is also called by the Lord, a Covenant in the flesh, Gen. 17:13. Therefore, to be sure, it is no Covenant of Eternal Life.

But for the better clearing of the this truth I shall first expound some words in the covenant. First are the words Everlasting Covenant. They seem to some to hold it forth as a Covenant of Life because it is said to be everlasting. Whereas the word everlasting used in this Covenant is to be understood only for the Ever of the Law for the time of the Jewish State. Always the word is to be understood this way when it is applied to the Jews in their generation. For example in the 16th chapter of Leviticus it is said, "the Priest should make an atonement for the Holy Sanctuary, an atonement for the Tabernacle of the Congregation, and for the Altar, and he shall make an atonement for the Priests, and for all the people of the Congregation, and this shall be an everlasting Statute to you to make an atonement for the children of Israel for all their sins, once a year:" Everlasting here must needs be understood but till Christ comes. So in Num. 25:13. "He shall have it, and his seed after him, even the Covenant of an Everlasting Priesthood, because he was zealous for his God, and made an atonement for the Children of Israel," speaking here only of a Ceremonial Priesthood typing out Jesus Christ the substance Who was to put an end to it.

So this Covenant of Circumcision is to be understood as everlasting as Canaan, and the possession thereof, which was until Christ's coming. He was the substance thereof. This being a Maxim, that wheresoever the word Everlasting or Ever has this joined with it, to you, or to your seed in their generations; that then it is to be understood only, for the Ever of the Law; and the time and period of that Ministration, till Christ come, and no longer, Exo. 40:15. "Thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their Fathers, that they may minister unto me in the Priest's office; for their anointing shall surely be an everlasting Priesthood throughout their generations." And so you have it in Exo. 30:20,21. Moses saying, "When they go into the Tabernacle of the Congregation, they shall wash with water, that they die not; and when they come near the altar to minister, to burn offerings made by fire unto the Lord, so they shall wash their hands and their feet, that they die not; and it shall be a statute for ever to them, even to him, and to his seed throughout their generations."

The next expression that I would speak to, is, "I will be to thee a God, and to thy seed after thee," which to some seems to hold forth a Covenant of Grace, in that He gives Himself as a God in this Covenant.

To which I answer, that God either gives and makes Himself over in a Covenant of Works, which is upon a condition of works done in the creature; or else He gives Himself in an absolute Covenant of Grace in Christ Jesus the Mediator without any condition of works to be fulfilled in the creature.

I shall make it clear that God only gives Himself conditionally in the Covenant of Circumcision. This is the first argument that I shall use to prove the Covenant of Circumcision to be a Covenant of Works and not a Covenant of Eternal Life, it is conditional. What God promises to be or to give to Abraham and his fleshly seed in their generations, was upon a condition that Abraham and his seed should keep his covenant on their parties, as clearly appears in Gen. 17:7,8, to verse 14. Here you find the Lord engages Himself to Abraham and his fleshly seed to be their God and to give them the whole Land of Canaan. In that sense He would be their God, to possess them of that good land, and all the blessings of the same, upon condition that they should keep His covenant on their part, both Abraham and his generation after him.

But though circumcision only be here mentioned yet all the works of the Law, at that time made known to Abraham, are there included. The Apostle, who best understood that Scripture, expounds it in Rom. 2:25. "For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the Law; but if thou be a breaker of the Law, thy circumcision, shall be made uncircumcision," and so you have it, Gal. 5:1-3. The Apostle says, "Stand fast, in the Liberty wherewith Christ hath made you free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage," which in Acts 15 it is said, "Neither they, nor their Fathers were able to bear;" but verse 2, "Behold I Paul say unto you, That if you be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing, for I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a Debtor to do the whole Law." So much is clearly held forth in Gal. 6:12, 13. Here the Apostle says, "As many as desire to make a fair show in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised, only lest they should suffer persecution for the Cross of Christ; for neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the Law, but desire you to be circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh."

Here you may observe that for men to be circumcised, and not to keep the Law, or otherwise to press it upon others; the Apostle holds it to be absurd, if withal they did not keep the Law that were thus circumcised.

In the Text before quoted it is clear that Circumcision (in the nature of it) binds them over to keep the Law. To this purpose you find in Acts 15, "There were certain teachers that taught the Brethren, that except they were circumcised they could not be saved." Upon which the Apostles come together and in the 10th verse Peter says, "Why tempt you God to lay a yoke upon the Disciples necks, which neither our Fathers, nor we are able to bear?" What was this yoke but that they were to be circumcised and to keep the Law?

So that Circumcision was that which did comprehend under it the Covenant of Works or the yoke of bondage that Paul, in Gal. 5:1-3, bids Christians to stand fast in their liberty or freedom from which covenant or yoke of bondage Jesus Christ had freed them from.

So that you may see that all the observation of the Law which we are set at liberty from by Christ Jesus' death, was included in the Law of Circumcision. So that in effect here you have the covenant.

"Abraham (as if God should say) I will be a God to thee, and to thy seed after thee in their generations, to protect, defend, and deliver thee, to bless thee, and thy seed with the blessing of Canaan, to bless thee, and the fruit of thy womb, in the Basket, and in their store, in all their outward blessings; upon condition that thou and they will be circumcised and keep the Law."

God makes a covenant upon condition, so that if they fail on their part, then He is left at liberty to fail on His part, as that notable expression in Jer. 11:2-5.

"Hear the word of this Covenant, and speak unto the men of Judah, to the Inhabitants of Jerusalem, and say thou unto them, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, cursed be the man that obeyeth not the words of this covenant, which I commanded unto your Fathers, when I brought them from the Land of Egypt, from the Iron Furnace, saying, Obey my voice, and do according to all these things which I command you, so shall ye be my people, and I will be your God, that I might confirm the Oath that I have sworn unto your Fathers, to give them a Land which floweth with Milk and Honey, as appeareth this day."

Whence you may clearly observe that God gives Himself to be their God, and to give to them the blessing of Canaan, upon condition that they would keep the Law, So shall ye be my people, and I will be your God.

Now you must mind that Abraham had a New Covenant of Life made with him when he was 75 years old, Gen. 12:4, which was 24 years before this time he had the Covenant of Circumcision. His happiness with all his spiritual seed was and is in that absolute covenant confirmed of God in Christ, which stands in force still to believers in all Nations. But this Covenant of Circumcision was conditional and not absolute. Therefore, it is no Covenant of Life but a Covenant of Works.

To Prove Circumcision Is A Covenant Of Works,
It Was A National, Fleshly Covenant

The second ground why the Covenant of Circumcision must needs be a Covenant of Works, a Typical Covenant, is because it was a National Covenant, a covenant in the flesh, as in Gen. 17:13. He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised, so my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting Covenant. To be sure such is not the Covenant of Grace to eternal life, for that was confirmed of God in Christ, as you hear, to all Nations. "In thee shall all the Nations of the Earth be blessed," Gen. 12:3, and "in thy seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be blessed," Gen. 22:18, as I have formerly spoken to.

But the Lord says of this Covenant of Circumcision that it shall be in their flesh for an Everlasting Covenant. It is manifest by the Apostle Paul that this is therefore a Covenant of Works, Rom. 4:1, 2. He says, "What shall we say then, that Abraham our Father as appertaining to the flesh hath found? for if Abraham was justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God."

These words are inferred by the Apostle Paul for the prevention of an objection that might justly be in the mind of the Romans occasioned by the Apostle's former answer. For though the Apostle had granted in the beginning of the third chapter that the circumcised Jews were in some respect privileged above other Nations, and that chiefly in those eminent tenders and offers that the Gospel held out amongst them which, though it proved not effectual to all, he minds to some that it was effectual. But, yet, after in verse 9, the Apostle begins to manifest his understanding that to be a Jew after the flesh and to be in the Covenant of Circumcision, did not free men from the guilt of damnation any more than other men who were Heathens and not Jews after the flesh, neither circumcised.

To this purpose he states a question, "What then? Are we better than they? No, in no wise. For we have before proved, that both Jew and Gentile, are all under sin, as it is written, there is none righteous, no not one." Here the Apostle goes on to prove that the Jews, after the flesh, (in the Covenant of Circumcision) were equally in a damnable and sinful condition with the poor Heathenish Infidels, all equally guilty before God, verse 19. His inference is in verse 20 that by the works of the Law no flesh should be justified in His sight. This clearly holds forth that to be a Jew, and circumcised, and to be under the Law, is the self-same thing, and when the Apostle had concluded that being a Jew in the Covenant of Circumcision did in no way difference him from the Heathen as to life, he now shows how both Jews and Gentiles come to the Justification of life, that is freely by God's grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood. Therefore he excludes the Law of Works wholly in the matter of justification, and brings in the Law of Faith. This shows clearly that he has but one way to justify both Jew and Gentile, which is by Faith in Jesus Christ, the true Promised Seed in the New Covenant.

Upon these words in Romans 4:1 the Apostle seemed to argue, is it so that a man may be a Jew, and have interest in the Covenant of Circumcision entailed upon the fleshly line, and seed of Abraham, and yet be not better than Pagans or Heathens, as to the matter of life? "What shall we then say, that Abraham our Father, as appertaining to the flesh, has found?" As if they should say; if a man may be a Jew of the seed of Abraham, and so of the Covenant of Circumcision, and as to the matter of justification and eternal life, be no nearer than a profane Gentile who is not Abraham's seed, nor has any interest in the covenant? What privilege did Abraham find in the Covenant appertaining to or entailed on the flesh?

The Apostle answers in the second and third verses, and so along in the 4th chapter of the Romans, clearly distinguishing two covenants, the one of Circumcision a Covenant of Works; the other a promise of Jesus Christ, made to the faith of such as believe. Therefore, the Apostle says in the 2nd verse and so forward that if Abraham were justified by works, he has whereof to glory, but not before God. Paul plainly interpretes that the covenant our Father Abraham had interest in, as appertaining to the flesh of him and his seed after him in their generations, was a Covenant of Works in which Abraham had nothing to glory in before God. The reason given, because he was justified before God in another Covenant or promise, Gen. 15:5,6. For what saith the Scripture? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness."

The Apostle goes on showing that justification was not in the Covenant of Works entailed on the flesh of Abraham, but by faith in the promised seed in the Covenant of Grace, which he proves by David's testimony in Psalm 32:1-8.

Now thus much being said, he states the question Whether this grace of justification came upon the Circumcision only, or the uncircumcision also for he said, that faith was reckoned unto Abraham for righteousness.

The Question of the Two Covenants,
Which One Included Justification unto Eternal Life

Here is the question, seeing that Abraham had two covenants made with him, one the Gospel of Faith, and the other a Covenant in the Flesh, in which of these had he justification to eternal life?

The answer is plain, for the Apostle says it was not in circumcision. He was not justified in or by the Covenant of Circumcision, but in the promise of the promised seed which God is said to give as a Covenant for His people, by faith in that seed. Even in uncircumcision was Abraham justified. That (as I said before) was 24 years before the Covenant of Circumcision was made with him. He was justified, believing in the promise of the Messiah Who was to come out of his loins according to the flesh, "In whom all Nations of the Earth should be blessed."

Now, God promising that the Messiah, according to the flesh, should come out of Abraham, viz. out of his loins or flesh, this was then a great article of his faith. He was to believe unto righteousness, not only that justification and blessedness were to be had, but they must be had in that seed Who was to come out of Abraham according to the flesh.

As a confirmation and seal of this public righteousness confirmed in Abraham as a Father of all Nations, God elects that flesh and blood to Himself, I mean the family of Abraham in an external Covenant, to point out to all the world that as verily as God did take this nation (according to the flesh) to Himself by this external covenant, so God would be incarnate in this flesh.

As the flesh of the fore-skin of the member of Generation must be cut or bruised and the blood shed, by which the Jew according to the flesh was bound to keep the Law, this I understand did figure out how Christ, the true seed of Abraham descending out of his loins by Generation, should, (considered as male and not female) by breaking His flesh, and shedding His blood, fulfill and satisfy the Law.

So that this Covenant of Circumcision was of sealing use to Abraham to confirm this other covenant and a School Master to lead to Christ, as all other Branches of that old covenant were, therefore, Paul says in Rom. 4:11, "Moreover he received the sign of Circumcision, a seal of the Righteousness of faith, which he had, being uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those that believe."

Here observe that the Apostle calls circumcision not a seal, but a sign, "He received the sign of Circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of faith which he had being uncircumcised." Here are the reasons that restrain the sealing use of Circumcision only to Abraham.

First, because he had this righteousness of faith before he was circumcised. Therefore, it might be sealed or confirmed because he had it before he received the sign of Circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of faith which he had being uncircumcised. But his posterity after him, at eight days old, cannot be said to have this righteousness of faith to seal them, having it not before their Circumcision.

The second reason is, that he might be the Father of all that believe. This is the main reason the Apostle insists upon, "He received the sign of Circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of faith, that he might be the Father of all that believe."

The Covenant of Works Was Visible to Confirm
the Covenant of Grace Which Was Invisible

This reason cannot be applicable to any of Abraham's posterity besides himself. They were not the Fathers of all that believe. It was proper only to Abraham to be a high Father, or a Father of all nations. Therefore, (as I said before) God promising in Abraham that public righteousness, as a father of all Nations in the Covenant of Grace, adds to that Covenant an external covenant to be entailed in his line, and in his flesh, as a confirmation of the same.

A third reason is this, here is the Spirit of God affirming the sealing use of Circumcision to Abraham only, and not to any one of his fleshly seed, and as before upon a reason special to Abraham. Now where the Scripture has not a Mouth to speak we must not have an Ear to hear. The Scripture here affirms Circumcision only to be a seal of the righteousness of faith to Abraham and affords no such thing as to his seed.

A fourth reason lies in verse 13. The promise of Abraham to be the heir of the world, was not to him nor his seed through the Law, that is, through the Covenant of Circumcision, but through the righteousness of faith.

For if they who are of the Law be heirs, then faith is made void and the promise of none effect. This is because the Law works wrath. Therefore, it is of faith, that it might be by grace to the end that the promises might be sure to all the seed. Not sure to that only who is of the Law, but to that also who is of the faith of Abraham who is the father of us all, as it is written, I have made thee a father of many Nations, before him who believed, even God Who quickeneth the dead.

So that there is not in all the Scripture a place which more clearly proves the Covenant of Circumcision entailed on the fleshly line of Abraham to be a Covenant of Works than this in Rom. 4. Paul's clearing and setting the Covenant of Circumcision and Faith in opposition holds forth that Abraham and all his spiritual seed had their Justification in another covenant and not in the Covenant of Circumcision. He clearly holds forth the Covenant of Circumcision to be works and not Grace. This does sufficiently prove that the Covenant of Circumcision had no promise of Justification or eternal life in it.

An Appendix to the Second Argument to Prove
Circumcision Was a Covenant of Works.

But further, that the covenant entailed on the flesh must needs be understood to be a Covenant of Works, viz. that of Circumcision, appears in Phil. 3:2-4. Here the Apostle says, "Beware of dogs, beware of evil Workers, beware of the Concision; for we are the Circumcision, that worship God in the Spirit, and rejoice in Jesus Christ, and put no confidence in the flesh." By flesh he means the covenant entailed upon the flesh, the Covenant of Circumcision. He says, "If any man thinketh he hath whereof to trust in the flesh, I more, circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the Tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews, as touching the Law, a Pharisee, concerning zeal, persecuting the Church, touching the righteousness of the Law, blameless."

Paul holds the Old Covenant to be no more than dung or dross in comparison to the other Covenant or Promise of Christ, holding righteousness and salvation by Him, which he received by faith. Paul suffered the loss of all things for the sake of Jesus Christ. He did account all the whole privilege of Circumcision, and the Covenant of Works, to be but as dung that he might win Christ. If the promise of Christ, salvation and justification by Him, had been given in the Covenant of the Flesh and line of Abraham, then it had been very improper for Paul to account this as dung, and to cast contempt upon it as that which was wholly void of Christ. It would be very sinful for any man in such a case to cast such contempt upon the Covenant of Grace itself and the privileges thereof.

But you see Paul does here clearly distinguish between two covenants, the one of Faith and the other of Circumcision. This will further appear in Gal. 3:3 "Are ye so foolish, that having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect in the flesh?" He again distinguishes two Covenants, the one spiritual, the other a fleshly covenant. The Galatians, having at the first hearing of Him, began to embrace the Gospel or the Spirit or Spiritual word of the New Covenant. Now they would join the Covenant of Works in the flesh with the Gospel. It is evident that he means the Covenant of Circumcision, which they would seek to be perfected by.

In Galatians 4 Paul clearly distinguishes between two Covenants and two seeds under the figure of Sarah and Hagar. He holds forth the Covenant of Circumcision to be the Covenant of Works as that bond-woman (as it were) in chapter 5:1-3 and 6:12,13. If you will seriously mind these Scriptures they do most evidently prove that the Covenant of Circumcision made in the flesh or fleshly line of Abraham is a Covenant of Works. It is that Covenant which the Gospel or Covenant of Grace is set in opposition unto. This Covenant of Circumcision is set in opposition to the Covenant of Eternal Life, as having all the Works of the Law included in it. So consider, the New Covenant speaks thus, "I will put my Law in your hearts, and in your minds will I write them." But Circumcision is a covenant, not in the heart but in the flesh only, as you have heard. This is the second ground why the Covenant of Circumcision cannot be a Covenant of Eternal Life but a Covenant of Works only.

To Prove Circumcision Is A Covenant of Works,
The Old Covenant Held Forth Temporal Blessings In The Land of Cannan

The third reason to prove circumcision to be a Covenant of Works and not of eternal life is,

Because there is no promise of eternal life in it but only of temporal blessings in the Land of Canaan. God, promising to be a God is only in respect to outward Protection and Provision in the Land of Canaan and other like privileges. This is noted by the Apostle in Heb. 8:6, "But now hath he obtained a more excellent Ministry; by how much also he is a Mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises."

Herein he clearly does show that the Covenant waxing old and vanishing away, was grounded upon worse promises, which must needs be understood as temporal promises, Jer. 11:2-5.

"Hear ye the words of this Covenant, and speak unto the men of Judah, and Inhabitants of Jerusalem, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Cursed be the man that obeyeth not the words of this Covenant, which I commanded your Fathers in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, from the Iron Furnace, saying, Obey my voice, and do them, according to all which I command you. So shall ye be my people, and I will be your God, that I may perform the Oath that I have sworn unto your Father, to give them a Land flowing with milk and honey, as it is this day; then answered I and said, So be it, O Lord."

Here you have this Covenant in which God, being the God of His people, gives them Canaan as being in all one covenant and is annexed to the works of the Law,

Observe the words in the text, "So shall ye be my people, and I will be your God, that I may perform the covenant which I have sworn to your Fathers to give them a Land flowing with Milk and Honey."

You shall see that the promises of Canaan and the blessings thereof, are annexed to the Law of works, Deut. 30:15:

"See, I have set before thee life and good, and death and evil, in that I command thee this day, to love the Lord thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and statutes, and his judgments, that thou mayst live and multiply, and the Lord thy God shall bless thee in the Land whither thou goest to possess it."

So in the last verse he presses the people to obey his voice that they might dwell in the Land that the Lord swear unto their Fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them. So in Deut. 7:12,13:

"Wherefore it shall come to pass, that if you hearken to those judgments to keep and do them, that then the Lord shall keep unto thee the covenant and the mercy that he swear to thy Fathers; and he will love thee and bless thee, and multiply thee, he will also bless thee in the fruit of thy womb; and the fruit of the Land, thy Corn, and thy Wine, and thine Oil, the increase of thy Kine, and the flock of thy Sheep in the Land which he swear unto thy Fathers to give thee."

So that you see that in the Covenant of God, God gives Himself to be their God, to the National people of the Jews in relation to the blessing of Canaan, this blessing was still upon obedience to the works of the Law. This covenant in which God elected to Himself the body of Israel and by which He separated them to Himself from all the Nations of the Earth, is clearly a Covenant of Works. In this Covenant the people were bound to outward observance, worship, and service to God. Upon this Condition God would be their God and give them Canaan.

For there is a vast difference in God's making over Himself to be a God to a People in a conditional Covenant of Works out of Christ, and in an absolute covenant established of God in Christ. For in such a covenant He was never the God of the whole family of Abraham, or Church of Israel. The elect obtained that and the rest were hardened, as in Rom. 11:17.

The fourth ground is this, that a man might have brought a Person into this Covenant and interested him thereby into all the Privileges of the same by laying out a little money which, if this were a Covenant of Life wherein the Spirit and Spiritual gifts of the Lord had been given, a man might not say as Peter did say to Simon Magus, "Thy money perish with thee."

But for that reason, most certain it is, this Covenant of Circumcision is no spiritual covenant. This will appear from the words of the Covenant in Gen. 17:12,13.

"And he that is eight days old, shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed."

"He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised, and my covenant shall be in your flesh, for an everlasting covenant."

Here observe that all bought with money must be circumcised. If an Israelite should buy a black Moor, or the most savage Heathen in the World, he was bound to see him circumcised. Being circumcised, he was now in that covenant. The truth is, circumcision was one of those carnal Ordinances that the Author to the Hebrews, in Heb. 9:9, does speak of as being appointed till the time of Reformation.

Now the person whom the Lord would have circumcised must be of the family of Abraham. That is all the qualifications required: For God does not require a person to be spiritually qualified, as he does now under the Gospel. The Lord gave, in general, a Law and Commandment unto Abraham that all his Family must be circumcised, and that he must see it performed.

It is not in the institution enjoined that the person who does circumcise must be a believer. Neither is it enjoined that the person upon whom it is done, must have Discipleship or the work of grace, but this only, He must be one of the Family of Abraham, either born in his house, or bought with his money. So, the slave bought with money was as truly interested into the Covenant of God and the right eating of the Passover as one born in the house of the seed of Abraham.

Men outside of the Covenant Might Be Saved While Men
in the Covenant Might Be Damned

A fifth ground is this, that men (out of this Covenant) might be saved, and such as were really interested in it, might be damned.

For example, Lot dwelling in the City of Sodom and all the godly that day in the whole world, excepting Abraham and his house or family, were no way interested in the Covenant or Circumcision, yet were saved. Israel, who for the multitude of them, were as the Sand on the Seashore and interested in this Covenant, yet only a Remnant of them were saved, Isa. 10:23. Lot is commended to be a just and righteous man. Yet, this covenant was never made to him nor his seed and posterity, the Ammonites and Moabites. They were as truly the seed and children of a believer as the seed of Abraham were.

So you find Job in the Land of Uz, in the Book of Job, and his four friends. Besides those of Job's friends, one of his friends does intimate several other ancient and godly persons in those times, as Job. 8:8,10; Job 15:10. Here he says, "Ask the Ancients and they will tell thee." We have those with us much more elder than thy Father, who do argue. These were very ancient and godly men fit to be inquired of about those heavenly mysteries. They were much older than Job's father in that East Country. It is plain that neither they, nor any of their children or families, had right to Circumcision and the blessing of Canaan. But most sure it is, they had an interest in the Covenant of Life. This plainly shows that Circumcision was but an earthly, typical covenant such as good and godly men might not have an interest in and such as wicked men had an interest in.

Do we not find that all David's sons were in this covenant? But how many except Solomon had any right to the Covenant of Life? Yea, Abraham himself had eight Sons. Each of them had a Generation. God did not make the Covenant of Circumcision with them, but only Isaac. The rest were as truly the Sons of believing Abraham as was Isaac. Ishmael, and the six Sons Abraham had by Keturah, with their generation, were all the children of the same believing Abraham just as Isaac was. Yet, this covenant ran not upon either of their posterity. But in Isaac, the text says, shall thy seed be called. Though we may not be so uncharitable but to think that many of the seed of those who went into the East Country might be the elect of God and in a Covenant of Grace, yet to be sure, they had not an Interest in this Covenant of Circumcision, and the Inheritance of Canaan.

Isaiah tells us in Isaiah 1:9, that if God had not left Himself a very small Remnant, Israel would had been as Sodom and Gomorra.

So there was in the whole Nation of Israel (who were in the Covenant of Circumcision) but a very small Remnant selected out from the rest into the Covenant of Life, Rom. 9. The Apostle so makes use of the words, and in Rom. 11:5, 7 the Apostle says, "the election in and amongst Israel have obtained it, and the rest were hardened or blinded." The rest, some may say, "what rest," the rest of Israel in the Covenant of Circumcision. But, it is plain that all Israel were elected, one as much as another in the Covenant of Circumcision, by which they were separated to God from all other nations, as I have said.

The Gospel Covenant Confirmed and Tendered to Natural Israel By the Holy Prophets

But it is plain that there was a Gospel Testament confirmed of God in Christ held out and tendered to the Jews by the Holy Prophets and Pen-men of God. The election obtained that and the rest were hardened. They remained still in the literal and old Covenant of Circumcision which they had right to only by natural generation.

But none had a right to the Gospel Covenant but by the regeneration and new birth. Therefore God says in Isa. 8:28, "I and the children that thou hast given me, are as signs and wonders in Israel," implying clearly that a little handful of Israel were given to Christ in the Covenant of Grace out from amongst the body of Israel. The rest of the multitude of Israel remained without being given to Christ, making signs and wonders at such as were given to Him, by being admitted into a Covenant of Eternal Life through faith. This shows that the whole body of Israel were not admitted into, but some a few only. So that you see Souls may be in this Covenant of Circumcision and be damned. Souls may be out of it, and saved. Therefore, this cannot be a Covenant of Eternal Life, but only a Typical Covenant of Works.

To Prove Circumcision a Covenant of Works Is,
This Covenant Might Be Broken And The Male Cast Off

The sixth ground to prove that the Covenant of Circumcision was but a Covenant of Works, an outward Typical Covenant, is:

That this Covenant of Circumcision might be broken, as the Lord says in Gen. 17:14. The uncircumcised man-child, whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, shall be cut off from My people, because he hath broken My covenant.

Here observe, though he were born of the Family and of the seed of Abraham and so had an interest in the Covenant, yet he might forfeit his right, and break this covenant so as to be cast off from God's people.

The New Covenant Cannot Be Broken Because It is Not Conditional
Which the Old Covenant Was

This is that Old Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31, "I will make a New Covenant with the house of Israel, not like that Covenant which I made with their Fathers, which they broke, and my soul had no pleasure in them." For, as I have shown before, it is impossible that the New Covenant can be broken because it is an absolute covenant made on no condition to be fulfilled by the creature. But the Lord works "both to will and to do of His good pleasure" in this covenant. Therefore, "it is not in him that willeth, nor in him that runneth, but in God Who shows mercy." The Lord says, speaking of the New Covenant, in Jer. 33:15:

"In those days and at that time, I will cause the branch of righteousness to grow up unto David, he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the Land; in those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely, and this is the name wherewith he shall be called, the Lord our righteousness; for thus saith the Lord, David shall never want a man to sit upon the Throne of the house of Israel."

"Neither shall the Priest the Levite, want a man before me to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually. And the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, saying, Thus saith the Lord, If you can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, that there should not be day and night in their seasons, then may also my covenant be broken with David my Servant, that he should not have a Son to reign upon his Throne." Where you see the spiritual covenant cannot be broken, as Psalm 89:34. "My Covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my mouth."

It must needs be a Covenant of Works, that is, conditional. He made such a covenant with the Priest mentioned in I Sam. 2:30 where the Lord saith to this purpose:

"Wherefore the God of Israel said, I said indeed that thy house and the house of thy Fathers, should walk before me for ever. But now saith the Lord, be it far from me, for them that honor me, I will honor, and they that despise me, shall be lightly esteemed."

You must still mind those conditional promises the Lord makes. Here the creature who is not walking in the performance of the condition on his part, God is set free or at liberty whether He will perform such conditional promises yea, or no.

But it is not so in the absolute promises confirmed of God in Christ, Gal. 3:17. Those promises are all Yea and Amen as you see in 2 Cor. 1:20. But the Covenant of Circumcision is only a Covenant of Works wherein a poor creature truly interested in that covenant, might break it and forfeit his interest and be cast out and rejected out of that covenant from amongst his people. This is clearly confirmed in Isaiah 50:1.

"Thus saith the Lord? where is the Bill of your Mother's Divorcement, which I have put away? or to which of my Creditors, have I sold you? behold, for your iniquities have you sold your selves, and for your transgressions is your Mother put away."

Now (beloved) a divorce argues a breach and forfeiting of the covenant which the body of all Israel was in. We know that the National Covenant was of Circumcision. They that know in the least measure the nature of the Covenant of Grace, cannot but know it to be such a covenant out of which a soul cannot be divorced from the Lord.

There are many who are visibly in a Covenant of Grace now, under the Gospel, and yet may be cast out from God's people

But some may say, it follows not but that it is a Covenant of Grace, and so then, they might be visibly in a Covenant of Grace and yet be rejected.

In the New Covenant We have No Infallible Rule of Judgment
as to Who is In that Covenant

Persons may now profess to be in Christ and so in a Covenant of Grace, by an outward profession, but this being barely a profession, and not in truth in them who profess the same; they profess they were in that, which in truth they never were. For, under the Gospel, we have no infallible rule to know who is in the Covenant of Grace and who is not, because we have only the confession of themselves, who may deceive themselves and us.

But we have an infallible Rule to judge that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and the seed forward in their Loins or their generations, were in this Covenant of Circumcision. Therefore, it is a great mistake for any to evade what has been said upon such a groundless objection.

Now consider, it is that great and faithful God Who said and professes that Abraham and his seed and family after him from Jacob forward, were in this Covenant with him. But now, it is only poor unfaithful Man, hypocritical, dissembling, proud man, who say they are in the Covenant of Life. When it proves not so, or when it visibly proves the contrary the Saints have a Rule to disown such. This is a most certain truth, God did never put a soul away and make a divorce between Himself and any one Soul in a Covenant of Life. It is as certain that the whole Church of Israel were in reality and truth in the Covenant of Circumcision, Gen. 17:10,11. Here Abraham, and those born in his house, are to be circumcised. So Psalm 105:9-11, which covenant he made with Abraham and his oath with Isaac and confirmed the same to Jacob by a Law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant saying, "Unto thee have I given the Land of Canaan, the Lot of your inheritance."

Now it would plentifully appear, (if further proof needed) that God, His own Self, testifies to His making and entering into covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and their seed forward. Therefore, let no man please himself with such a poor, groundless objection, that the family of Israel were only visibly or in the judgment of Charity, in the Covenant of Circumcision as Hypocrites are now in the Covenant of Grace.

For there is nothing more clear than this, Israel were in truth and reality in the Covenant of Circumcision expressed by the Mouth of God Himself, and nothing more certain that Israel were never (all of them) so much visibly in the Covenant of Grace.

If it were necessary I could multiply places of Scripture,to prove the most part of Israel were visibly unbelievers living in those manifest fruits of the flesh as Drunkenness, Swearing, Lying, Whoring, Stealing, Covetousness, and palpable Ignorance. They were without faith and knowledge. All these notorious sins were constantly in the greatest part of the Church of Israel. They neighed (as fed horses) after their neighbors' wives and were given to oppression and horrid idolatry. All these sins being such manifest fruits of the flesh, that such as live in them, the Apostle says, cannot enter into the Kingdom of Christ and of God. They are visibly the children of the Devil. Therefore, to say the whole body of Israel were visibly godly, and so visibly in the Covenant of Grace, is a most gross mistake. They were really in the outward National Covenant of Circumcision, but not the generality so much as visibly in the Gospel Covenant of Life.

The Mass of Ignorance and Blindness Mix and Confound
The Two Covenants God Made to Abraham

It cannot be denied but that those Jews in John 8:30, and so forward, were Abraham's children and interested in the Covenant of Works. Yet, Christ is far from concluding their right to the covenant of Sonship and the heavenly adoption. But rather, in that respect Christ concluded that they are of their father the Devil, whose works they did. They also were Liars and enemies to Christ, as the Devil was from the beginning. Therefore, he excludes them from being the children of God. So that the main mass of blindness and darkness lying upon men's minds is this, they mix and confound the two covenants made to Abraham, the one is a spiritual, heavenly covenant made to him as a Father of the faithful. This Covenant is to those only who walk in the steps of faithful Abraham. The temporal Covenant of Circumcision was to the seed according to the flesh from Jacob forward, and those joining themselves to that family.

So then, in a word, the Covenant of Circumcision must needs be a Covenant of Works, and not of eternal life, because it might be broken, which the Covenant of Eternal Life cannot be.

If we Make it a Covenant of Eternal Life We Overthrow
Many Fundamental Points of Religion

The seventh ground to prove the Covenant of Circumcision is not a Covenant of Grace is,

That if we maintain the Covenant of Circumcision to be a Covenant of Grace to eternal life, therein we overthrow many fundamental points of Religion. This is a strong ground to prove that it is not of Grace but an outward typical covenant. For it is impossible that such an understanding of Scripture which crosses plain fundamental points of religion can be true.

To give you some examples, first you must needs confess that the Covenant of Circumcision was made to Abraham and his seed after him, in their generations Gen. 17:7, from Isaac and Jacob forward. So that being born in the house or Family of Israel, or being bought with the money of one of the Israelites, interested a person in that covenant because he came forth out of that line and was born heir to that Covenant and the privileges of the same.

To Say That The Covenant of Grace is Entailed On The Flesh,
Overthrows The Main Fundamental Points Of Our Religion.

The chief and precious privileges of the Covenant of Grace are adoption of Sonship, Justification and the inward work of sanctification. All these privileges the natural generation must needs be born heirs to if they were born heirs of a Covenant of Grace. This must be asserted by those who defend children's baptism.

This fundamental point of Religion, that all mankind are by nature the children of wrath, Eph. 2:2, and that all, both Jews and Gentiles, are charged under sin, Rom. 3:9 must needs be denied. "There is none righteous, no not one," be it known to you that this is a fundamental doctrine of truth generally acknowledged by all the godly, "that we are dead in sins and trespasses, wherein in times past, we walked according to the course of this world, according to the Prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience; among whom also we had our conversation in times past, in the lust of the flesh, and of the mind, and were children of wrath by nature as well as others."

The Apostle Paul affirms this to be equally the state of himself, who was born in the Church of Israel, as well as the Gentiles. David does affirm this of all in general, Psalm 14:2,3, which the Apostle Paul urges in Rom. 3:9 forwards, speaking of himself and the rest of the National Churches of the Jews,

"What are we (he says) better than they? meaning than the Gentiles No, in no wise, for we have before proved that both Jews and Gentiles are all under sin, as it is written, there is none righteous, no not one; there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God, they are all gone out of the way, they are together become abominable, there is none that doeth good, no not one."

In Psalm 51 David says, "I was conceived in sin, and brought forth in iniquity;" who was a child of the Church of God, as it is usually termed.

Evils of Affirming Those Who Are In Abraham's Natural Covenant
Are Also In the Covenant of Grace

But beloved, this doctrine is clear in Scripture and clearly experienced by every Godly Christian. This truth must needs be overthrown if the whole body of Israel were:

because both heirs of a Covenant of Grace, and of righteousness, nor never born dead in sins and trespasses. That is inconsistent with being in a Covenant of Grace and Life.

This opinion of holding the Covenant of Grace to be entailed in the flesh opposes itself directly against this aforementioned foundation of Religion and must needs be a gross error so considered.

The second fundamental point of Religion that this error opposes itself against is, stability in a Covenant of Eternal Life. It cannot be imagined that I should much insist upon proving this Doctrine of stability in grace to be a fundamental truth. I shall take that for granted from the nature of the New Covenant as seen in several Scriptures before recited, as in Psalm 125.

"They that trust in the Lord shall be as Mount Zion, which cannot be removed, but as the Mountains are round about Jerusalem, so shall the Lord be about them, from this time forth, and for ever."

And in Psalm 89:33, "If thy children sin, I will afflict them, with the rods of men, but my loving kindness will I not utterly take from them, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail; My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my mouth."

But, taking this for granted to be a truth that all born in the Church of the Jews, were born heirs of this stable Covenant, and so were really and in truth in the Covenant of Grace, then most of the Church of Israel who were in a Covenant of Grace, were damned and not saved, as Isaiah 10:22,23. Though Israel were as the sand of the Sea, yet a Remnant of them were saved only. So Isaiah with Rom. 9:27,28,31. "But Israel which followed after the Law of righteousness, hath not obtained to the Law of righteousness." Paul says, Rom. 11:5, "There was a Remnant according to the election of grace," and in verse 7 how "they obtained it, but the rest were hardened," all but the remnant, were blinded, and hardened.

Therefore, if such multitudes as the sand of the Sea, were all really in a Covenant of Grace, most of them must be understood to fall out of the covenant and so to fall out of the Covenant of Life.

This is another fundamental truth that this opinion is fully against, that souls may be truly in a Covenant of Eternal Life and yet perish and be damned.

The Third Foundational Point this Overthrows is,
the Necessity of Conversion or Regeneration

The third foundation this error overthrows is, the necessity of Conversion or Regeneration. This doctrine is eminently confirmed by Christ in the Gospel as a fundamental truth in John 3:4, 5 where Christ, speaking to Nicodemus, tells him, "that except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God." Likewise in John 8:24, "Except ye believe that I am he, ye shall die in your sins." In John 3, the two last verses, "He that believeth not, the wrath of God abideth on Him, and he shall not see life."

If The Carnal Seed Were In the Covenant of Grace and Life, then
Why Did Christ Command Them to Believe to Receive Eternal Life

The before-mentioned errors hold to a Covenant of Life running in the flesh upon the carnal seed, opposes itself against this. For might the carnal seed of Israel say to Christ, why do you preach such a doctrine to us, "That except you be born again, you cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven?" They could well say, "we affirm the contrary seeing by the first birth we have an interest in the Covenant of Grace and eternal life already without believing and being born again, and so are entered into the Kingdom of God, and the privileges thereof." Whereas you say "except you believe that I am He," you shall die in your sins? Why does Christ pronounce death without believing, seeing we are acquainted with another way to enter into life, than the way of believing, which is to be begotten of one of the church members or of a believer?

We find the Holy Ghost says in 1 John 5, "He that hath Christ hath life, he that hath not Christ hath not life." "No," says this error, "there were thousands who were interested in life, without having Christ, by carnal generation." The Apostle says, "There is no other name under heaven by which we can be saved but by the name of Jesus."

Yea, this error says, "There is another name by which we may come into a Covenant of Eternal Life and so to be saved." So that here lies the case where Christ, in the Gospel, powerfully affirms no other way to life but by believing, regeneration, and coming to Jesus Christ. This opinion destroys all these testimonies. It opens another door of entrance into the Covenant of Life, that by fleshly generation, though Christ says to Nicodemus in John 3, "That which is born of the flesh, is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit, is Spirit;" as if souls were infatuated, and had no ears to hear His plain word.

If this Contrary Opinion Be True then There is
No Need to Seek the Conversion of Anyone

They who are of this opinion do defend the contrary. To what purpose should any man seek the conversion of any Believer's children, whether formerly of the nation of the Jews, or now the nations of the believing Gentiles; seeing they are born heirs of a Covenant of Eternal Life, and so are in as good a state without conversion and believing and being born again as any other soul is by believing, and by the new birth?

This Contrary Doctrine Justifies the Jews and Their Arguments
Against John the Baptist and Jesus Christ

This doctrine tends to justify the rebellious Jews against John the Baptist and Christ. The Sadducees and Pharisees came to John's Baptism, Matthew 3. John says, "O ye Generation of vipers, who hath forewarned you to fly from the wrath to come? bring forth fruits meet for repentance, and think not to say within yourselves, we have Abraham to our Father." John would have this people to be converted to entitle them to this Covenant of Grace and to baptism which is an Ordinance of the same covenant. They are not to think so erroneously because they are children of Abraham according to the flesh, that should entitle them to the same. Therefore, he says "think not within yourselves, we have Abraham to our Father," and we are his children according to the flesh. Therefore, we need not a work of conversion or true Repentance to entitle us to the privileges of the Covenant, as was baptism. Also in John 8:31, Christ says unto some Jews, "If you abide in my words, then are you my Disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free, and then you shall be free indeed." They answered him, "We be Abraham's children, and never were in bondage to any, How sayest thou then, We shall be made free?"

Here you may observe that these wicked, obstinate Jews were of the same opinion that they were in a state of happiness and good enough by generation, by being Abraham's seed according to the flesh. Jesus answers, "Who so committeth sin, is the servant of sin, and the Servant abideth not in the house for ever." We find Christ tells these Sons of Abraham, that they were so far from being the adopted sons of God, in a Covenant of Life, that they were of their Father the Devil. These same persons Christ speaks to in verse 24 and tells them, "Except they believed Christ was He, they should die in their sins."

Christ was far from this opinion. He did not think that the Covenant of Circumcision was a Covenant of Life. He does thoroughly reprehend them for this groundless confidence. This error was the main obstacle that hindered the Jews from faith and repentance. They thought the Old Covenant entitled them to happiness only by being of the stock of Abraham and born heirs of the Covenant of Circumcision. This very rotten opinion was one of the Devil's sleights to lull them asleep in a carnal and unconverted condition. They thought they needed not the New Birth; which thought of theirs would have been true enough provided all the children of Abraham had, by generation, interest in the Covenant of Life which other men could have no interest in without regeneration. But Christ, you see, presses a necessity of conversion to these children of Abraham who at the present, were as fully interested in the Covenant of Circumcision as Abraham himself. Even to Nicodemus, who was a Ruler of the Jews, Christ presses a necessity upon him, and also labors by a parable in Luke 16 to convince those sottish Jews that one might be the seed of Abraham according to the flesh and yet be irrecoverably damned. Therefore, he brings in the rich man in Hell, speaking thus, "Father Abraham, I pray thee, send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water to cool my tongue." Abraham is brought in owning him to be his Son, speaking thus, "My Son remember, that thou in thy lifetime, receivest good things."

Here you may observe that the man in Hell, irrecoverably damned, owns Abraham to be his Father, and Abraham also does acknowledge him to be his Son. Here you clearly see that a man may be a Son of Abraham and yet damned, "thou hadst thy good things in this life, but Lazarus his evil things." Ezekiel 18:9,10 shows where a just man is presupposed to beget a son who is a robber, and a shedder of blood, and who goes out in all manner of wickedness, and that in Israel.

Wherein observe, Abraham owns no other privilege belonged to the rich man by virtue of being the Son of Abraham, but what was in this life, or in this world. Hell was his best portion in the world to come. But, if he had been born heir to the Covenant of Life, how then could Abraham's affirmation have been true?

Beloved, let all ingenuous Spirits who are not willing to walk blind-fold consider how contrary to the whole tenor of the Gospel this opinion is and how it is destructive to these fundamental principles of the Gospel, the necessity of Christ, and of Regeneration, and destroys all sense of the necessity of conversion, and helps to harden men to destruction as it did the blind Jews, who (as it appears) were fully blinded in the receipt of that opinion, that being Abraham's seed, according to the flesh, interested them in happiness and eternal life.

This Concept Destroys the Doctrine of the New Covenant and
Its Many Visible Points

Fourthly, this opinion destroys the doctrine of the New Covenant, and the nature of it, and the manner of how God makes it with the soul. For, to make a New Covenant with the soul, is to write the Law of God in a man's heart and in his mind, and to infuse saving knowledge and faith. By this God unites the soul to himself, and so pardons all his sins. Without any condition considered in the creature, God binds over Himself to be their God freely in Christ, and binds over Himself to own them to be His people. Only in this way, and in no otherwise, is God said to make His New Covenant with a poor soul. Whereas, this dream would seem to bear you in hand, that a whole nation may be in a New Covenant and have it made with them, and yet have none of this work wrought in their hearts.

Fifthly, this opinion destroys the doctrine of justification by faith in Christ. Seeing that it does hold out another way than by faith to come to justification, which is by the carnal birth of believing parents. For, if a soul is admitted into a Covenant of Life, I hope you are not ignorant that justification is a great privilege in the New Covenant, and really the portion of all that are in that covenant.

Sixthly, this opinion destroys the Doctrine and foundation of all Gospel Churches where it is held, which will appear by two things:

First, it destroys the matter of the Church, you know that this is a fundamental truth, that the matter of the Church ought (now under the Gospel) to be Saints by calling, 1 Cor. 1:2; Spiritual worshippers, John 4:23; Lively stones, 1 Pet. 2:5; Such as are redeemed from their vain conversation, 1 Pet. 1:13; Such as are brought out of darkness into His marvelous light, 1 Pet. 2:9.

Now this error destroys the truth, or opposes itself against the truth of God lying in all these Scriptures. It brings in the nation of believers, all born of their body, their seed's seed in their generation. For the Covenant of Circumcision was not only to the next generation immediately flowing from Abraham, "But to thy seed after thee in their generations." We see in that generation during Christ's time, they were as well called Abraham's seed, as Isaac himself was, and they did call Abraham their father.

Therefore, if the Covenant of Circumcision shall be a man's pattern, we must necessarily have a Church that is national, consisting of succeeding generations for many hundred years, coming out of believing persons' loins, and so set up the partition-wall again between the natural branches and those who are wild by nature.

So that this tenet does of necessity destroy the true matter of a Church, because it unavoidably admits into the Church all the unconverted and unregenerate children, born of the bodies of such persons, that either are or have been accounted believers.

As it destroys the matter of a Church in admitting such that are not made Disciples, so it occasions such as do believe, remaining in that opinion, to live in that sin of neglect of the Lord's Baptism, contenting themselves with that counterfeit of Baptism which they had in their infancy.

This Evil Opinion Causes the Constitution of a Church To Be
By Both Good and Bad Persons

This evil opinion occasions the constitution of a Church or Congregation of good and bad promiscuously, and all these unbaptized both the good and the bad. What light in the Gospel have you to justify such an Assembly, to be the true Church of Christ that does consist of some Religious people in the judgment of charity and a world of carnal children admitted and received in among them and all, both the carnal and the religious, never baptized with the Lord's baptism?

I do deny such an Assembly can be owned as an orderly Church of Christ. Thus you see, what a great error this is, that opposes itself against so many fundamental points of the Gospel.

But may some say, though we receive in children by baptism into our Church, we do not admit them unto the Supper.

The Question is, when will you admit them? See what an untrodden path you are run into? Do you own your children to be in a Covenant of Grace and eternal life, and enrighted into the privileges of the same? Is Baptism the privilege of the New Covenant, and not the Supper also? If it be, how dare you keep them from their right and privilege, I pray you? How long did the Apostles baptize their members, before they admitted them to the Supper?

If you look in Acts 2:41, 42 you shall find as many as gladly received the word of God, were baptized, and presently they continued in the Apostles' doctrine, fellowship, breaking of bread, and prayer, as soon as they were baptized.

Therefore, you have no ground at all, upon any pretense, to suspend from the Supper such members whom you own as privileged in all the other Ordinances of God, which you have received into your Church, by your supposed baptism.

Thus you may see what horrible Consequences flow naturally from maintaining a Covenant of Eternal Life in the flesh.

This Concepts Holds That Persons May Have Eternal Life
Without Union With Christ By Faith

Seventhly, this opinion defends another gross error, that persons may have right to a Covenant of Life, without union or in-being in Christ by faith. It is a sad thing that souls who profess knowledge in the Gospel, and to be preachers of the same, should be so blinded so as to mislead people in so weighty a point as this is, and that should endeavor to leaven thousands of poor people with such a sad error that opposes itself against the very substance of the Gospel, in holding all the whole Nation of Israel to be in a Covenant of Eternal Life, with the carnal children of believing parents among the Gentiles, though the greatest part of them have no union by faith in Christ

(Editor's Note: This is the same concept most modern American Primitive Baptists hold. They claim that most human beings are the elect of God and shall go to heaven without any faith union with Jesus Christ. That is correct, they teach that countless millions shall die and go into heaven without believing in or knowing Jesus Christ. This we hold to be the gospel of antichrist. REP)