GOOD WILL TOWARDS MEN, OR A TREATISE OF THE COVENANTS, Viz. Of WORKS, and Of GRACE OLD& NEW.  
Wherein sundry Propositions are Laid down Concerning them, and divers Questions occasionally Discussed.  
By a Lover of Truth and Peace.  
LONDON, Printed, for Samuel Richards, Book-seller in Nottingham, and are to be sold by Thomas Guy, at the Corner shop of little Lumbardstreet, and Cornhill, near Woolchurch Market. 1675.   

TO THE READER.  
AS in the Apostles days, some were Exceeding Zealous about the Law, understanding neither what they said, nor whereof they Affirmed; There are some in our days, who have the Covenant of Grace and the New Covenant much in their mouths, while yet they understand little of it, yea, are under very great Mistakes about it.  
Perhaps( Reader) thou wilt wonder to see a New Treatise of this Subject, upon which there are so many Extant. Yet it were to be wished, that in some of them there were not Multa Corigenda, foul erratas . And besides, let who will writ of it, instead of putting to it a Finis, he may conclude with a Nonnulla Desiderantur, there are some things yet behind.  
Indeed the Subject is exceeding Copious, and withal, a necessary Subject to be oft Inculcated. Without some knowledge of Gods Covenant, Men can neither understand God, nor Jesus Christ, nor Themselves aright.  
Touching the Occasion of this present Discourse being in Company with a Worthy special Friend, I was Speaking my Thoughts, That most of the Prevailing Errors of our Times, were from Ignorance of the Covenant of Grace, or not being right in the Doctrine of it: Whereupon he willed me to apply my Thoughts to that Subject. When Considering further with myself the dangerous Tendency, and sad Consequences of some Mistakes about it, I was ready to say[ I also will show my Opinion.] Now to make way for my Intended Discourse on the Covenant of Grace. it was very Requisite to Premise something of Mans State under the Covenant of Works.  
Many Points relating to these Two Covenants, I witting pass by, to Insist more largely on what I conceive very Needful at this Day, that might be an Antidote against Prevailing Errors, and a means of Establishing Souls in the present Truth.  
I conclude before-hand, some will account this Discourse a Dry Piece, to wit, Such as look only at the stirring of Affections. But woeful Experience may Teach us, that it is as well a Christians Duty to see to the right Ballasting of his judgement; for want of which, we have seen many sadly Tossed to and fro.  
The Scripture is Profitable for Doctrine, 2 Tim. 3.16. This is one end and use it serves for. And if the Doctrine herein laid down be Sound, and according to the Scriptures of Truth, I shall hope, it will not be Unprofitable.  
Further, I must expect, others will be Prejudiced, and take Distaste, meeting with some things here across to the Opinions, which they have Espoused. Yet I can say, the Discovery of Truth is my Endeavour and Design,( and not to lay open the Nakedness of any of a different persuasion, further than it might serve that Way.) And sure I am, Truth ought to be dearer to us all, than our Credit, or Worldly Concerns.  
Upon a Review of the whole, I especially commend to thy serious Perusal, the Twelfth, and Thirteenth Proposition of the Covenant of Grace, beginning at Pag. 225. and ending at 297. showing the Terms and Benefits of the Covenant of Grace, wherein every mans Grand concern lieth. Reader, if thou hast a mind to see, there I have endeavoured to show thee the things that belong unto thy Peace. 
Diog. Laert. in Socrate. l. 2. p. 111.  As Aeschines said to his Master Socrates, {αβγδ}, &c. I am poor, and have nothing else, but I give thee myself: And it took with his Master. We have nothing to give to God worthy of his Acceptance; yet if( with the Believing Corinthians, 2 Cor. 8.5.) we would now give ourselves to the Lord, it would be very Acceptable to Him, and every way advantageous to ourselves. We should come better out of his Hands: Yea, He would be ours ( our God, and Portion) if we are willing, and resolved to be His. Methinks, the Lord says to Sinners, as Jehu to Jehonadab, 2 Kings 10.15. Is thine heart right as my heart is with thy heart? If it be, then give me thy hand. O how glad should I be, if this Discourse might promote that Holy and happy League betwixt God and Souls! Indeed, I am not without hope, but through the Blessing of God, it may be of Good use to some. And otherwise no Reasons should have moved, no persuasions should have prevailed with me to yield to the Publishing of it. The Success( I know) depends wholly on His Blessing.  
{αβγδ},  
{αβγδ}.  
I writ with Calmness, and would be Sorry this should Raise the least Storm in any. Where thou canst not Assent with judgement, yet Dissent with Affection. Let us follow the Truth in Love. If thou findest any Light and Warmth here, aclowledge the same to come from the Father of Lights. Let Him have the Praise: And forget not to Pray for one, who is greatly Ashamed, that he hath so little served God, and his Generation, who without a better Head, and a better Heart, is still like to do little Service,  
J. B.   

Addenda& Corrigenda.  
page. 3. Line ante penult. add.[ There is par ratio, why this First Covenant should be so called, though it should not be directly intended in that place.] p. 9. l. 14. r. External. p. 11. l. 29. 1. flowing. p. 12. l. 31. for but, r. be. p. 13. l. 10 blot out or. p. 14. l. 14. r. owed. p. 15. marg. {αβγδ} is put for {αβγδ}, p. 18. l. 29. r. Law, p. 21. l. 10. r. had, p. 24. l. 7. r. he. l. 9. r. commonly use, p. 25. l. 6. r. as a moral, p. 33. l. 8. r. goods, p. 34 l. 10. r. Judge p. 41. l. 12. r. carried, p. 42. l. 4. r. in, and l. 31. r. Niti, p. 61. l. 2, r. so we. p. 73. marg. r. mod. div. p. 76. marg. r. quicquid mandat. Calv. p. 93. l. ult. {αβγδ} p. 137. l. 16. r. without, p. 152. l. 12. after grace that in marg. to some, &c. p. 162. l. 1. r. cur p. 164. l. 31. Cocceius, p. 174. l. 20. r. ac. l. 21. r. in eo quidni, p. 213. l. 11. blot out be, p. 232. l. 16. r. guileless, p. 233. l. 27. blot out the Law of, p. 235. l. 9. r. justifaction, p. 245. l. 13. r. by Faith, p. 247. l. 25. r. many, p. 253. l. 15. r. godly sorrow, p. 279. l. 18. for of, r. to, p. 282. l. 13. r. Hendiadis, p. 285. l. 25. for long, r. large, p. 300. l. 13. for now, r. nor, p. 306. l. 32. blot out the stop at Faithful, p. 307. l. 9. after Preached, r. so explicitly, p. 321. l. 7. r. Opponitur, l. 8. r. Externae, p. 322. l. 22. r. includeth, p. 326. l. 18. r. Incompossibilia, p. 424. l. 26. r. dispense, p. 429. l. 7. r. quatefaciendam, p. 405. l. 7. r. Maymony. One reference of good use is omitted. p. 385. l. 4. marg. scil. Mr. Baxt. of Infant Bapt. p. 98, 99. Other literal Mistakes, and false Pointings, which I hope will not mueh hinder the sense, the Ingenuous Reader will pass by.   

OF THE COVENANT OF WORKS. Part I.  Gen. 2.17. 
But of the three of Knowledge of Good and Evil thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die, or dying thou shalt die.  
I Design( God assisting) to Discourse of the two Covenants betwixt God and Man. 
The Introduction.  The right opening and understanding whereof might help to set and keep our Judgments right in many points of Divinity, and prevent our falling into many dangerous and prevailing errors. And as Luther said( as I remember) upon his understanding of the point of free Justification by Christ's righteousness, that thereupon he thought himself apertis portis in ipsum paradisum intrâsse, to have straight way entered into Paradise: And ibi continuò alia mihi facies totius Scripturae apparuit, forthwith the whole Scripture appeared to him with a new face; so it would no doubt to many, could they attain to a right and true notion of the Covenants.  
Now I have made choice of this Text of Scripture, whereupon to ground my Discourse of the Covenant of works: As this was part of it; part of that first Covenant, God was pleased to make with Man in innocency.  
I confess the Covenant of Works made with Adam in innocency, is more darkly spoken of than the Covenant of Grace.  
And the Reason is obvious, because the first Covenant was soon broken, on man's part, that he can claim no privilege or benefit by it. In this respect it is, as if it had never been. All man's hope of happiness depends wholly on that which is called the Covenant of Grace.  
Therefore the promissory part of that first Covenant is not mentioned here, not spoken of expressly: but only implyed, and included in the threatening. The Text indeed runneth in the Form of a Law with a threatening. As we have no more expressed here; but,  
1. A Precept, not to eat.—  
2. The Sanction or penalty threatened, death in case man did eat, contrary to the charge, and precept God had given him.  
Yet there is more included and implyed here: As,  
1. A Promise: A promise of the continuance of Adam's life and happiness, upon Condition that he continued his Obedience.  
When it is said [ If thou disobeyest thou shalt die.] it fairly intimates thus much, 
Poena enim denunciata inobedientiae non expectatur, ubi est obedientia. Cocceide foed. c. 2. Sect. 24. p. 29.  [ If thou wilt be Obedient in this thing, and whatsoever else I command thee, thou shalt surely live still, and be happy, thou shalt not die.]  
2. The Tenor of the first Covenant is included here, that it was[ Do this and live, disobey and die.] That the Stipulation, or Condition required of man in the first Covenant, was his perfect obedience to the will of God in all things, not only to the Law of Nature implanted in him, but also to any further Command of God's giving Forth.  
As we see in this positive Law, where the thing forbidden was lawful in itself, and only sinful because forbidden, and forbidden, to prove and try his obedience. As this was indeed a fit trial of it, by a Law to restrain him from that, whereunto he had a Natural inclination, as unto other fruits in Paradise( Gen. 3.6.) and which was indifferent,( within mans liberty to take and eat) before the giving of that Law.  
But I say the Condition of the first Covenant was obedience to the will of God in all things; therefore it is rightly called the Covenant of works. As Rom. 3.27. we red of a Law of works contradistinguished and opposed to the Law of Faith. The Tenor of it being [ do this and live] implyed here in the threatening, If thou disobeyest in any thing, be it but so much as in tasting of this fruit,( which here to try thy Obedience, I forbid thee to eat of) Thou shalt die. As Grotius( de Satis. c. 3.) per unam Speciem peccati omne peccati genus indicatur, ut exprimit Lex eadem clarius explicata, Maledictus qui non manserit in omnibus praeceptis Legis, Deut. 27.26. Gal. 3.10.  
This[ In the day thou eatest thereof, dying thou shalt die, meaneth as much as that[ Cursed is he that continueth not obedient in all things.  
3. That the Law of works, the Law given to Adam, was more than a penal, and praemiant Law, more than a Law with a promise, 
It is true Gods Law with its Sanction may be called his Covenant, before mans consent, as containing the matter of it; but it is most properly a Covenant when it is consented unto, having then also the form of a Covenant.  and threatening annexed, that it was also a Covenant. I have this to say further, viz. that we cannot but suppose, that innocent Adam did fully consent to, and readily and thankfully accept of Gods Terms and proposals here[ Obey and live, Disobey and die.] When God had done so much for man in his Creation, making him a reasonable Creature; in, or after his own Image, able to yield perfect obedience, and when the said obedience was indisputably, indispensably his duty, whether God promised such a reward or not, to suppose now that man was not fully consenting to the Terms offered,( which were most just and reasonable) for the continuation of his happiness, were to suppose that man was not what he was indeed,( i.e. reasonable, and innocent,) This were to suppose, that God did not make man upright or perfect, but rather perverse, and to suppose that man lay across to his Maker, even before he fell, which is( no doubt) prodigiously false.  
4. One thing more included here, and to be inferred, is, that this Covenant, and Compact, was not made with Adam alone, but with him, and his posterity together. Their want of perfect conformity to Gods Will and Law,( the thing required, and insisted on in the Covenant of works) rendering his posterity guilty of death, even as if they had set their teeth in the forbidden fruit. The penalty threatened to Adam's breach of Covenant, we see inflicted on his posterity, that certainly they were involved in the Covenant with him, to be dealt withall upon the same Terms. Even Infants, who have not sinned after the similitude of Adam's Transgression, yet through his disobedience( mediant corruptione, their nature by that means being corrupted) are subjected to the same death, and punishment.  
Though Corrinus takes it thus, 
Cens. Amat. Arm. c. 9. p. 138.  death being threatened unto Adam that very day he sinned, therefore his posterity could not but partake of his punishment. As they must all of necessity die in him, who were in his loins. Yet by his leave, this account he gives of the matter is utterly short of that account the holy Scripture giveth of it. The Apostle concludeth further, Rom. 5.12. That by Adam's Sin, all the world of mankind became subject unto death; so as they are subject to it, not only to die virtually in him but formally to undergo the Sentence of death in their own persons.  
Now hence I lay down this Doctrinal Conclusion.  
Doct. That God was pleased to Covenant with man at first, when in the state of innocency, promising to give him eternal life, upon Condition of his obeying perfectly and constantly; withall threatening death, if in the least point he should disobey.  
And to help your understandings, and to led you on to a clearer conception, and apprehension of the Nature of this first Covenant, I shall proceed by certain steps, laying down several propositions about it: humbly begging the Spirit of truth so to guide me, that I may not misled you here.  

Sect. 1.  
PROP. I. God the maker of all things, created man a rational being, after his own Image, he being created to know, aclowledge, love, worship, obey, and enjoy his Maker.  
COncerning the Image of God wherein man was created, it is, questioned,  
1. Wherein it did consist?  
Ans. 1. Not in the form and fashion of his body. Homo non est imago Dei ea parte, quâ bestiis similis est. Coccei. For God is a Spirit, and hath not any bodily shape, as the Audians, or Anthropomorphites of old dreamed. Therefore his Image most properly or primarily consists in something spiritual. It was a fond conceit of Osiander, that man was said to be created after Gods Image, because the Son of God was to assume Man's Nature. But Christ was not the express Image of God in this respect.  
That Text Heb. 1.3. where he is called the express image of his Fathers person, 
Christus quum factus est homo, dicitur factus esse nobis similis per omnia, dempto peccato. Illius igitur corpus ad imaginem nostri factum formatumque potius fuit, quam nostrum ad illius, Zanch.  doth certainly respect his Deity, not his humanity. His being incarnate. Christ's taking man's Nature on him, was his being made like to us.  
Again, the Scripture affirmeth this of man before his fall, that he then had the Image of God, and had he continued in that first Estate of integrity, there had been no occasion for the Son of God to be incarnate, to take man's Nature on him.  
2. But the Image of God in man, consisted in those things, which advanced him above the inferior Creatures, representing some Divine perfection, which according to our way of conceiving of God is formally predicated of him, or properly attributed to him. Which is either, 1. Ratione substantiae hoins,& imprimis ainae. The Natural Image of God in man. As God is a Spirit, and so the Soul. God is immortal, and so the Soul is immortal. Or, 2. Ratione dignitatis,& {αβγδ}, 
Mr. Baxt.  which a Learned man of our own calleth the Relative Image of God. So man in that dominion which God gave him over the inferior Creatures,( that were made for him) represented God, the Lord of all, being as a little God upon Earth. Thus Magistrates are called Gods. [ I said ye are Gods.] Or, 3. Ratione donorum, seu qualitatum moralium, the moral Image of God. Those habits which represented God's wisdom, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.  
Now as the Moral Faculties( to wit) those which are the proper seat of moral Good or Evil) are the chief, 
Imago Dei in principe animi facultate proculd●bio principem locum obtinuit. Suffrag. britain. de 3& 4 Art. Thes. 1. p. 94.  And as Moral Good is more Excellent than Natural, and Moral evil worse than Natural( as Christ, was subject to a world of evil of this last sort, and yet retained the Image of God, most fair, and unspotted, being free from the least touch of Moral evil:) Thus the Moral perfection of the faculties of the Soul, is man's highest perfection. And herein chiefly and eminently did God's Image in man consist. And nothing more opposite to the Image of God, than Moral pravity. As God hath more to do in Natural Evils, than in Moral. He freely owneth his being the Author of Natural Evil, ( is there any evil in the City, and the Lord hath not done it?) but it were blasphemy to make him the Author of Moral Evil, or Sin.  
The Image of God consists not only or chiefly in the Essence of the soul: nor only or chiefly in the powers and faculties of the soul( supposing there were any real distinction of the faculties from the Essence) which some make to be Speculum Trinitatis, the Glass of the Trinity. The Essence and Natural powers of the soul remain, now that the Image of God is defaced. Nor only, or chiefly in dominion over other Creatures( as some would have it) This would rather seem to be an Adjunct.( or however a less principal part of it) Gen. 1.26. Let us make man in our Image— and let them have dominion. And that it is a thing distinct, and separable too, from the Image of God, from what is principally intended 〈◇〉 it, seemeth to follow from hence: that both 〈…〉 and Eve are said to have been created in the Image of God, Gen. 1.27. They were created both alike in the Image of God: but they were not both alike in dominion, the Woman being made for the Man, is subject to him. Again, the Angels( surely) had the Image of God in as eminent, or an higher degree, than Man had; yet were not they made Lords over this lower world,( as man was, Psal. 8.6.) that we can any where find. The Angels were made after Gods Image, to whom the dominion over inferior Creatures did not so properly belong, as unto men.  
Indeed the Image of God seemeth more properly to denote some inward frame and complexion of soul, rather than any such Eternal privilege or prerogative, as Lordship over the Creatures.  
Therefore we take the Image of God, especially and eminently to consist in those spiritual Endowments of Knowledge, Righteousness, and Holiness. That inward Rectitude of mans Soul, God made man upright, Eccl. 7.29. where( whatsoever Socinians say) we must understand, upright in respect of Moral rectitude;( as Moral pravity is opposed to it)[ finding out many Inventions.] Now what is the Moral Rectitude of the Understanding, but sound Knowledge, and wisdom? what is the moral rectitude of the will, but Righteousness, and Holiness?  
Thus upright was man, when he came first out of Gods hand, no error in his understanding, no irregularity in his will, no disorder in his Affections. A sign of which we see, Gen. 2.25. They were both naked, the Man and his Wife, and were not ashamed. No uncomely motions to cause shane, such as they were sensible of after their fall, Gen. 37.10. Naked innocency was Glorious, but naked sin and turpitude a thing most ignominious.  
See what is meant by the Image of God, Eph. 4.24. That ye put on the new man, which after God is created in Righteousness, and true Holiness: such as the Saints are by spiritual Renovation, such was man at first by Creation, viz. Righteous and Holy; so much also is hinted in the word[ renewed] v. 23. And be renewed in the spirit of your mind: Implying that man had such a frame of Spirit once. He was created after God in Righteousness and Holiness of truth, that Image of God which is in some measure, renewed or restored in the Saints; see also Col. 3.10. Those spiritual endowments, wherein a man comes nearest to God, that it appears God is his pattern,( as to be Righteous, Holy. Be ye holy, for I am holy, saith the Lord) these must needs be most properly Gods Image, this is to be made partakers of the Divine Nature, or of a God-like Nature,( though Gods Essence, and Attributes are incommunicable) to have those qualifications, which are the fairest representation of Gods perfections, which can be seen and found in any Creature.  
By the way, what a lustre is here put upon Holiness, to commend it to us? Gods Image principally consists in this; would you be like God? Be holy, as he is holy. Though you cannot be as holy as he is, with an[ as] of equality; you may, and ought to be holy as he is holy, with an[ as] of Similitude, and the more holy, the more God-like. No wonder, that the Saints are called the excellent ones in the Earth, Psa. 16.3.  
But what prodigious wickedness is it for any to scoff at Holiness? He that mocketh the poor, reproacheth his Maker: How much more he that scoffs at purity? What a Diabolical disposition is that, which cannot but express an Antipathy, and Indignation against Holiness? surely they are very ill affencted towards their Prince, that cannot endure to see his Picture, but will disgrace and throw dirt upon it.  
2. Another Question here is, whether the Image of God in Adam was natural, or supernatural?  
Ans. Here the Sociniaus take away the subject of the Question, as we understand it; They understand no more by the Image of God, than that dominion man had over the inferior Creatures; denying, that Adam had any such thing as Original Righteousness, holding that he was created in a middle state without any moral rectitude, or righteousness, which should more incline him to good, than evil. So some of the Popish Schoolmen would have man created, in puris Naturalibus, meaning without Grace, Holiness, or Righteousness; but the Scripture hath determined otherwise, God made man upright.  
And that Righteousness or uprightness concreated with( him, though if we take an Estimate of it, from what man is now since his fall, it is to be called supernatural, as being quiter above Man's Nature now corrupted, by Sin, and not to be attained to by the power of Nature,) Man is restored to it only by supernatural grace; yet considering man in his primitive state, as he came first out of Gods hand, it was Natural to him; Not as following from his very Nature, Essence, or Faculties, Physico modo, nor as an essential part or property of man, naturally considered; nor only as perfecting, or adorning Man's Nature, as Bellarmine grants it may in this respect be termed Natural. But as not above the Condition of Man's Nature at first, though it be above corrupt Nature; yet it was not supra naturam integram, above Man's Nature as at first. Nay it was conditio Moralis Naturae illi debita. It was a moral endowment or perfection some way due to man, considering the end for which he was made. Not due by way of Merit, but of condecency, or congruity to Gods wisdom and goodness( as some express it) As the Natural Faculties of understanding and will were due to him, if God would have any reasonable Service from him. And if God had not conferred on man at first this moral Rectitude of mind, and will, together with his being( without which man was not fitted to aclowledge, serve, obey, and honour his Creator) he must needs have missed of his End, for which he made man a reasonable creature, and not a bruit; so this work of his had not been very good. The Creation of man little to his praise, if he was, made to serve God, and not furnished with sufficient abilities to serve him. Suppose man created at first without Original Righteousness, and do you not thereby impute folly to his Maker? Is not this to impeach the Wisdom and Holiness of God? Yea, how could the Psalmist so much admire what the Lord had done for man at first, making him a little lower than the Angels, Psal. 8.5. when if he was made without true wisdom and understanding, he was little better than the beasts that perish, Psal. 49.20. And let it be considered whether the want of holiness and righteousness in a Creature capable thereof, but not sinful; and consequently whether to suppose man created without the same, be not to make God the Author of Sin. Vacuitas Justitiae Originalis malum quoddam est, privatio Scil. summi boni. Num igitur paenae vel culpae? Si paenae: cujus peccati? Si Culpae: cujus personae Thes. Salmur. de. stat. Adam. ante laps. Sect. 22. p. 195. vide etiam Sect 21. So let it be considered, whether to deny that man at first had Original righteousness, be not to suppose Natural concupiscence( which is now in every one contrary thereto) to be from God and Nature, understand pure Nature) and therefore good in itself, not sinful, carnal, inordinate, concupiscence, or that propension in men to things forbidden is natural indeed, speaking of Man's Nature, as it is corrupted by the Fall; yet it was not natural speaking of Man's Nature, as it was at first before he fell. Though as he had a body, he was inclined to things of sense, yet the Sensitive appetite was in perfect subjection to the higher powers of his Soul had he attended to hold the same in subjection. It was his Sin to suffer the sensitive appetite to rebel and rule in him. But had there been any such thing as inordinate, concupiscence or Rebellion of the sensitive appetite against reason, in Man's pure Nature as it came from God, this supposed, there would be a necessity of holding with the Papists, that the Motions of the same were not Sin, any more than hunger and thirst; otherwise we should make God the Author of Sin.  
Again, attend to this Argument, to prove that Adam was created with Original Righteousness. Either Adam was created righteous, or unrighteous, or in a middle state betwixt righteous& unrighteous, one of these you must hold. But certainly he was not created unrighteous; for that were again to make God the Author of Sin. That would be to say, God made man unrighteous, contrary to plain Scripture, and to the common sentence of all that are right in their senses, neither could he be in a state of Indifferency betwixt righteous and unrighteous; because man a reasonable creature was bound to be righteous, as soon as ever he had a being. And the least deflection in this Nature from the Rule of righteousness, would be unrighteousness in him. It is impossible to conceive that man should be in medio negationis here, neither righteous, nor unrighteous. And further, if we suppose man set in such a state by God, still this foul and horrid consequence would follow, that God was no more the cause of Man's holiness and happiness had he stood, than of his sin and misery, when he fell: That he should no more have owned any praise and thanks to his Maker, had he chosen and persisted in the way of righteousness; than he can justly charge God with his sin and perdition.  
But thus I hope it sufficiently appears, that Adam had Original Righteousness concreated with him, and connatural to him. This Original Righteousness was then Natural, as opposed to Supernatural. It was not above the Condition of Man's Nature then, but requisite for the state, wherein he was, and the end for which he was made. Again, this Original righteousness in Adam was Natural in another respect, as opposed to what is merely personal.( as Original Corruption is Natural.) It should have ben derived and conveyed with his Nature to his Posterity; had he kept it. Holiness and righteousness is not Natural to the Saints, that have God's Image in some measure restored. It is supernatural to us now, that we cannot convey it to our Children. But it was Natural to Adam, at first, and and so, that had he not lost it, it should have been propagated to his posterity, as now the Corruption of his Nature is propagated.  
Ah! How is man changed from what he was at first? How are we sunk in our kind? Man was upright at first, but now miserable depraved, he that was little lower than the Angels by Creation, by his own degeneration is become like the beasts that perish. Of all our losses the loss of Gods Image; this, this is the greatest. A loss ever to be lamented. The Crown is fallen from our heads, woe unto us, that we have sinned.   

Sect. 2.  
PROP. II. The Great and Glorious God being Man's Creator, it follows by necessary and undeniable consequence, that he is the absolute proprietor, owner, and disposer of this his Creature, Man's sovereign Lord.  
IT is he that hath made us, and his we are, Psal. 100.3. As there is a twofold reading of the words. In the Margin it is {αβγδ} ipsi, vel ipsius; though in the Text it is {αβγδ} non. He is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end of all things. All things made by him, and for him, Prov. 16.4. The Lord hath made all things for himself, 
{αβγδ}  ad responsum suum, as some render it. All his Creatures are to be as Servants at his beck, ready to answer to his call to do whatever he appointeth, or commandeth. We having received our beings from him, and moving, and having our beings still in him, therefore surely we owe to him, Omne quod sumus,& omne quod possumus, all we are, have, and can do, and ought ever to be at his dispose, and at his Command. An independent creature is a thing most abhorrent from reason, the greatest Monster that can be conceived, or thought of.   

Sect. 3.  
PROP. III. God having made Man a reasonable Creature, endowed with his own Image( as was shewed before) not only capable of knowing, but of yielding Obedience to the Will and Law of his Maker, Moral Obedience immediately becomes due, from such a Creature to his Maker.  
AN Obligation to obey our Creator, is a Natural resultancy from our Condition, as we are Creatures. He that gave being to us, hath undoubted Authority to give Laws to us. He that said what we should. Be, to him it certainly belongeth to say what we should Do.  
While Man is Gods Creature, 'tis impossible that he should not owe all possible Subjection and Obedience unto God his Maker. 
Est ordo immutabilis, ut creaturae Deo obtemperent.  He must first cease to be a Creature, or God cease to be his rightful and supreme governor, before this Obligation to obey God can cease. Though Creatures may forfeit their beings, God can never forfeit, or pass away his Right in his creatures. It's impossible that God should leave the rational creature at liberty, to take his own swing, to live as without Law. It is impossible that God should resign up his right to any creature to rule( as in his stead) without being at all accountable to him; he cannot cease to govern the world: for thus he should deny himself, and give away his Glory to others.  
Now what should we think of such Divinity as this? 
Mar. of Mod. Div. p. 154.  That Believers are not concerned with, nor obliged by the Law of God, as delivered by God Creator, but only as delivered and confirmed by Christ, or God in Christ, our Redeemer; That they are no more to look, at the Moral Law as in the hands of God-Creator, or as in the hands of Moses; but only as in the hands of Christ, to receive the ten Commandments only, as they are the Law of Christ.  
I cannot but look upon such Doctrine as very dangerous, tending to subvert the very foundation of true Piety and Religion. I take that to be very sound( Assemb. confess. of Faith, c. 19. Sect. 5.) The Moral Law doth for ever bind all, as well justified persons, as others, to the obedience thereof; and that not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also of the Authority of God the Creator, who gave it.  
Yet I grant, we are to receive the Law not only as delivered by the Creator, or as delivered by him immediately without a Redeemer; neither are we to receive it from Christ, the Redeemer only, as excluding the Authority of the Creator.  
True it is, We are under no Law here, but what is the Law of Christ, as being ( jure Redemptionis) the Universal King.( As Learned Mr. Baxter) The Law of Christ is, First, The Law of Nature-redeemed in his hand. Secondly, His peculiar super-added remedying Law. The former is now part of the precepts of Christ, and bindeth us to perfection, necessitate praecepti; though not medii, in regard of the pardoning promise. Yet this does not take away all Authority from God, as if the Law was quiter taken out of the Creator's hand, when it was put into the hand of Christ. We red Joh. 5.22. The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgement unto the Son. And yet in 1 Pet. 1.17. The Father judgeth without respect of persons, according to every mans work. Though he judgeth not executively, so as Christ does, who shall pronounce the Sentence in an audible manner; yet he judgeth Authoritatively, in, and with, and by Christ. The Father is not stripped of his right, and Authority of judging, by committing judgement to the Son. That is not the meaning of [ The Father judgeth no man:] but that he judgeth not himself alone without the Son, but with, and by the Son; so though the Law be in the hand of the Redeemer, yet it is not thereby quiter taken out of the Creators hand; It is not the Son only, that rules and governs by his Love; but the Father in, and by him. And let it be considered, whether the damned are not so under the Law of God-Creator, that all their hatred of God, and blasphemy against him, is sin? And when Christ shall have delivered up the Kingdom to the Father, whether the Saints in Heaven shall not be under the Law of God Creator? so that if they should not continue to obey perfectly, they should sin. And whether never till men come into the other world, they come under this Law of their Creator, or were they not under it before?  
That the Law of God as Creator should not oblige all men, as they are his Creatures, is a wonderful strange Paradox to me. If Gods Commands, as they are his Commands, do not constitute and determine Man's duty, and lay a necessary tie upon man to Obedience, then God hath lost his Authority over man( this is plain) or man is advanced above the condition of a creature. But do not the holy Angels obey the Commands of God, as the Commands of their Creator( Psal. 103.20.) and shall we think man is exempted from Obedience in that respect? Has man a privilege here above the Angels in Heaven? And what will be their duty to Eternity, to love, praise, serve, and worship God, and observe his pleasure, as being their Creator; can this be a sin, and weakness in believers; we red John 5.23. That all men should honour the Son even as they honour the Father: But they that hold the Law of God binded them, not as it is Gods Law, but only as it is the Law of Christ, would seem to honour him, not as the Father, but above the Father. And of whom doth the Apostle James speak, Jam. 4.12. There is one Law-giver, who is able to save, and to destroy: Is it not the same with him, that said, Do not commit Adultery, that said, Do not kill, Jam. 2.11. The same with him that gave the Law in Mount Sinai, where if you understand Christ, as God, you necessary include the Father. If you understand Christ, as Mediator, then you suppose the Law given in Mount Sinai, to be given from the hand of Christ, as Mediator.  
Now grant this, that the Laws and Commands of God are immediately constitutive of mans duty, or Obligatory, even because, or as they are the Laws and Commands of God,( and grant this you must, or you quiter overthrow the course of Nature, utterly confounded the order of beings, make the creature independent, and sui juris, Lord of itself, you deny Gods Dominion and Authority, and thereby race the foundation of all Religion, and cannot glorify him, as God, but rather deny him to be God.) But, I say, granting the commands of God, his Laws certainly binding to his creatures, even because they are his, and then( methinks) the dispute[ whether the Law of God oblige, as given by Moses] may be waved, we should agree in this( sure) that the Law of God, howsoever, or by whomsoever, promulged, and declared, is binding to his creatures. And therefore if the Decalogue, or ten Commandments given to Moses, and by him immediately to the Jews, be declarative of the Commanding will of God, as a Copy and transcript of the Law of Nature, that standing Law of perpetual right, comprehending the duty which God requireth of man, as man; it is for us, and all the men in the world, to look into it, to observe it, as well as it was for the Jews. It is the Duty of all men, who are Gods creatures, and his subjects, to use all possible means of coming acquainted with the will of God their sovereign Lord. And so far as the Writings of Moses and the Prophets, do reveal and declare the will of God concerning us, what he requires of us, and all men, as well as of the jews; so far we are concerned with what they wrote, as well as the jews.  
And whatever the writer whom I have had here last to deal with, saith of the Law-binding believers, only in the hand of Christ; yet he clearly confutes and contradicts himself in several passages, cited with approbation out of many sound Divines. I shall take notice of two or three. 
Marrow p. 11.  Perfect and perpetual Obedience was due from man unto God, though God hath made no promise to man( concurring with Dr. Reynolds) That Man being Gods Creature ( N. B.) by the Law of Creation he owed all obedience and subjection to God his Creator, which is all that I pled for. Again, he citeth Dr. Bolton, That the Moral Law was given of God to be a true and eternal Rule of righteousness for all men of all Nations, and at all times. 
p. 153.  Again he citeth the same Author, together with Mr. Perkins, saying, 
p. 155.  The ten Commandments being the substance of the Law of Nature Engraven in the heart of man in innocency; and the express idea or representation of Gods own Image, even a beam of his own holiness, they were to have been a Rule of life( N. B.) both to Adam and his posterity, though they had never been the Covenant of works.  
Now if by the Law of Creation man oweth all Obedience to God, and God hath given the Moral Law to be an Eternal rule of Righteousness, which should have been a rule to Adam and his posterity ( as they were Gods Creatures) though there had never been a Covenant of works; what follows, but that the Moral Law is binding to believers, as they are Creatures, and this is the standing Law of their Creator, though it is also further binding to us, as confirmed by Christ, and in the hand of Christ.  
And thus that distinction of a Threefold Law, viz.[ The Law of Works, the Law of Faith, and the Law of Christ,] as he explains, and applies it, may appear to be very weak and unprofitable; yea, unsafe; though he lays so great stress upon it, as to tell us, That so far forth as any man comes short of the true knowledge of this threefold Law, so far he comes short both of the true knowledge of God, and of himself.  
But, 1. One would think, that the Law of Faith( to speak properly) should be the Law of Christ; yet he distinguishes between the Law of Faith, and the Law of Christ.  
2. The Apostle distinguisheth betwixt the Law of Works and of Faith, Rom. 3.27. but never betwixt the Law of Faith, and the Law of Christ.  
3. I think the common distinction of a Covenant of works, and of Grace; or as others express it, The old Original Law, and the new Remedying Law, much clearer, and to better purpose.  
4. His opposing the Moral Law, as in the hand of God-Creator to the same Law as in the hand of Christ, and holding that believers are only bound by the Law, as delivered by Christ, is intolerable. It is granted, that we are not under the Law, only as delivered by the Creator, not under the Law of Nature, as merely created, or as given at first to man in innocency, but he opposeth those as contraries, which ought to be conjoined. As if we could not be bound by the Law, both as it is the Law of our Creator, and as it is the Law of our Redeemer; but are free from it in the former respect, if bound in the latter: This seems intolerable. For so it follows,  
1. That Believers are not redeemed unto God by his blood( as Rev. 5.9.) but rather redeemed from him, not to owe that subjection to him, which they did before.  
2. That through the redemption of Christ, they are advanced above the Condition of Creatures. For by the Law of Creation, as Creatures, they are bound to obey the Law of their Creator. But certainly Christians in being redeemed by Christ, do not cease to be creatures. I say you do not cease to be creatures, when you become Christians, nor does God lose the Right he had in you before, to require Obedience from you; but he hath now a further right in you. The old Obligation by your creation is not taken off, but still in force, when this new Obligation, by your Redemption is further added, and laid on you.  
3. According to what this writer lays down, it is the privilege of believers, not to have any after Sins pardonned, and remitted as to the guilt of everlasting punishment; but only as to the prevention, or removal of some temporal chastisements. They are under no Law, but the Law of Christ; and Christ's Law threatens no other penalty than Fatherly chastisement. 
Pag. 154. 199, 200.  That[ if need be] you shall be as sure of Temporal correction, as an Unbeliever of Eternal damnation. And to be corrected if need be, is not so much a penalty, as a mercy. I am sure, the contrary is sometimes threatened, as a sore judgement.[ Why should ye be smitten any more? I will not punish your daughters when they commit whoredom. Ephraim is joined to Idols, let him alone.] But however a believer must not conceit, 
p. 202.  that till his Sin be pardonned, he is liable to be condemned for it. So the matter is brought to this Issue, that for the Sins which a man commits after he believes, he hath no need of pardon, nor can be( with understanding) pray for the pardon of his sins, not only in that more famous sense, that we use the word[ pardon] in: But even in the lowest sense, wherein the word is ever used. He hath no need of pardon to free him from Condemnation, because no sin can make him liable to Condemnation. Again, he hath no need of pardon, to free him from Temporal chastisements; because it is not threatened, but when there is need for it; and when there is need for it, a sanctified across hath more of mercy in it, than an unsanctified Comfort, where a person is not by any Law liable to any punishment, such a person( sure) has no need of pardon.  
But I should think that believers as they are creatures, are bound to obey God in all things, and that Christ came not to take off the obligation to duty and obedience, but to take off the obligation to wrath and punishment. That their sins are properly sins, as against Gods Law, and deserve punishment, deserve hell in their own Nature, as well as the Sins of others. Only they have this relief by the new Covenaant, they shall not be condemned for them.  
Thus much of the third Propoposition, viz. Man being a reasonable Creature, he oweth Moral Obedience to his Maker. Now it follows.   

Sect. 4.  
PROP. IV. Therefore God rules and governs man after another manner, than inanimate things, and brutes, are governed. His Kingdom ruleth over all. Natural Agents are ruled by his power and providence. But man he ruleth also a moral Agent, by Precepts, Promises and threatenings.  
ANd if the Lord had not designed in the Making of Man, thus to govern him, then might not one use the Psalmist expostulation( though in another sense) wherefore hast thou made all men in vain? wherefore hath he endowed us with a Faculty of discerning right and wrong, good and evil? And why hath he given us a capacity to look backward to reflect on our ways and actions, a power of setting up a Iudgment-seat, within ourselves, to call ourselves to account? And why hath he given us a capacity of looking forward, to consider with ourselves whether our present course tends, why hath God placed such a power as Conscience in men, Conscience, I say to check, kerb, and restrain us from Sin, to spur on and quicken us to duty, to accuse, or excuse, to prophesy good or evil, to give Sentence for us or against us; and why hath God planted such affections in men, as Desire, Hope, Fear, all respecting some absent, remote, future good or evil! How is it, we can dread evil threatened, or have any hope of good promised, if it were not the will of God, that we should be governed, not as Bruets, that are lead on to things by a mere Natural instinct, without reason; but as rational Moral Agents, by such Moral means, as Laws, Promises, threatenings.  
And here again I cannot but enter my dissent, and declare my dislike of what that writer, with whom I had to do before, lays down so confidently, that a true believer is to obey; 
Marrow p. 209.  yea, does obey, without fear of Hell, or hope of Heaven. And so far forth as they eschew evil, 
p. 172. 176, 177, 178.  or do good, for fear of Hell, or hope of Heaven, their obedience is but slavish.  
Now I shall not say much here concerning the fear of punishment, because I shall have occasion to speak of that afterwards.  
And to prevent misunderstanding, I shall lay this down, That a true believer does not obey God merely out of such self-respect, as for fear of punishment, or hope of reward. No, he hath a true love to God, and a love to the Law of God. As the Apostle saith, Rom. 7.22. I delight in the Law of God after the inward man.  
But as he hath a love to God, and obeyeth in love, so he hath, and ought to have a love to himself too. And although gracious Souls in some holy raptures, have the Love of God so far prevailing in them sometimes, that for the present they would seem quiter to forget themselves, and to set aside all respect to their own Souls, as it was with holy Paul there, where( had it been possible) he could have wished himself accursed from Christ— Rom. 9. Yet it is not thus with them ordinarily, neither yet may we say, that so far as Christians look, and aim at their own happiness, so far they degenerate and act like Slaves, not like themselves. All love of the reward is not a mercenary love: but when men only respect the reward. Now a Child of God hath a love to his work, as well as to his reward, Gods commands are not grievous to him; but indeed this is grievous to him, that he is no more conformed to Gods commands. And were it put to such an ones choice, he would not desire any liberty to transgress them, but would have more power to keep them. But what a gross mistake is this, because men are not only to obey for fear of punishment, or only in hope of reward, to conclude thus, therefore they are not at all to regard either what God hath threatened, or promised.  
And if it were so, that men were not to obey with any respect to what God hath promised them.  
1. How great a part of Scripture is given to us in vain, but all Scripture is profitable— to make the Man of God perfect, and to perfect the Godly man, that he may be thoroughly furnished to every good work. Shall we think that God hath made so many promises in vain. That those great and precious promises in Scripture are but ciphers, and stand for nothing?  
2. Is it not horrible pride for men to think themselves more perfect than innocent Adam was, to conceit that they yield obedience unto God upon more pure and spiritual grounds and motives? This is evident, that the Law given to innocent Adam, was backed with a threatening, and a promise. And so it was his duty both to dread the threatening, and to have regard unto Gods promise.  
3. I can boldly say, that to have no thoughts of our own everlasting happiness, not to look at that, is such a strange piece of self denial as the Lord no where allows; much less does he command, or commend. Is it not contrary to such Scriptures as these, Seek first the Kingdom of God, work out your own Salvation— Lay hold on eternal life? It is a carnal Self-love, and self-seeking, which is mens sin and shane too. As what can be more absurd, and irrational, than for men to care for the body, but neglect their precious immortal Souls, to labour for the meat that perisheth, and not to be at any pains for that meat which endureth to everlasting life? To be wholly taken up with things present, things below, that are but temporal, not regarding the things above, which are eternal.  
4. And if true Believers are supposed to be of such a strain, as to obey without eyeing the promised reward at all; then it follows they are better than Moses, the man of God. For he had respect unto recompense of the reward. Heb. 11.26. And yet you are to observe, he is their commended for so doing. And this is made an expression, and effect of his Faith, v. 24, &c. Yea, this would seem to be an out-doing of the blessed Apostles. We run and strive to obtain a Crown incorruptible, 1 Cor. 9.25. we look at the things which are not seen, 2 Cor. 8.14. {αβγδ}. These are the marks we aim at. Yea, which I even tremble to mention, this would make Christians better than their Masters, would set the Servant above their Lord. Do we not red of Jesus Christ, that for the joy that was set before him, he endured the across, Heb. 12.2.  
5. How glorious a pretence soever men may have for their setting aside all respect to the promised reward; yet it is really and indeed a sinful slighting, and contempt of Gods Grace, Bounty, Goodness; so the Sadduces had their fair pretence, that God was to be loved for himself, which is a certain truth: but( mark it) this is not the whole truth. For God is also to be loved, served, for what he is, and would be to those that love him. We ought to love God, not only because he is infinitely worthy of love in himself( in regard of his own infinite excellencies, and perfections) but also because he is so loving, and gracious to, and such a bountiful rewarder of them that seek him, and love him. Where is the Mouth that dare deny, that God is even in this respect also to be loved, served, honoured of his creatures?  
6. Though men will sometimes talk at random, without weighing or considering what they say; yet the truth is, it is impossible that one right in his wits should not have a desire of his own everlasting happiness. And certainly it is very great rashness for any to make that a {αβγδ}, a distinguishing sign of a true believer, which would rather prove one not a man, or reasonable. The Service which God requireth of us, is reasonable Service; but it is unreasonable, when God hath revealed and propounded to us provable, everlasting happiness, that we should not believe it; or that believing there is such happiness to be had, and obtained, we should not most earnest desire, and indefatigably pursue and press after the attaimment of it. And what can sound more strangely than this, that it is not a Christians duty, but rather his Infirmity by patient continuance in well-doing to seek for Glory, Honour, Immortality, Eternal life?  
7. What is the happiness of Heaven, but the most full and glorious enjoyment of God? That to obey in hopes of Heaven, is indeed to obey and serve God for himself. Are we to seek after the enjoyment of God in every Duty and Ordinance, as when we pray, hear, &c. Is his presence to be sought on earth, and not much more to be desired in Heaven? Much more I could say here, but I hope this may satisfy: All is not Gold( Sirs) that glisters; nor all those Notions Gospel Doctrines, which many pretend to be so.  
What is here said, I hope may help( through Gods blessing) to deliver some poor doubting trembling Soul out of one great snare, that some, who mean well, yet being unwary lay before them.  
Certainly, I should tremble to think of making this the Touchstone to try my own, or your Faith, by, scil.[ Doing what the Lord requires, without any hope of Heaven, or eyeing of the promised reward.] You may follow virtue( holiness) & virtutis amore,& mercedis amore, both from a love to virtue itself, and to the reward of virtue, so much I think is implyed in Rom. 6.22. Ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life. And to follow after holiness, as that without which we cannot come to the enjoyment of God, and happiness, is to attend to the Scripture direction, Heb. 12.14. and therefore cannot but be safe. If holiness be the way to happiness, by Gods appointment, and happiness the end of holiness; then certainly we ought to follow after holiness, not only for its own sake; but also for the tendency it hath to true and everlasting happiness. And though there be a truth in it, that virtue and goodness is a reward of itself, and to be loved for itself; yet it is not true, that where this is, a man desires no other reward, looks no further, Heb. 10.35. Cast not away your confidence, which hath great recompense of reward. This Consideration should move us to continue in faith and holiness, that there is great recompense of reward; That to quicken and encourage ourselves, on in a way of holiness and obedience, by the thoughts of what the Lord hath graciously promised thereunto, this is( you may clearly see) according to the Scripture; and the other way, wherein men pretend to do all out of pure love to God, without any regard to their own happiness, is a being religious and holy above the Scriptures. But certainly they overshoot themselves, that pretend to an higher way, a more spiritual and excellent way, than that which is shown us in the Scriptures.   

Sect. 5.  
PROP. V. It is evident and undeniable, that sundry of Gods Laws( comprised in that which is called the Law of Nature) are of Moral, perpetual right, and equity, commanding what cannot but be mans duty, requiring such things, as have an unchangeable goodness and comeliness in them. Forbidding such things as have an unchangeable horridness and odiousness in them. Some things are good, and some things are evil in their own Nature, and therefore are so perpetually, invariably, necessary; that it is impossible that a righteous and holy God should not command the one, and prohibit, and condemn the other: Such precepts( as some well observe) depend on Gods righteous Nature, rather than on his sovereign Will.  
THerefore upon the Question, whether God at any time hath dispensed with the Law of Nature, or with any purely Moral precept, I should incline to those that say( notwithstanding those Instances that are brought seemingly contrary) The Law of Nature was not dispensed with, no change in the Law; only their was a change in the matter or Object, and that immutatio materiae made by God not as legislator, but as Dominus, as Proprietor, or Owner. That when God commanded Abraham to Sacrifice his Son, he might do it from the absolute Dominion he hath over all mens lives; and if Abraham had Sacrificed him upon God's command, it had not been Murder. but the highest Act of Obedience. The Israelites taking away the egyptians Gods; when God had altered the property of them,( as Lord and Judge proceeding against the egyptians in justice, as against Delinquents that had forfeited the same, and making over( by his free donation) the right and title to them to his people; I say the Israelites possessing themselves of what was no longer the egyptians, but indeed their own, by Gods disposition and free gift) this cannot be accounted Theft. And may it not be thought, that according to an Equitable construction of the Law: Such Instances, or Cases as these, were no more prohibited, than works of Piety, Mercy, and Necessity are forbidden( in the Law) on the Sabbath day( compare Exod. 20.10. with Matth. 12.5.7.)  
Thus the Matter, or Object, about which the Law was conversant, may be changed, when yet the Law itself, is not changed, but as obliging as ever.  
Again, some commands there are in the moral Law, the very matter whereof is unalterable( the foundation never ceasing or changing) as some Instance in the Three first Commandments of the Decalogue. Thus it is Man's duty for ever to fear, love, believe, serve, honour God. Thus it cannot but be horrid wickedness, for any one to blaspheme, or contemn God; to doubt of his truth, power, &c. Now this is of Immutable Equity, that what is Morally good, and cannot be otherwise, should be commanded, and the reasonable creature bound to it; that what is morally evil, and cannot but be evil, should be forbidden. And to affirm that God may cease to command, or approve of what is so intrinsically, necessary, everlastingly evil, is to set up his absolute sovereignty in such wise, as to justle out his infinite goodness, purity, and holiness; that is, to set his glorious Attributes at variance one with another. But certainly the Judges, and Rector of all the world can do, and command nothing, but that which is right. Plutarch had rather men should have said, Nullum esse Plutarchum, quam malum esse Plutarchum; That there was no such man as Plutarch, than that Plutarch was a wicked man; and so he held it worse, De Deo male sentire, quam Deum esse negare, to entertain any wicked opinion of God, than to deny God. This is( no doubt) a very monstrous conception of him, to imagine that he should not will, and command virtue and holiness; or that he should not utterly disallow of 'vice and wickedness. 'tis part of the Charge brought in against the wicked, Psal. 20.21. Thou thoughtest that I was altogether such a one as thyself: But( says the holy one) I will reprove rhee for it, Well therefore let this be laid down, as an everlasting truth, that there are some things which God can no more deny to be Man's duty, than he can deny himself. There are some precepts of unalterable force, and obligation, never to be repealed, abrogated, or dispensed with. The Lord can no more dispense with mens acknowledging, loving, reverenceing Him, that these should not be their duty, and the contrary sinful and damnable in their own Nature, than he can deny his own Divine goodness, and infinite perfection; so he can no more approve of what is evil in itself, than he can do evil, or be evil; he can no more approve of mens lying and deceit, than he can lie, or deceive men Himself. He can no more approve of Atheism, profaneness, hypocrisy, Pride, Envy, Malice, Covetousness, and the like; than he can change, or cease to be what he is, an holy God of purer eyes than to behold iniquity.   

Sect. 6.  
PROP. VI. To the unchangeable Law of Nature, God( our sovereign Lord) may add what Positive Laws his Divine wisdom judgeth meet, whereby to try his Creatures Obedience. And there is no positive precept of His, given to Man, but Man is immediately bound to obey it; even by the Law of Nature, which requires this in general, that we obey God in all things.  
THe Law of Nature( as we have heard) in special enjoins what is good, or forbids what is evil in their own Natures.  
Positive Laws are conversant about things neither good, nor evil in themselves, things of a middle Nature; which yet become Good when commanded of God, and evil when forbidden. Because it is good to obey God in all things; but very evil and sinful to disobey God in any thing. The goodness of God would never command any thing evil in itself. And what the Lord commandeth though indifferent before, yet being commanded( in regard of his sovereign Authority and Dominion) it becomes a necessary duty. As what he forbiddeth, though lawful enough before; yet being under a Divine prohibition, it becomes sinful. Of such purely positive precepts we find this one given to Man in the state of Innocency for the trial of his Obedience, Scil. this [ of not eating of the three of Knowledge of Good and Evil,] whether any more are to be found, that were purely positive, and given to Man in that state, I know not.  
And amongst all those Commands which our Lord Jesus Christ hath laid on his followers in the Gospel; some Inquisitive men have been able to discover no more than two( to wit, concerning Baptism and the Lords Supper) that are merely positive institutions. And these two appointed not only to try our Obedience; but for other high ends, and gracious purposes, to be Seals of the new and better Covenant, and special helps and furtherances unto Christians( through Gods blessing upon the due use of them) as means of promoting both their Grace and Comfort, and a strong engagement on them to Duty and Obedience. So that they are not mere Arbitrary impositions, showing only the will and Authority of him that appointed them, but also pledges of his Grace and favour towards us; and are our great privileges: As the promise in the New Covenant speaks forth the wonderful Grace of God, so doth his instituting and annexing these Seals, to strengthen our faith in what he hath there promised.  
As for the Law of the Sabbath, there hath been enough written, to prove, that it is not a purely positive precept. When God hath given us all our time, to Question, whether a considerable part of it be not due to his special solemn Worship, and Service, seems very unreasonable. Nay, it would seem to be but Occasional, viz. in regard of man's present state in this world, the necessities of the outward man, that call him to earthly employments, that he hath an allowance to follow these secular employments, when if it were not for this, his whole time would be due to God's more immediate Service; as the Saints in Heaven keep a perpetual, everlasting Sabbath.  
Now what is noted here, may show us the wonderful goodness of God towards us in Gospel times, in freeing us from the Law of Ceremonies, from such a multitude of burdensome impositions as the Jews were under. How easy is the yoke of Christ, compared with the yoke which was upon the necks of the Jews? So we may see here the reasonableness of the Christian-Religion. The Lord requires nothing of us in the Gospel, but what is indeed good in itself, or at least good for us; imposeth nothing on us in the Gospel, merely to show his absolute Authority over us: Even the Positive Institutions of the Gospel are such as speak his gracious condescension towards us.  
Again by the way, we may here reflect upon the Tyranicalness of the man of Sin. What a multitude of strange impositions hath he brought into the Christian Church, as envying Souls that liberty we have under the Gospel.   

Sect. 7.  
PROP. VII. God our supreme and absolute Lord and governor, to manifest his Divine Goodness and benignity, together with his sovereign Authority and Greatness, was pleased to his Law, given to Man at first, to add and annex a gracious promise of Future life and happiness.  
HEre( Gen. 2.17.) is implyed upon condition of his obedience, the promise of eternal life, whereof the three of life was a sign, Gen. 3.22. Ainsworth.  
To encourage men to yield free Obedience, God bound himself by his free promise to reward it.  
Here take notice of Gods gracious Nature. He would not rule man with rigour, but made the yoke of his Subjection as easy as man could possibly expect, or reasonably desire. Besides the strong Engagements that lie on the Creature to obey God, the Lord was pleased to give man all encouragement that might be.  
There is a Question, what life was promised unto Adam?  
Whether to live still in statu quo, to be continued upon earth in that happy state, wherein he was created, or whether after some time he should not have been advanced, and translated to a more glorious estate in Heaven?  
Now some very worthy and Judicious Divines( I confess) are for the former, denying the latter. And others I know look upon the Decision of the Question( which way soever it be decided) as an unprofitable speculation; but I cannot so slight it, because if it appears to be an Heavenly happiness, that was promised, it further sets off the Grace of God towards man, which must needs have laid him under a greater obligation to obedience, and thankfulness; so it doth the more set forth and aggravate man's sin and ingratitude, whom such cords did not, could not bind. Besides that it may be of some service against Socinians, who would have Adam subject to death by Creation, not by Sin.  
Now to the Question.  
1. Those Divines that hold a life of happiness upon earth, only promised unto Adam, do grant the promise of life to be implyed in the threatening of death: Now if the threatening [ dying thou shalt die] did not only intend a privation of the life which Adam then enjoyed, but everlasting punishment in hell; Then it seems to follow, that the life here implicitly promised is not to be understood only of the continuation of that life, which Adam lived in paradise, but of everlasting life in Heaven.  
2. That eternal life which the Scripture opposeth unto death ( the wages of sin) Rom. 6.23. there is none that questioneth, but it is a life of happiness in Heaven.  
3. Was not the Earthly paradise a type of Heaven, and the three of life there, a type of Eternal life in Heaven( Rev. 2.7.) Had Adam the type of Heaven, and was it not to teach him what to expect, to look after a life of happiness in Heaven? unless you will say, Those were Types only since they were lost, not while they were, and might have been enjoyed.  
4. Was not innocent Adam as capable of Heavens happiness, as believers are now? And would it not be strange, that though he had kept his Integrity and innocency, yet he should never have enjoyed the chiefest Happiness and perfection, he was made for, was created capable of.  
5. If Adam had continued innocent and obedient, may we not suppose, he should have had as many Children descending from him, as have sprung from him since the fall, who might have stood and been happy with him: Now whether seemeth more improbable, to suppose a translation of men up to Heaven ( Successivè,& suo ordine) by degrees and in their order, as it should please God to transtate them; or to suppose their continuance all together upon earth, where if we should suppose all the Generations of men that have been since Adam already existent here together; 
Answ to Bishop of Rochest. Letter. p. 86, 87.  it is hard to conceive how the Earth should bear them all, though Dr. J. T. would hence conclude that Dissolution of Soul and Body should have been, if Adam had not sinned, which I can see no Reason to admit. Yet( as he says) the world would have been too little to have entertained those myriad of men, which must in all reason have been born from that blessing of [ Increase and Multiply] which was given at the first Creation, and to have confined Mankind to the pleasures of this world in case he had not fallen, would have been a punishment of his innocency.  
Another Question here, whether it was of Grace, or of Justice, for God to promise Adam life, and happiness( as he did) upon his continued Obedience?  
Answ. Of strict Justice it could not be; because he might have promised less, yea, might have promised nothing at all de futuro, without any Injustice. I readily grant it inconsistent with Justice to punish, or afflict an innocent Creature eternally. Yet Justice does not require that the service, or obedience of a Creature be rewarded with everlasting, that is, infinite happiness. True it is, if Adam had tarried as he ought, doing well, he should have been accepted, continuing his Obedience, he might have expected the complacential Love of God his Creator towards him, so long as the Lord was pleased to continue him in being; that while he was innocent, God would look on him as such, not hold him guilty. but it sounds strangely to say, God cannot make a rational innocent Creature, and annihilate, or unmake it again, if he pleaseth. To hold that he is bound to perpetuate the being and happiness of such a Creature, till( by some misdemeanour) it comes to forfeit its being and happiness; is to deny that God hath such power over his Creatures, as the Potter hath over the day, as Mr. Ball of the Covenant, p. 273. withdraw that voluntary Covenant, and who doubteth not but that had the Creature kept his Innocency a Thousand years, God was free to have amnihilated him.  
Indeed God cannot be injurious to his Creatures, because of his Essential Justice, which is instead of a Law to him, and is himself, neither can he be beholden or properly indebted to his Creature; because of that infinite plenitude of perfection in himself, to which all the Creatures in the world, can make no Addition; as also because of his right and propriety in his Dominion and Authority over his Creatures. Thus Innocent Adam could never by the most perfect, unsinning Obedience have merited in a strict sense; that is, in the way of commutative Justice, the continuation of his life and happiness. While he did only pay the debt, which was indispensably owing to his Maker, it is most unreasonable to think, he could this way oblige God to him, make that God to whom all was due, his Debtor. Again, as( if Adam would merit) what he gave to God ought to have rationemindebiti, it must not be due before( which was otherwise, he could give to God no more than his own) so it should also have rationem Lucri, be some way profitable unto him, at whose hands he would merit. But who hath given to him, and it shall be recompensed to him again, Rom. 11.35.  
Again, we may cast in this as Overplus, here was no proportion betwixt the work and the promised reward, what proportion betwixt a finite Creature's giving up its self to the Service of its Maker, and God's giving back himself to be everlastingly enjoyed? What proportion betwixt a Creature's obedience, continued for a time, while he was in a probation-state, and God's remunerating it with happiness, 
Coccei de faed. p. 35.  beyond time, even to Eternity. Turpis Error est, promissiones dei nisi proportione officii. It was congruous to the Divine goodness indeed to promise so much to an innocent, and obedient Creature, it was a promise worthy of him that made it, though his Creatures Obedience could not be properly worthy of that which was promised.  
So I conclude it was not of strict Justice, or natural Equity, but of grace and bounty, that God promised to Man's finite Service, and Obedience already due, a future, everlasting, infinite reward.  
Now if innocent Adam could not properly be said to merit the promised reward, though he had performed unsinning obedience, how absurd is it to talk of the Saints meriting ex condigno by their imperfect Obedience, Exod. 20.6. showing mercy to them that love me, and keep my Commandments. All that God doth for such, is of his mercy. Yet I do not deny, but that if Adam had obeied perfectly, it had been rewardable at the Bar of Gods distributive, legal Justice; as the obedience of the Faithful is rewardable at the Bar of Crace; but neither in the way of commutative Justice.   

Sect. 8.  
PROP. VIII. Gods promising to man life and happiness, upon Condition of perfect Obedience [ Do this and live] was his part of the Covenant with Adam.  
GOd in his Covenant holds forth the way how his Creatures might be sure of his favour, and attain to the Fruition of him. And thus God's Covenants are not like Mens Covenants( as one notes) Homines enim de mutuis beneficiis: Deus de suis foedus facit. Men that Covenant one with another, aim each at their own advantage; but God in Covenanting with his Creatures, does not expect any benefit, or advantage by them, but does it to show how willing, and ready he is to communicate his benefits to them.   

Sect. 9.  
PROP. IX. Innocent Adam as he was bound, so he could not but accept of the Terms, or Condition, upon which God proposed, and promised the perpetuating of his happiness. And thus Man consenting to Gods terms, God and Man were formally and actually in Covenant.  
A Mutual Engagement of parties, is all that is essential to a Covenant. This is the difference betwixt a Promise, and a Covenant.  
A Promise is that which bindeth one party singly; A Covenant is that wherein both parties are mutually bound.  
To the Covenant betwixt God and Man, it was no way necessary, that Man should indent with God, or make his own Terms; No, he was bound to accept of such Terms as it should please his Lord and Maker to set down, and offer; whatsoever God required of him, would bind him immediately, as a Law, without his consent, or liking of it. And before Man could have the liberty of making his own Terms with God, he must first satisfy and take off that Obligation on him, as a Creature to obey his Creator in all things, which Obligation a Creature can no way possibly take off, or be freed from, while he is a Creature.  
Thus in the Covenant betwixt God and Man, God is to propose the Terms, and Man is obliged to accept of them, as proposed by Him.  
In the first Covenant, the Covenant of Works, where the Condition was perfect Obedience; the Lord required no more, than what was due from Man, though God had not promised any further favour thereupon.  
Now the condescension being wholly on Gods part, in offering to enter into Covenant, and the benefit accrueing, or likely to accrue, being solely unto Man, it could not be just or reasonable, that Man should withhold or deny his consent.  
Thus Man at first was taken into Covenant with God, Man engaging to obey God in all things; 
Faederatio constat stipulatione& promissione.  and God engaging amply to reward his Obedience, in an endless life, and felicity. We should not once doubt( as the Socinians) whether Adam was under any Law but this, [ of not eating of the three of Knowledge of Good and Evil,] The Moral Law being written in his heart, and that in so fair a Character, that he needed not to have delivered it to him either by word, or in writing.   

Sect. 10.  
PROP. X. Though the agreement and consent of both the parties was enough to constitute the Covenant; yet for the further solemnity and ratification of it, the Lord was pleased to appoint a visible sign or signs, as a seal annexed to it.  
AS paradise and the three of life, was to confirm the promise, that if Man obeied, he should live and be happy; and some would have the three of Knowledge to confirm the threatening, that if he sinned he should die. The former to signify the reward of Obedience, the latter to signify the punishment of disobedience. The one a Sacrament of life, the other of death. But this which is said concerning the three of Knowledge is more Questionable. Fuit arbour haec non proprie Sacramentum, 
Coccei de Foed. c. 2. Sect. 19. p. 20.  neque vitae neque mortis, said signum dominii& subjectionis,& materia explorationis.  
The Signs and Sacraments, God hath used to annex unto his Covenant, have been such as represented the blessings promised in the Covenant. This is evident in the Covenant of Grace. And that Pradice was to signify Heaven; the three of life to signify eternal life to Adam, seemeth very plain; Heaven being called by the name of paradise in Scripture. And the three of life so called( as some good Expositors have noted) because it was to be a symbol and Memorial to Adam as oft as he tasted, or beholded it, of his receiving his life and happiness from God, that he had not these in: and of himself. His eating of this three was to be an Acknowledgement of his dependence upon God for life and happiness, and, Se non propriâ virtute, said Dei unius beneficio, vivere,& perpetuò victurum, si obediret, &c.  
Here by the way, observe, God thought not Sacraments useless to man in innocency. Yet some amongst us think themselves above Sacraments, and Ordinances, those means and helps God hath appointed under the Covenant of Grace.   

Sect. 11.  
PROP. XI. Being agreed about the thing, there can be no great Reason why we should contend much about the Name.  
THis first Covenant is called Foedus Amicitiae, a league of Friendship, by way of contradistinction to the new Covenant, which is Foedus reconciliationis inter inimicos; The first Covenant was made with Man in the state of Innocency, when God and Man were Good-friends.  
Again, it is called Foedus operum, the Covenant of works, sinless works, and obedience-every-way-perfect, being the Condition, the thing stipulated, and required in this Covenant.  
Again, it is called Foedus Naturae, the Covenant of Nature; as the following Covenant, Foedus Gratiae, the Covenant of Grace. Yet there seems to be some doubt, whether it be so rightly called the Covenant of Nature: Though the Law of Nature bound man to obey his Creator in all things, which was the same that the Covenant of works bound him to, that we must say the preceptive part of the Covenant was natural; yet I dare not say, that the Promissory part of the Covenant was so, that God was bound to promise all he did upon Man's Obedience, or bound to promise any thing at all; I say, it was not juris Naturalis, that God should make such a promise, I dare not say, that there was an intrinsical, natural, necessary connexion betwixt a Creature's Obedience, and everlasting life and happiness; so that God had not been just, if ( supposing) Adam's Obedience continued a 1000 years, he had not thereupon confirmed his Creature in a state of endless happiness. If it had been injustice to have denied such a reward to Man's Obedience, so that Man might have concluded upon it from a common natural principle( as that God cannot be unjust) then there was no need to have promised it, or to have entered into Covenant about it; would God have made a Covenant to do that, which his Essential justice bound him to? If he was not bound in Justice, so to reward his Creature's Obedience, then it was his free goodness( or Grace) to promise, and Covenant to do it.  
Now let it be considered, if it was thus of Gods Grace, and condescension to enter into the first Covenant with Man, if it was doing more than he was bound to, then I say, let it be considered, whether it be fair for any to censure him, as if he had been over-rigorous, had he dealt with any according to the terms of that Covenant, or that God could not have held men to it.   

Sect. 12.  
PROP. XII. God by Covenanting with Man, had a further right in him, a new title to his Service, and Obedience. First, he might have commanded man jure creationis, as he was his Creature, had this Covenant never been; Again, he may command him jure foederis, vel foederationis, upon Account of the Covenant betwixt him, and his Creature.  
THis new right was accumulative unto, not destructive, or exclusive of the Former right. Man's being obliged de novo to obey God, by what the Lord promised in the Covenant to do further for him; cannot take off, or cancel that Obligation on him from his Creation, from what God had done for him already.  
That I may say here( without contradicting the Apostle) The Law( i.e. the Law of Nature) which was in force( at least, in order of Nature) before the Covenant, the Covenant did not disannul it. My meaning is, Gods condescension in Covenanting with Man, did not derogate, or take off any thing from his Authority as Law-giver, Gods Law was still binding as a Law, as the Law of our Maker; otherwise it would follow, that Man being taken into Covenant with God, he could not properly be guilty of disobedience, no disobedience but is a repugnancy against the Law, or will of a Superior, whom we ought to obey. But in case the Law of God should lose its Authority and obliging force, to Man in Covenant with God, then a Man doing contrary to his Law, could only be charged with treachery, falseness, breach of Covenant, or ingratitude( as one equal may have occasion sometimes to charge another, who hath no Authority to command, or call the other to account.) Where there is no Law, there is no Transgression.  
But Adam's offence, his breach of Covenant, was properly disobedience, Rom. 5.19. That the Covenant made with Adam, did not take from the force of the Law, which he was under, as a Creature; but indeed added this further aggravation to his sin, that it was not barely the transgression of Gods Law, but the violation of his Covenant: as it was an affronting of Gods sovereignty and justice,( a dreadful thing indeed) so it was a notorious slighting of Gods wonderful condescending love and goodness, shameful ingratitude, to be abhorred.  
But this is a principle which it concerns us all to be very clear in, that God in entering into Covenant with Man, did not set aside his Autherity, did not cease to be man's sovereign; no verily, while Man is his Creature, God cannot cease to be his rightful governor, or the Law of God cease to bind Man to obedience, even because it is the Law of his Maker.   

Sect. 13.  
PROP. XIII. As a clear and certain evidence, that God in Covenanting with man, did not lay down his sovereignty and Authority over him; He annexeth to his Law or Covenant the just threatening of a dreadful penalty, Death in case of disobedience. In the day thou eatest,( sinnest) dying thou shalt die.  
AS God hath first of all jus praecipiendi, a right of Commanding. So if his Commandments are not in every thing obeied; he hath thereupon jus puniendi, a right of punishing. Where due Obedience is denied to a Superior, much more where it is denied unto him, who is the supreme, God over all, punishment is justly exacted, and righteously inflicted by him.  
Now there is a Question, when God threatened death to Adam, if he disobeyed, what kind of death it was, whether the same kind of death was threatened under the Covenant of works, as under the Covenant of Grace?  
Ans. I suppose the same kind of death threatened under both Covenants. If the same kind of life and happiness was promised under the Covenant of Works, as is promised under the Covenant of Grace, we may in reason conclude the same kind of death, and punishment was threatened in both Covenants. But the former would seem true as we heard before.  
Again, what think we? Do any suffer, as adjudged to death by the Covenant of Works? If we suppose any sinners in the world proceeded against, and punished, as Violaters of that Covenant, we red no where in Scripture of two different Hells prepared, one for those that are guilty of breaking the first; the other, for such as are guilty of breaking the succeeding Covenant. We find the same Vengeance threatened to them that know not God, and to them that obey not the Gospel, 2 Thess. 1.8. The Sinners of sodom suffer the Vengeance of Eternal fire, Judge v. 7. the same vengeance which is threatened to Sinners in Sion. I say the same punishment for kind( i.e. Hell-Torments) though not the same degree of punishment; but if a different degree of punishment should make a new kind of punishment, it seemeth to follow, that, since of those that sin against the Covenant of Grace, some sin more heinously than others, more openly and desperately than others contemn it, and therefore shall be thought worthy of much sorer punishment( Heb. 10.29.) so there should be divers kinds of punishments; for the breakers of the Covenant of Grace, which I know none that will assert.  
Again, I suppose it will not be denied, but believers are delivered by Christ's satisfaction from the condemnation of hell. As I suppose, it will not be affirmed; that Christ satisfied for the penalty threatened in the Covenant of Grace, properly as there threatened; but for that which was threatened and due to sinners under the Covenant of works. And so will it not follow, that the condemnation of Hell was threatened, and due to sinners under the Covenant of works.  
Only, one thing seemeth to make against this, viz. Supposing a temporal death or separation of Soul and Body, to be one thing included in the threatening here, [ dying thou shalt die] it would seem that the resurrection of the body is a proper fruit of Christ's death, and resurrection, 1 Cor. 15.21, 22. And if there was to have been no resurrection of the body, had not Christ dyed and risen again, then it would follow, no such punishment could be threatened at first, as is now threatened to unbelievers, who are to be punished everlastingly both in Body and Soul.  
Ans. The fore-mentioned Text seems to speak of the resurrection unto life, the resurrection of those that are Christs, v. 23.  
Again, though Christ Mediator, be the cause of the resurrection of all( both just, and unjust) at the last day; yet it follows not, that there had been no resurrection, if Christ had not been given a Mediator; we know what he saith, Joh. 5.22.27. All judgement is now committed to the Son of Man, yet surely sinners should have been judged, though he had not been incarnate, had not been the Son of Man. Qui resurrectionem impiorum Christi m●rito attribuunt, ignorant hominem pro peccato& temporalem,& aeternam mortem in toto supposito perferendam debere, Coccei de Foed. c. 2. Sect. 2. p. 46.  
Another Question, whether the truly righteous man is awed with the threatening.  
Ans. That the righteous ought to be awed with divine threatenings is very plain from hence, that righteous Adam was to make use of this threatening, to keep him from sin. And the best of Saints while upon earth, are short of innocent Adam, many degrees below him, being renewed and sanctified but in part, having but( as it were) a first draft of Gods Image, which Adam had complete; But,  
1, Some will say, Believers have no need of the threatenings to keep them from sin.  
Ans. What are they greater than our Father Adam, more perfect than Adam was in the state of integrity. He had need of the threatening, and his not attending to it so as he should have done, was a cause of his, and our sin and ruin.  
Again, why are there so many threatenings in the Word, directed to believers in special, if they are not to be headed, and if such have no need of them? surely, the spirit of wisdom speaketh not in vain. Therefore said the Wisdom of God, Luk. 11.49. what the written word says, that the wisdom of God says; so God in his infinite wisdom, thought it needful to awe his people with threatenings, and not only to feed them with promises. Then can it be any other than folly for any to think, his threatenings needless, Rom. 8.13. If you live after the flesh you shall die. This is spoken to those, of whom he saith v. 15. Ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, Heb. 10.38. The just shall live by Faith, {αβγδ}, but if he draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. Parallel to Ez. 18.24 Heb. 10.26, 27. If we sin wilfully after that we have received the Knowledge of the truth, &c.  
Not that these Texts will prove the apostasy of Saints; but only that upon supposition of their total sinal apostasy, they should perish even as others. If you can suppose a Saint to fall away finally, I will suppose that Saint to fall into condemnation, and to perish everlastingly; and such threatenings are to caution them, as means appointed and blessed by God, to prevent their total apostasy, and consequently to prevent their Perdition too. And as one observes well, there is a threatening virtually contained in every promise. As when it is said [ Whosoever endureth to the end shall be saved.] It implieth that whosoever doth not endure, and hold out to the end, shall not be saved. But further some will say, Adam it's true might fall from the Condition of the Covenant of works, and so fall under the curse and threatening, but believers cannot fall from the condition of the Covenant of Grace, that they need not fear the threatening, seeing they cannot fall under it.  
Ans. That a Believers standing is surer than Adam's was, it is not because he is stronger in himself, for he is much weaker than Adam was; but because he hath those props and supports, which Adam had not in the state of his integrity. There is Gods immutable purpose and promise to uphold him, Christs undertaking, and interceding for him, &c. But as the Lord hath promised, the Elect shall persevere; so he hath provided means in order to it,( as was hinted before;) so he keepeth his people close to himself, not only by working love, but also by putting an holy fear in their hearts, Jer. 32.40. I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me. This may be set forth by a comparison which Mr. Rutherford hath, thus, As a Child in his Fathers Arms threatened to be cast over a sharp rock into the Sea, may fear, and cry out for fear, and yet believe such is his Fathers love and compassion, that he will not throw him into the Sea, that the threatening is not intended to be executed; but to cause him to take faster hold, and clasp his Arms about his Father's Neck.  
2. But here some again will say, to be awed with threatening, is slavish; this is from a Spirit of Bondage, and contrary to our acting out of love.  
Ans. We may see the contrary in Adam; He was to fear the threatening, yet was not of a slavish spirit, notwithstanding the threatening against disobedience, yet he obeyed in love too, while in the state of Integrity. So the Apostle says, 2 Cor. 5.14. The love of Christ constraineth us, and in the same Chapter v. 11. Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men. To Act only from fear, is the property of a slavish spirit indeed; but so on the other hand, to cast off all fear is the property of a vain, secure, and wanton spirit. But observe, we do not think it enough for men to act in Religion only from fear; you never hear us say( as the Papists) that Attrition, as distinct and separate from contrition; that sorrow for sin merely for fear of hell, without any sorrow for it, as an offence against God,( if accompanied with confession to a Priest) is enough for ones Salvation.  
If that Text of the Apostle John 1 Epist. 4.18. be objected.  
Ans. Love here is not perfect, as it will be in the world to come.  
2. By Fear( which love is said to cast out) the Apostle meaneth not a reverential fear of God, which quickeneth unto duty, and helpeth to compose the heart aright in duty; but a slavish fear. Or,  
3. He meaneth not the Fear of God, and of his wrath or displeasure, but the fear of man, of man's frowns, of man's rage. Indeed this hath torment in it; and greatly disquieteth, and disanimateth men, in whom it prevaileth.  
Briefly to dispatch this point, are we allowed to fear any thing? If any thing in the world be to be feared, surely then Gods wrath is to be feared, coming into the state of the damned, to be for ever deprived of, shut out of God's presence, and laid under his burning Indignation for ever, is a thing to be feared: not that believers should conclude positively, and absolutely of their falling into condemnation( for there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus) but upon supposition; thus, If I live after the flesh, I shall die. If I should draw back from Christ, it would be to my own perdition. If I should wickedly depart from God, forsake him, he would cast me off for ever. Pray Sirs think of it: Hath not God  told us so much in his Word, and are we not bound to believe the truth of what he there declares? And if we are bound to believe these things to be true, are we not exceedingly to dread least they should be verified in us; how should we dread that course and state which we are sure to perish in, unless the Word of God prove false! And thus to apply the threatenings of the Word, is a good way to prevent the evil threatened. Such an Application of Divine threatenings tends to promote an holy care, which is a necessary duty, rather than to beget slavish fear, that Soul-misery. They that quiter cast off these reins, which the Lord hath laid on us, to kerb, and keep under our Corruptions, I should look for no other than that they would soon wax wanton, and kick against God.  
One consideration more, I cannot pass by; Divine threatenings show us what Sin deserves, and the greater sense we have of our danger by sin, the more we shall prise redemption by Christ. The more we understand the desert of sin, the more we shall come to know our Obligation unto God, for pardoning grace. They are clearly mistaken therefore, that would not have believers hear the threatenings of the Word. Surely they do not understand themselves, that think this is a way to damp that Child-like love, the Gospel requires, rather a due consideration of Gods threatenings against Sin and Sinners, would help to raise a believers love to God, and Jesus Christ, and blow it into a greater flamme, Mary loved much, because she had much forgiven. And the more we see what sin deserves, the better we shall know what it is to have sin forgiven, and the more we shall apprehended, what an Obligation lieth on us, to love God that pardoneth our iniquities, and to love Jesus Christ, a dear Redeemer, upon whose account they are forgiven.   

Sect. 14.  
PROP. XIV. From the fore-going Proposition( to look no further) it evidently appears, the Covenant betwixt God and Man was not inter pares, said impares, not betwixt equals, or persons equally un-engaged to each other, and so that it was not a pure Covenant, but mixed, partaking also of the Nature of a Law.  
HEre was a Law with a threatening, as a Covenant with a promise. And the matter being betwixt God and his Creature, betwixt the most absolute sovereign, and his Subject, it could not be otherwise, unless the Majesty of Heaven and Earth would have laid aside his Crown and sceptre, except he had given away his Supremacy, and ceased to be the Rector of the world.   

Sect. 15.  
PROP. XV. This Covenant therefore which God made with Man at first, was the perfect, adequate Rule, both of all which God then required of Man, and of what Man might expect from God. It contained the Rule of Man's Obedience, and the ground of his hopes.  
THe Stipulation or condition required, was no less than the whole duty of Man, obedience to the will of God in all things.  
The promise of life( belonging to this Covenant) included in it all good, agreeable to Man's present state, and everlasting happiness, at the end of Man's probation-state.  
The death threatened upon Man's disobedience, we see explained in part, what it was in those evils, which sin hath brought upon the world of Mankind, manifold miseries, in this life we feel; we all naturally fear, and look for temporal death. ( The living know that they shall die.) And which is inconceivably more, sin subjected to all miseries Spiritual, and Eternal.  
Thus the first Covenant determined both of Man's duty, and of his Condition, as to felicity, or misery, as to life or death, according as he performed, or failed in his duty. If he was Obedient in all things, then he was sure of life and happiness, if he failed in any the least point of Obedience required, then he could look for nothing, but to have the threatened penalty inflicted. Some find, as soon as Adam had sinned, he was afraid, and hide himself, Gen. 3.20.  
But whether the threatening of the first Covenant did properly belong to it, as a Covenant, or a Law, I leave to others to determine.   

Sect. 16.  
PROP. XVI. In this first Covenant there was neither need of, nor place for a Mediator.  
FIrst I say, there was no need of a Mediator here, at the making of this Covenant, God and Man were very good friends.  
Again, there was no place for a Mediator here. The condition required in this Covenant being perfect, personal obedience. If Adam obeied not in his own person, this Covenant is broken, irreparably broken. And thus it becomes impossible that ever Man should attain to life and happiness by this Covenant, if once he faileth in the least point of duty required of him, upon the least breach of Gods Law, he is immediately sentenced to death by the Tenor of this Covenant. And there is no thought of escaping condemnation in this case, except it please the Lord( of his infinite grace and mercy) to come upon new terms with Man.  
There is a Question whether Christ be not a Mediator on the behalf of the Angels that have kept their station.  
Some suppose Christ a Mediator to them, though not for reconciliation( that they aclowledge were needless, because there was never any breach betwixt God and them.) Yet for confirmation; but there is no probability, that I can see in that opinion. It appears altogether improbable for the like reason to that now mentioned, upon which it will be granted, Christ is not to them a Mediator of reconciliation; viz. they need not such a Mediator. For if after such a trial as the Lord would please to make of the obedience of Angels and Men, they were to be confirmed in their happiness and obedience for the future, to make good the promissory part of the Covenant of works, then there was no need of a Mediator for confirmation either of Angels or Men under the Covenant of works. His Creatures confirmation in a state of happiness( upon their good carriage in their probation-state) was Gods part of the Covenant, what he promised, and would have effected; no need of any to undertake for Gods part of the Covenant.  
That this was Gods part of the Covenant is clear. The creature was not to expect confirmation in happiness, without performing the condition on his part, that is, carrying obediently, and as a creature ought to do in all respects towards its Maker in viâ, or in its state of probation. And this condition being performed, God would never have failed to perform the promise on his part; that is, to confirm such a creature in patriâ.  
And to say otherwise, that a Mediator was necessary for confirmation under the first Covenant, without whom, Man, or Angel could not persist in Obedience, is interpretatively to deny, that they were created upright, and with sufficient Abilities to have kept upright; which is to suppose their fall was from a debility of Nature, from a want of some inward principle and help necessary to their standing, and not from the ill use of the liberty of their own wills. And this consequently denies the goodness of God, which he vouchsafed to these his creatures in special; denies what he did for them, making them after his own Image, and casts the fault upon God, that they fell necessary, not being created with ability to stand.  
Again, suppose Christ a Mediator for confirmation, to undertake on the Creatures behalf, to help them to perform the condition; then it would seem strange, that Man was not confirmed. What? was Christ wanting, negligent, or unfaithful in his office? Surely no, therefore that Man was not confirmed, it seems sufficient to clear it, that Christ was not intended of God to be a Mediator for confirmation to Angels, and Men, under the Covenant of works.   

Sect. 17.  
PROP. XVII. God was under no tie, or Bond, to make Man immutably holy.  
IT is very unjust, and unreasonable, for any to complain, that God did not set Man in such a state at first, from whence he could not fall. That Man was endowed with such power at first whereby he might have stood, and had stood( had he not been shamefully wanting to himself) this is,( no doubt) sufficient to vindicate the honour of his Maker, though he gave him not that special grace, from which one cannot fall.  
It is too much for a creature to be immutable in its own Nature. To suppose such a thing of Man, so far as this property and perfection reacheth, is to make Man equal unto God. Therefore though Man was created holy, yet was he mutable, his holiness such as might be lost.  
Now when God made Man upright, and then put him upon the trial, whether he would stand upright, he did no injury to man at all, Quum Deus hominem permisit sibi, injuriam non fecit homini, said gloriam suam asseruit sibi. Jun. Surely the Lord had done his part, enduing Man's soul with knowledge, righteousness, and holiness, engaging Man to himself by so many favours, as by so many strong Bands, which his goodness and bounty had laid on him, promulging, and making known his Law, the Rule Man ought to live and walk by, backing the same with a dreadful commination, to warn and deter him from sin, and with a very ample promise to excite and encourage him to obedience. Thus no moral means were wanting, or denied to Man's preservation; what could Man reasonably have desired that God would do more for him; If now man miscarrieth, the fault cannot be in his Maker, but in himself. Had he used that power, and those means given him, as he might, and ought, he had been for ever happy. God did not deny him any thing, which was congruous to his present state. I know not how we can say that there was Gratiae substractio,[ nam, ut velvet constanter non peccare, Nullam Adamus acceperat, 
Lapsus desertionis, non desertio lapsus causa fuit.  ut autem posset non peccare si velvet vel nullâ indiguit, cum peccandi ratio in volendo sita sit, vel eâ non substractâ potuit peccare. Thes. Salmur. de laps. adam. Sect. 25. p. 203.] God did not take from Man any ability to perform obedience, given him in his Creation; but only gave not in( as he was not bound) a new supply of further grace.  
Certainly, it was no hard or unjust thing, that God should try his Creatures obedience, who stood obliged to him by such wonderful ties and engagements: and if God would try Man's obedience, Man is supposed not to be in a state of Impeccability: It would not have become the Divine Wisdom to give Man a Law purely for trial whether he would obey, if it was impossible for him to disobey.  
Thus indeed while Man was Viator, in a probation state, we must grant, he had a power to obey God in all things, and it was also possible for him to disobey.  
Yet observe this, there was no evil inclination, no propensity to sin in Man before, as is found in him now since his fall. That pronity, which is now in us all, to what is forbidden, is certainly sinful: that should we suppose any inordinate concupiscence natural to Man at his first Creation, it would infer, that he came sinful out of Gods hand. This would be to impute folly to our Maker, and make God the Author of Sin. In the regenerate there is a lusting of the Flesh against the Spirit; but in Adam there was no such lustings, and contrary inclinations( while he kept his innocency& integrity) But his natural inclinations were in an absolute subjection to right Reason, and the Rule which God his Creator had given him. As Aquinas says well, the Act of the concupiscible faculty is only so far to be accounted natural, as it is subject to right reason, when it rebels and transgresses the bounds of reason, then it is contra naturam, and Vulnus naturae. So this was not in Man before he sinned. That natural inclination in Man to eat of the fruits in Paradise, was Physically or Naturally Good, morally indifferent, neither good nor evil. It was in his Nature as convenient to it, being to live on the fruits of the Earth. But when God by a special positive Law had restrained Man's Natural liberty, forbidding him to eat of such a fruit, what might have been desired Naturally, and innocently before, cannot be desired now without sin; because Man is bound to subject all his desires to the Divine Will and Law. That he had a natural power of eating the forbidden fruit, was no way culpable, or sinful; but that he exerted this power against Gods Law.  
Now though a good account may be given, why Man was not created immutably good, he being at first in Statu viatoris, non comprehensoris, a probationer for Heaven. And therefore his obedience being to be tried;( though he had power to perform sinless obedience, yet it was also possible for him to disobey) yet it will not follow, as( Corvinus would have it) that glorified Saints, who are comprehensors, because they are fully confirmed in good, cannot properly be said to obey, or to be under any Law.[ Ut vero liberum arbitrium tollatur ab eo, cvi lex praescribitur, etiam fieri non potest, quia ubi illud non est legi locus non est, Quare etiam sequitur, iis qui jam in bono sunt confirmati, proprie Legem ferri non posse, neque item eos Deo obedire propriè dici posse, &c. Corvin. Censur. Anat. c. 6 Sect. 1. p. 101.]  
This is strange Divinity sure; though it would seem needless that such as are confirmed in a state of happiness and perfection, should be under any Law merely for trial.( It would be Actum agere, to give them such a Law, which the wisdom of God would not do.) Yet it will not follow, that therefore they are lawless. And if they cannot be said properly to obey, 
Ergo, inquam, is non vult qui non potest non velle; tu ergo, ne vis quidem tibi esse been, quia non potes velle tibi esse Male. Nam quae voluntatis eadem est obedientiae ratio, &c. Camero defence. c. 12. p. 205.  why are we directed to pray, that the will of God may be done on earth, as it is in Heaven? why are they made patterns of obedience to us? But suppose that Angel, who was sent Acts 12. to deliver Peter out of Prison, had refused( Jonahs like) to go, when God sent him; would it not have been proper disobedience? And what reason can be given, but that his going upon Gods errand was an Act of Obedience?  
And this further, Jesus Christ who was anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows, to whom God gave not the Spirit by measure, was certainly as much confirmed in Good, as any Saint or Angel in Heaven can be; yet who can have a face to deny, that he truly obeied? Obedientia non est necessitatis, said libertatis. says Corvinus. We say though obedience cannot be both free and forced, yet it may be free and necessary too. It may be in some respect necessary, and yet most free. Saints and Angels in Heaven cannot but love God, they see so much excellency and amiableness in him, for which they must love him to eternity; and yet they love him most freely. As on the contrary, the Devils sin necessary, can do no other, through that insuperable Malice and Wickedness which acteth them, yet they sin freely. According to Corvinus his way of reasoning, the weak, imperfect, obedience of believers, should be more perfect obedience, and more worthy to be called obedience, than that of Angels, and Spirits of just men made perfect; which soundeth strangely. As if that obedience was not most perfect, that had most of the will in it. But I forget myself.   

Sect. 18.  
PROP. XVIII. God( as he was not bound to prevent Man's fall) had holy, wise, and good ends in permitting him to fall.  
THus he takes occasion of manifesting his punitive justice, holiness, and hatred of sin; as also of displaying his rich, and free grace, his wonderful mercy and compassion towards sinners, upon Man's breach of the first Covenant. He bringing in a new and better Covenant, God hath concluded all under sin, that he might have mercy upon all. In the Creation he shew'd his power, in bringing something. Yea, a world of Beings out of nothing; here he manifests his wonderful goodness, in bringing good out of evil; yea, the greatest good out of the greatest evil.   

Sect. 19.  
PROP. XIX. The Sin of our first Parents in eating of the forbidden fruit, how light a matter soever it may seem to many; yet was indeed exceeding heinous, full of dreadful Aggravations.  
THe blasphemy of Pope Julius the third is ever to be abhorred, who said, since God was so angry with our first Parents, propter pomum, for an Apple, 
Szeged Spec. pontiff. 75.  he had more cause( being his Vicar) to be angry propter pavonem for a Peacock.  
But that Man broke with God for so small a matter, it made the sin so much the greater; 
Quo levius Mandatum eo gravius peccatum.  and the easier it was for him to have obeied Gods command, the more inexcusable was his disobedience. That he had more power than ever Man had since, to have resisted the temptation, his sin and transgression appears hereby to have been the more wilful. So the dignity of his state makes his sinful fall the more shameful. As the wonderful favours God had heaped on him, added the odious slain of ingratitude to his sin of disobedience. And what a causeless jealousy and base distrust of God was here, even of that God, who had been so good and kind towards him; that he despised Gods counsel, trusting to his own inventions, and shifting for himself. And what horrible pride, Heaven-daring Ambition, in affecting to be as God? wherein appeared his wretched discontent at the good condition God had set him in, over-looking that glory and honour the Lord had crwoned him with, and envying at the Divine perfection of his Maker, what a notorious contempt was here? a contempt of his sovereignty and Authority, slighting the prohibition given him, a contempt of Gods power and justice, slighting the commination; a contempt of Gods bounty and goodness, slighting the promised life and happiness. And as Samuel said, Disobedience is as the Sin of witchcraft, and as the iniquity of Idolatry; was there not Atheism, Infidellity, Blasphemy, Idolatry here; in believing, yielding to the Devil, preferring his lying suggestions before the Word of God? Besides sensuality, indulging his appetite contrary to Gods command; yea, Murder, and the greatest cruelty towards his posterity, doing what in him lay, to ruin and undo them for ever.  
These with many other sins, were contained in the first Transgression.  
One more I must not let pass un-named, viz. that it was a direct breach of Covenant. Breach of Covenant with God, horrid perfidiousness, not merely the breach and transgression of Gods Law; but also the violation of his Covenant, and so a shameful requital of Gods gracious condescension. Had it been an enemy or a stranger, that had carried it thus, there had been less of wonder& strangeness in it; but that a friend, and a confederate should deal so treacherously with God, may not Heaven and Earth be astonished at this?  
This( I say) was a direct breach of Covenant with God, an irreparable breach of that Covenant. An utter renouncing of it. As it was a breach of that Law, God had given to be the Test of Man's obedience(& perfect obedience was the condition of the first Covenant) so it was as an open profession of disobedience, 
It was the transgression of that precept which God had given for the trial of Man's obedience, and so was an absolute denial of subjection,& renouncing of obedience; as the observance of it had been an open profession of submission and due obedience. Ball of Meditation. p. 213. 214.  and declared renouncing of his Covenant.  
I know it is a great Question, how our first Parents could so strangely overshoot themselves?  
But that they did so, is plain, and out of Question. Some Question whether the sin of pride, or incredulity was first in the fall of our first Parents? But methinks we must conceive them something declined from God, and their duty, before they could be guilty of either that pride, or incredulity. So it would seem that incogitancy, and not retaining God in their thoughts, as they ought to have done, was the first step to their ruin. That through incogitancy, they came to be seduced by the Serpent, drawn into error, and incredulity, and so to an inordinate appetite after the forbidden fruit, and next to eat, which was the completing Act of their sin.  
What need then have we all to look well about us, watch and pray, that we enter not into Temptation. Give not the water a little passage, least it prove as a breach of the Sea, that cannot be repaired, that fire which at first one might stamp out with his foot, that spark which might be put out with a wet finger, being let alone, doth soon become a devouring flamme, consuming all before it.   

Sect. 20.  
PROP. XX. This is the direct and dreadful consequence, the sad and woeful effect of Man's sin and breach of Covenant, that thence forward he can lay no claim to the promise, but immediately falleth under the curse and threatening annexed to it.  
THe condition of the Covenant of works being nothing less than perfect obedience, one sin violates it on mans part, as well as a Thousand. Thus by one Act of disobedience man quiter forfeited all his right and title to all good and happiness, which he had in present possession, or hoped for in regard of Gods promise, by one act of disobedience he brought himself under the curse. That according to the Tenor of this Covenant, after once he had sinned, he could no more expect any good at Gods hands for ever. And thus by sin man ruined himself, cast himself out of Gods favour, of a friend made himself an enemy, became subject to Divine wrath and vengeance, to all the miseries of this life, to death spiritual, and temporal, and eternal.  
Here I may speak something to the Question, How far the Covenant of works is abrogated?  
Ans. Here I fear not to assert, that we are all still bound to what the Covenant required; that is, to obey perfectly, though we are not bound up to it; that is, so bound up as to fall under the Sentence of Death unavoidably, and to have no hope of happiness, if we do not obey perfectly. I say we are not thus bound up to it; because there is a new Covenant set on foot. But that in some sense it is still in force, we must all grant, as roundly and confidently as some assert the repealing, and nulling of it.  
1. As concerning the preceptive part, what God required of Man in that Covenant; it was no other than the Law of his Creation. As we are Men, as we are reasonable creatures, it is our indispensible duty to obey God in all things. I say by the Law of Creation we are bound to obey God in all things; and that Law continues to oblige us, so long as we are creatures.  
Some tell us believers are freed not only from the condemning, 
Mar. of Mal. die. p. 148.  but from the commanding power of the Covenant of works. Now I would ask such, Is it not every Man's duty still to obey God in all things? If so, then by what Law? Doth the Law of Faith insist upon perfect obedience? Or is not this the demand of the Law of works? Though we are not bound to keep the Law of God in all things necessitate medii, as the condition of life, yet we are bound necessitate praecepti, so that we sin whensoever we transgress it in any thing: And either believers are under the commanding power of the Law, requiring perfect Obedience,( though Christ hath power again, according to his superadded Law of Grace, to suspend and take off the Penalty) or they do not sin, in not yielding perfect obedience, and so need no pardon. Where there is no Law, there is no transgression; and where is no transgression, there needeth no pardon. So Christ should not have procured pardon for the sins of believers, but rather this privilege of exemption from the strict Obligation of the Law, that what are sins in others, are no sins in believers. If it be said, the Law requiring perfect obedience is still in force, but only as it is in the hand of Christ. I answer, it did not cease to be Gods Law, in becoming the Law of Christ.  
But thus you must say, the preseptive part of the Covenant of works( being the Law of Man's Creation) is still in force. It being eternally the bound duty of a Creature to obey its Maker in all things.  
2. As to the minatory part as it threatened death to every sin, determined and declared the punishment due to sin and sinners.( And a threatening as a threatening, doth no more, doth not necessary predict the event) we must say this is still in force, or deny that sin now deserves legally what God threatened unto Adam. It is a very gross mistake for any to think that the sins of believers do not deserve hell and wrath. The reatus simplex, a dueness of punishment to sin, is ever inseparable from sin. And so by the Old Original Law, that punishment is due to the person of the sinner Only here steps in a Remediant Law, a Law of Grace, that says, if thou art a true believer, if thou art one that truly repents, the punishment is not to be inflicted upon thee; for Christ hath satisfied, and his satisfaction God hath accepted for thee; But I pray mark it, if the old Original Law be not in force, to charge guilt upon us, we have no need of a discharge in, and from the Gospel, what need of a discharge from that, which no Law can charge us with? so we must say, a believer hath no sins to be pardonned. For a pardon does necessary and essentially import a dissolving of the Obligation to punishment. Now there can be no Obligation to punishment, where the penal Law is no more in force: And where there can be no Obligation to punishment, there cannot be properly any dissolving of that Obligation; and so properly there can be no pardon.  
Thus you see to what issue the matter is brought, if we should deny the old Law in force, as threatening death to every sin, scil. consequently we deny that there can be such a thing as pardon.  
3. As to the promissory part of the Covenant of works, or Law of Innocency, that cannot be said to be abrogated, but only ceaseth, cessant capacitate subditi, since the fall Man is no capable subject. For a Man to be a sinner, and yet to be capable of claiming life and happiness by the Law of Innoceucy, is indeed a plain contradiction. Such a Law, or Covenant, when once the condition becomes naturally impossible( as learned Mr. Baxter somewhere noteth) transit in Sententiam, it ceaseth to promise in this case, and instead of that, passeth Sentence upon men. Yet cannot sinners blame God, that righteousness and life come not this way, as if the failure was in his promise. No, it is in themselves, their not answering the condition; when Christ( a capable subject) came, the Law of innocency justified him, and so it would justify us, supposing we were, and did all, which the Law requireth. So much seemeth to be implyed in that speech of our Saviour to one that desired to justify himself,( saying, what shall I do to inherit Eternal life, whereupon, Christ to give him enough, referreth him to the Law,[ This do, ( obey perfectly) and thou shalt live.] Luk. 10.25.28. not that any man ever did, or ever can attain to life and happiness by the works of the Law. Certainly, the Romanists are quiter mistaken in the scope of our Saviour's speech here, who cry out, Hear, O ye Lutherans, the Lord Christ saith not, creed& vives: said, fac hoc, Not[ believe, and live] but[ do this, and live.] Daring wretches, that to stablish their own proud Opinions, would have Jesus Christ to contradict himself. Rather the design of our Saviour's speech was to convince a man of his own inability, to save himself. And yet this seemeth to be implyed in it, that if there was any one in the world, 
Lex non falso salutem promittit suis cultoribus, si quis plene observet quicquid. Mandat. Coelo.  every way such as the Law of God requireth to be, suppose such an one as is failing and deficient in nothing, and then [ Do this, and live] would entitle him to life and happiness, such an one should attain to happiness without Christ, or pardoning grace, in as much as he had no need of a pardon. But seeing it is naturally impossible, that sinners( and we are all sinners) should ever attain to the condition of the Covenant of works, which is full conformity and perfect Obedience to Gods will, therefore that promise is indeed ceased as to us.  
But to think that Man's sin could abrogate the Covenant, that God had made, is very unreasonable. As if a man could satisfy and discharge a Bond by forfeiture. As if a subject by breaking the Law, could make himself lawless. He may thereby deprive himself of the benefit& protection of the Law, it's true, but cannot exempt himself from the Duty of Subjection to it. Again, to think that God would abrogate it, and take Man's failing in his duty, as a ground of excusing him from his duty, is as unreasonable. Then might one not have said, Noli ergo imperare, now give up the Government of the world.  
Again, to think that Christ would give himself, and improve his interest for the abrogation of it, would be an unworthy reflection on him. As if in his office and undertaking, as Mediator, he had not carried equally, indifferently consulting the Interests of both parties, with the like real tenderness. As if he had not been as true to his Father's honour, in preserving his right in, and authority over his creatures, as to his peoples safety; but did too partially incline to us, though the offending party.  
It was enough for the securing of the salvation, and happiness of his redeemed ones, that he procured a new Law of Grace written in his own blood, [ That all that believe in him should be justified, and saved,] notwithstanding the old Original Law continued still in force.  
Nay, I tell you Christians, this does advance and set forth the free Grace of God, and exalt the praise and merits of your Redeemer; that for his sake, your sincere, though weak, imperfect obedience is accepted, from whom yet perfect Obedience is is as due to God, as from any; and that for his sake your sins are pardonned, which are as properly sins, and as truly deserve hell and wrath as the sins of any.  
Thus I say, there is no reason to think, the first Original Law is made voided by the after remediant Law. For both may stand in force together; as that strict Law given to the Common-wealth of the Jews, for putting Transgressors to death; to which was superadded this Law of Grace, that in such and such cases the Law-giver, the Rector did admit of a Commutation, that upon offering a Beast in Sacrifice, the Transgressor's life should be spared ( though forfeited by the Law) Lev. 5.17, 18. So this Original Law, whosoever stands indebted to another, shall satisfy his Creditor, or be liable to an arrest, and to be cast into Prison, remains in force; notwithstanding we suppose such a relieving Law as this made afterwards, That if any person in Debt, shall serve in the Wars, &c. while they are so employed for the public, they shall be protected from any arrest. These instances may help to clear the Question I am upon, especially the former.  
Many think, that because the Law of works serves not to the same use and end, for which it was given to Man in the state of Integrity, therefore it must needs be abrogated, that we are no more obliged by it. Not considering that the reason why righteousness and life cannot come by the Law, is not any weakness in the Law, but our weakness and incapacity to fulfil it. The Law of Ceremonies indeed cannot justify, because of its weakness.( For it is not possible, that the blood of Bulls and Goats, should take away sins, Heb. 10.4.) But the Law of righteousness, which I am speaking of, were it not for Man's weakness, would justify. Therefore that we cannot be levied by the Law of works now, let us not lay the fault on the Law, but on ourselves.  
truly, I cannot but wonder at some, that would have this a Question of great difficulty, but of little moment whether the Law of works, given to Adam, continue in force to all Mankind; methinks it is of very great moment, so that if we suppose the abrogation of it, we give the Antinomian no little Advantage. And methinks it is very plain, that it must continue to bind Man( obedience to God in all things being no more than he is for ever obliged to, as he is a creature) though for non-performance of such obedience as that Law requires, God is not bound to Man by that Law.  
I conclude therefore the Law of works is still in force, that none of us can say, If we obey God sincerely, we pay him all we owe, he requires no more; we cannot say that our sins do not legally deserve Eternal death; but only that though the Law of God looks upon us as sinners, and condemns our sins, as well as the first sin of Adam, yet this we may pled against the Execution of the sentence, and condemnation of the Law. There is also a new Law of Grace, an Act of General indemnity and Oblivion which Christ hath procured, which God hath passed, that frees us from the curse and penalty of our sins, if we repent, believe, obey the Gospel, i.e. if we lay hold on the Grace offered to us, with an unfeigned desire and resolution to live and be, as this Grace that bringeth Salvation teacheth us.   

Sect. 21.  
PROP. XXI. When God threatened man,[ that in the day he sinned, or disobeyed, he should surely die, or dying he should die,] this will not prove the full execution of the threatening, was immediately to attend Man's first transgression; but that Death, and all miseries included in it, were immediately due by Law.  
THat he should be punishable. Illud[ morieris] non significat. Actum moriendi said debitum. As we must not understand the prohibition [ Thou shalt not eat] as a prediction or declaration, as touching matter of event. But the meaning is, thou mayest not eat, it shall not be lawful for thee; so neither are we to understand the threatening,[ in the day thou eatest, dying, thou shalt die] as a prediction of what should immediately come to pass. Nec enim statim mortuus Adamus est, 
Whittak. de Peccat. Orig. p. 39.  said statim tamen reus mortis factus,& morte dignissimus. When Solomon threatened Shimei, 1 Kings 2.37.[ on the day thou goest out, thou shalt surely die] the meaning is, thy life shall be accounted forfeited.  
Though I grant, as soon as Man had sinned, he became mortal, and began to die, yet the threatening, as a threatening, does not foretell certain matter of event; but only declare what punishment was due. And suppose the Death threatened here, was to have been immediately inflicted, as soon as our first Parents had sinned, then there had been no natural generation. Then the guilt and punishment had no way reached his Posterity; because so he should have had no posterity.  
Here you may observe a great difference between a threatening and a promise; he who hath a promise made to him, may lay claim to the thing promised; he hath a right by virtue of the promise. Men sometimes sue upon a promise, and Justice gives them the thing in kind, or value, the promise being proved; one is bound to do, as he promiseth, not always to do as he threateneth. There may be reason to relax the punishment, that was threatened. A Rector that hath power in his Laws to set down and determine what punishment shall be due to the Transgressors; he hath also power above the Law in some cases to respite, or take off the punishment; otherwise there could be no such thing as Pardon. No Rector can be said to pardon an offender, but when he remits the punishment legally due.  
Yet I grant, it becomes not the Wisdom of a governor to relax his Laws( supposing them good and Just) to remit the penalty lightly, or without good consideration; for so the Law would soon lose its Authority; Men would be emboldened to transgress, the end of Government would not be carried on. It is a clear case, that God the righteous governor of the world, would not remit the penalty without a most valuable consideration; as Christ must die in our stead.  
And one thing further must be granted, that sometimes threatenings do not only declare meritum paenae in peccante,& jus puniendi in comminante, a desert of punishment in him that offends, and a right of punishing in him that commandeth and threateneth; but also the irrevocable decree,& purpose of the Rector to inflict the said punishment. Thus God threatened Eli& his house, Ahab& his house; thus the sin& blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is threatened; and so all that continue finally impenitent and unbelieving are threatened: Such threatenings are not a mere Sanction of the precept, but a signification, or Revelation of Gods purpose, showing not only what he justly may, but what peremptorily he will inflict.   

Sect. 22.  
PROP. XXII. The Penalty threatened in the Covenant of works, was neither fully executed( for then all Mankind had been utterly ruined) nor absolutely remitted( for then none were liable to Death and Condemnation by that Covenant.) but relaxed.  
THe Penalty taken off in some part from Man in general; whence it is, that sinners, such as are under the Covenant of works, have some lineaments( as it were) of God's Image, some remainder, or remembrances of it still, and some common mercies. And the penalty more fully taken off from believers. And that upon most wise, and weighty Reasons, the satisfaction of Christ being a sufficient Motive, and the manifestation of Gods rich and free Grace, a glorious end of his so doing.  
Now whether the Reprival of sinners be a fruit of Christ's satisfaction, and whether they owe all their common mercies to Christ's Mediatory undertaking, I will not take upon me to determine; But that any of the Sons and Daughters of Adam are pardonned and discharged, that believers are justified and saved, this must needs be ascribed unto Jesus Christ, the second Adam, and his meritorious satisfaction.   

Sect. 23.  
PROP. XXIII. For, Adam's breach of Covenant was not only to his Personal prejudice; but so mischievous to all his posterity, that descend from him by Natural Generation, that it subjects them all to a state of sin and wrath.  
HAd he kept his Integrity he should have begotten Children, not in a state of sin, but in a state of innocency: The Image of God, that Original righteousness which was concreated with him, should have been conveyed and derived from him to his Children, together with other blessed privileges appertaining to that state. But when Adam by his sin, had deprived himself of Original righteousness, he could not derive that to us, of which he had deprived himself. Nemo dat quod non habet, he could not communicate that to us, which he himself had lost.  
I find some of great Name that deny the Covenant was made with Adam and his posterity, the better to deny Original sin,[ Though the Doctrine of Original corruption( as I conceive) will be found to hold true, abstracted from the consideration of that Covenant made with Adam. And a learned pen hath noted this, that many bring the Doctrine of Original sin into doubt by laying all upon Covenant Relation, 
Dr. J. T. Ans. to Bishop of Roch. p. 106.  and denying, or over-looking the Natural proofs.] If there had been such a Covenant( says one) it had been but equity that to all the persons interested, it should have been communicated, and caution given to all who were to suffer, and abilities given them to prevent the evil; for else it is not a Covenant with them, but a Decree concerning them. And it is impossible that there should be a Covenant made between two, when one of the parties knows nothing of it.  
But it is neither impossible, nor unequal to involve and include Children in Covenant with their Parents, when they understand nothing of it. They are parts and appendices of the Parents, and at their Parents dispose, before they know how to dispose of themselves. And who questioneth but in taking a Lease one may by Covenant bind not only himself, but his Children after him to certain Terms, which yet the Child knoweth nothing of? And did not that Covenant which Moses made betwixt the Lord, and the Children of Israel, Deut. 29. take in their little ones, v. 10, 11, 12. Yea, the Children that were to be born of them, v. 15. who were intentionally in Covenant, though not actually; yea, the very Law, and light of Nature teacheth men to Covenant for their Children, when they do but engage them to their duty, and may probably by that means, procure them some considerable benefit and advantage.  
As to that plea, [ It would not be equal, if the posterity had not caution given what they might suffer by the breach of the Covenant, and ability given to prevent the evil] that this is a mere flourish, a sound of words without any strength of Reason, is thus demonstrated, viz. This would make as much against Gods decree concerning Adam's posterity, as against the Covenant with him, and his posterity.  
Now it is granted on all hands( and this learned writer will not deny) that the Posterity of Adam have lost and suffered much by the fall. And may not one argue against Gods proceedings herein, just as he does against the Covenant with Adam and his posterity; saying, It had been but equal that caution should have been given to all who were to suffer, and abilities given to them to prevent the evil.  
But that you may understand what Man's condition is by Nature, through the fall of our first Parents.  
1. Take notice, that Adam by his fall lost his Original rectitude, and became universally depraved in the whole Man; see the blindness of his mind, together with crookedness of will, and disorder of affections, Gen. 3.8. When they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the Garden in the cool of the day, Adam and his wife hide themselves from the presence of the Lord God, among the trees of the Garden. And if they had not thought of God, till they heard of him, where was Conscience? In a dead sleep sure. And was not their understanding now darkened, darkened with a witness, when they thought to hid themselves from Gods presence among the trees? But whether can a creature flee from his presence? Again, how strangely were their wills perverted, and affections disordered, who now exceedingly dread, and cannot endure the presence of God; whereas, before they had sinned, he was accounted the chiefest good, they could not but have delighted in his presence before, as their highest happiness.  
And what was Adam's fall but a turning from God to the Creature, preferring the lust of the eye, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life before God and happiness; preferring a false seeming good before the chiefest good. 
V. Thes. Salmur. de Statu. hom. laps. Sect. 19, 20. p. 208.  Thus he changed his ultimate end: And having changed his ultimate end, he was wholly changed as to his Morals; there being no more of moral goodness in any means or end, that a Man propounds to himself, than there is of respect and subordination to the ultimate and highest end. And therefore when Man turned from God the chiefest good, to a false good, being lead away with his sensitive appetite,( through his own incogitancy, and the tempter's subtlety) there upon he became animalis home, wholly carnal; I say, thus he became a vain, sensual, carnal man. Hence came that woeful disorder into his Soul. All things turned upside down with him. The sensitive appetite,( which was the lower faculty, inferior to the will, and understanding, and to be ruled) came to rule in Man, the other powers loving and liking to have it so. Thus the nearest end of the lowest faculty( as things of sense) the things of the flesh, the having and enjoying of those things, became the last and highest end of the superior faculties. What horrible confusion was here brought into Man's Nature by sin? That if you look upon him in a Moral consideration, he was no longer such a Creature as God made him, but quiter another thing; though he had the same Natural faculties after his fall as before, yet the moral qualities of those faculties were not the same, but directly contrary. God made man upright, with an appetite in perfect subjection to right reason, with a clear understanding of the chiefest good, with a will sweetly closing with that good; but when through inadvertency( as I said before) he fell from God to a false good, all these faculties were immediately corrupted, and depraved, the rectitude of them quiter lost.  
If any one should say here, but as Adam when he fell, turned from God to the Creature, and to a false good; might he not of himself turn from that false good unto God again?  
Ans. No, not of himself, when he hath lost that rectitude of Soul, which is absolutely necessary to ones choosing God, and taking him for his last end and chiefest good; nor is the case alike: It is easy for one to fall, or cast himself down from an high pinnacle, not so easy for him to rise again, when by that fall he hath broken all his bones. 
Thes. Salm. ubi supr. Sect. 33. p. 211.  As it is observed, Haec rerum quae corrumpi possunt naturalis est Conditio, ut facile corrumpi, corruptae in integrum restitui vix unquam possint: This is the Natural condition of things which may be corrupted, that they may easily be corrupted, but being once corrupted, can scarce ever be restored to their perfection again. But of this in another place.  
2. Adam by his fall having lost his Original righteousness, and his whole Nature being corrupted, he begot Children like himself, destitute of Original righteousness, and so indisposed to all true goodness, but prove to all which is evil.  
That the corruption of Nature is propagated unto all, that naturally descend from him, is very evident. Adam had lost Gods Image, and was corrupted, and sinfully inclined, when he is said to have begotten a Son in his own Image, Gen. 5.3. observe, the Scripture opposeth the Image of Adam to the Image of God, Eph. 4 22.24. to the Image of Christ, 1 Cor. 15.47, 48, 49. what is Adam's Image, but the flesh, Joh. 3.6. the Old man, Col. 3.9. All men naturally bear the Image of Old Adam. Does not that prove corruption natural, and propagated to them?  
Again, how plain is that of our Saviour, Joh. 3.6. That which is born of the flesh is flesh. By this argument he there proves the necessity of regeneration, of a new birth, without which there is no entering into the Kingdom of God. For that which is born of the flesh is flesh, as Job 14.4. Who can bring a clean thing out of an anclean? The answer is, not one. No man can do this. So Rom. 5.19. By one Man's disobedience many were made( constituted) sinners.[ Many] Some would have the Apostle speak thus, cautelously, because that all simply and absolutely were not made sinners by Adam. Eve was a sinner, yet not made so by Adam's means; she was first in the transgression. Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was made Man; yet was not a sinner. But admitting these two special exceptions, the {αβγδ} here, these [ many] are as much as all, v. 12. The All here meant indeed, were many, and the many here spoken of were all. But the word[ many] seems to be used here, because it was to come in again in the other part of the comparison.[ made sinners] {αβγδ} constituted sinful, to understand this of their being only used as sinners, is a private interpretation, and not according to the Analogy of Faith.  
How strange a passage is that one hath, 
Dr. J. T. Ans. to Bishop of Roch. Letter, p. 11.  I was troubled with an Objection lately, for it being propounded to me; why it is to be believed that the sin of Adam could spoil the Nature of Man, and yet the Nature of Devils could not be spoiled by their sin, which was worse, I could not tell what to say, and therefore held my peace.  
But methinks one need not study much for an answer to it. The Devils were not the root and fountain of other Spirits. God did not say to them, as to our first Parents [ increase and Multiply.] But Man being to propagate his kind, it seemeth not so unaccountable,( once supposing our first Father to have sinned away Gods Image, that his Nature is destitute of Original righteousness, 
Natura enim humana( quae in primis parentibus tota erat) per peccatum tot a corrupta est— unde non nisi corruptos, injustos,& mortales filios generare potuit. Meth. confess. Edit. a De Soto. fol. 4.2.  and tainted with a contrary principle, habit, disposition, or inclination) that he should beget Children in like manner viciously inclined. It is natural for creatures to beget their like. Haec est Naturae Lex, nt sui quaeque res similem gignat, homo hominem, vitiosus vitiosum, Leprosus leprosum.( plac. de Imput. pri. pec. p. 160.)  
And, as is the Root, so the Branches; as the Spring, so the Streams. You would not expect pure and wholesome streams, to flow from a corrupt fountain.  
Obj. If all descending from Adam be corrupted, how was Christ Jesus clear from Native corruption? was he not conceived, and born of a Daughter of Adam?  
Ans. All that descend from Adam by Natural Generation( the Virgin Mary not excepted) derive Natural corruption from Adam. But Christ descended not from Adam by Natural Generation, his Generation and conception was miraculous. He came into the world, not by virtue of that primitive benediction[ Increase and Multiply] but to make good that special promise [ The seed of the Woman shall break the Serpents head.] He was that seed of the Woman conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost in the womb of a Virgin; and so the Holy One indeed, Luk. 1.35, This very much confirms the truth of the point I am upon, scil. the propagation of Natural corruption to all that naturally descend from Adam, that Jesus Christ to free him from the said pollution, must not come into the world by Natural Generation, but by a most miraculous conception.  
Obj. But you will not deny, but Adam after his Fall was restored by Repentance, and renewed by Grace.  
Ans. Grant him to be renewed, sanctified, yet it was but in part, that he had Gods Image restored in him. And this, of Gods wonderful special Grace, and therefore it was not a quality that was naturally to descend. When he begot a Son, he did this, as a man, not as one renewed and created again. He begot a Son after his own Image, that is, sinful like himself; not after Gods Image, which in man's lapsed state, is purely supernatural.  
Obj. But you cannot tell how this Natural corruption is conveyed from the Parent to the Child.  
Ans. Nor do we know how the bones do grow in the womb( Eccl. 11.5.) of her that is with Child. But we must not deny that which is plain, because we cannot understand that which is difficult. We have seen plain Scripture for the derivation of corruption from Adam to us all.  
Obj. But may not the Scripture mean, we are made sinners by imitation of Adam, rather than by the propagation of corruption from him? May we not understand it thus, that we are corrupted by his evil Example?  
Ans. No, That were not to interpret but to pervert the Scripture. That which is born of the flesh is flesh. Does not this speak plainly of Natural Generation, and nothing of imitation. So Psal. 51.5. Behold I was shapen in iniquity, and in Sin did my Mother conceive me. Certainly, David is here confessing his own sin. Not the sin of his Parents, but that which he had cause to be ashamed of, and humbled for, as his own Sin, not anothers. So that Text [ by the Disobedience of one many were made sinful] If it meant by imitation only, then it should have been said, that we were made sinful by the Serpent, by Satan, or by the Woman, Eve, rather than by Adam; or why is the speech limited to the disobedience of one, when the world is full of pernicious examples; great multitudes there are, that draw others to sin by their evil Examples. And multitudes that are drawn to sin this way, who never red or heard of Adam. And those that have heard of his sin, have also heard of his punishment; that should rather deter them from sin. And plain experience shows, that not his particular example, which is so remote; but nearer examples have the most malignant influence upon men. And that Children in the most religious families, where are the best precepts, and examples both, do bewray corruption of Nature, as soon as ever they can put forth any Acts of reason. Oh what strangers are they in Israel, yea, strangers in the world, yea, strangers to their own hearts, that see not the first rise of sin and wickedness that is in the world since the Fall, to be from an evil inclination within men, and not from an observation and imitation of others. And I know not well, what can be replied to that, if we are made sinful by the disobedience of one Adam, only by imitation, then may we not be said( by a parity of reason) to be made righteous by the Faith of one Abraham, we walking in the steps of his Faith?  
3. The next thing I would clear to you is, That this Natural inherent pravity, or Original corruption is sinful. It makes us really guilty before God, obnoxious to his wrath and curse for ever. I purposely wave speaking of the guilt of Adam's first transgression, the imputation of it to his posterity immediately, and antecedently, or irrespectively to this corruption of Nature, propagated from him, leaving it to the sober consideration and discussion of the Godly-learned.  
But though we hold Adam's sin propagated, Non peccatum personae, said peccatum Naturae; not his personal sin, not the transient action; but the sin of the Nature of Man, the corrupting of his Nature; for so it was an inherent, permanent, Evil quality: this alone sufficeth to condemn any one in the world. In regard of this inherent pravity and corruption, which is in every one from his very birth, yea, from his very quickening in the womb; we all deserve death and condemnation, deserve to be dealt withal and punished, after the same manner, as if we had done what our first Parents did.  
Now this is very plain and evident from Scripture, Eph. 2.3. and were by Nature Children of wrath, even as others. Nothing but sin could subject us to Gods wrath, to which yet we are all obnoxious by Nature, one as well as another. And if obnoxious to Gods wrath by Nature, then sinful by Nature. So that there is sin and guilt in our very Nature, before ever we come to the practise and commission of sin.  
Again, what an undeniable proof is that, Rom. 5.12. By one man sin entered into the world, and death by Sin; and so death passed upon all men, {αβγδ}, which whether you will red it relatively in quo in whom, or causally, eo quod, because or in as much as all have sinned, I shall be content. These things are plain however.  
1. That death came into the world by sin.  
2. That all on whom death passeth, have sin.  
3. That many on whom death passeth,( as infants) have not actual sin.  
4. Therefore it follows that they have sin derived from Adam with their very Natures. That Original corruption hath the true Nature of sin; otherwise according to the Apostles arguing, Infants should not be subject to death.  
But here we are  told by no mean writer, that Man was created Mortal, 
Un. Necess. p. 371.  and if Adam had not sinned he should have been immortal by Grace, i.e. by the use of the three of Life.  
Yet elsewhere the same hand lays down this assertion contrary to the former,  
Dissolution of the Soul and Body should have been, 
Ans. to the Bishop of Roch. Letter. p. 86.  if Adam had not sinned] which if so, how then should he have been immortal by grace, i.e. by the use of the three of life? what he adds there by way of proof; For the world would have been too little to have entertained those myriad of Men, which must in all reason have been born from that blessing of [ Increase and Multiply] hath no strength at all, but leans on this weak and false prop; that without the dissolution of Soul and Body, Man could not have been translated from Earth to Heaven. Take this away, and what he saith comes to nothing.  
But though Adam was not immortal, as the Saints are after the resurrection; yet neither was he Mortal as we all now are. 
Thes. Salm. de Stat. adam. ante Laps. Sect. 32. p. 197.  Tam naturalis erat Adamo facultas non moriendi, quam non peccandi. To say, that he was created Mortal, is to deny that immortality was any part of Gods Image, wherein Man was created. Again, death was threatened only in case of disobedience, as we see here, Gen. 2.17. Does not that imply, he should not have dyed, if he had not sinned. As the Apostle telleth us, death entred by sin, and passeth upon none but Sinners; Infants die as well as others, and therefore they are sinners.  
And yet further to evince it, take this Argument; Either Infants that die in infancy, and are saved, are saved by Christ, or not; now surely there are none that have the face of Christians, can have a face to say, any in the world are saved without Christ; for there is salvation in no other. Therefore I hope we may take this for granted, all Infants that are saved, are saved by Christ. And if saved by Christ, then Christ dyed for them. If Christ dyed for them, then they were really guilty; truly, properly sinners in themselves; otherwise they are none of them saved by Christ.  
Yea, indeed if Infants, or any in the world were innocent and guiltless before God; such would have no need of a Saviour, no need of pardoning Grace and Mercy; such must go to Heaven another way, not by the satisfaction and redemption of Christ. He had dyed in vain so far, had he dyed to purchase Gods favour for those, who no way merited his displeasure. Justice itself would not condemn, but clear all that can pled not guilty.  
Methinks, though the Remonstrants would have natural corruption merely penal, not sinful; yet they( of all others) should grant this Argument, who would have the death of Christ intended for all, and every one alike, to make the remedy provided in Christ, the second Adam, adequate unto our malady and misery, that came by the first Adam. Now what need that Christ's death should be intended for Infants, to reconcile them to God, if they were not obnoxious in themselves to his wrath?  
Obj. But says Corvinus, If the Law does not require that a Man be born without sin, 
Cens. Anat. Arm. c. 8. Sect. 7. p. 121.  if it requires not Original Righteousness, a man sinneth not in that he is born without it; therefore the want of it cannot properly be called sin.  
Ans. Though it is true( as Rivet says) vetantur futura, 
In Exod. 20. p. 314.  non praeterita aut praesentia? quae jam in actu sunt; yet facta mala arguuntur à Lege, improbantur& damnantur. And so this, prava dispositio,& carentia Justitiae damnantur a Lege. It is contrary to the Law, and condemned by it. The Law properly forbids things to come, but reproves, disallows of things present, contrary to it. As this Native inherent corruption( including an indisposition, and averseness from what is truly good, and proneness to evil) must needs be contrary to the Law. That which is the cause of all actual sin, must needs be 〈◇〉 sinful sin indeed.  
Again, was not Man obliged by the Law of his Creation to be, and continue as holy, good and perfect, as God made him? In this respect may we not be born guilty Creatures, Rei debendi, licet non agendi, we are guilty before God, if our Natures( as well as Actions) be not perfectly conformed to Gods will, and Law.  
Obj. But says Corvinus, after the fall, obedience is required by a new Covenant, wherefore Man is considered as fallen, not as upright still.  
Ans. I have shewed before, the new Law of Grace doth not hinder the old Original Law( which requires perfect Obedience and exact conformity to the will of God in all things) from being still in force; otherwise we do not sin in not obeying perfectly, and have no cause to be humbled, and to sue to God for pardon and forgiveness upon that account.  
Obj. This corruption of Nature in Infants is not theirs, by an Act of their wills.  
Ans. Though it be not a voluntate, yet it is in voluntate. Are sinful habits no sins, because they are not sinful Acts? It comes not by the Child's will, it's true, for it comes by Nature, is conveyed naturally. The Child born sinful, because descended from sinful Parents: Yet this corruption is principally and eminently seated in the will, and from the will it acts, and shows itself as soon as the will can act. The sin of Infants is not in Action, but in this evil disposition. We must say this of Children, even unborn, or newly come into the world, that they do not actually will the committing of this or that sin, it is from natural impediments, the let and hindrance is a natural incapacity; otherwise there is that pravity of will even Natural to them, which would break forth into all manner of Sin( if God withheld his restraining hand) the Natural Impediments of Action being but removed. And is not this enough to make them Objects of Gods wrath, and worthy of Death? How can an infinitely holy God but loathe, and abhor such vile Creatures; whom he seeth( even by Nature) so wickedly inclined, if he look upon them, as in themselves, and not in and through his Son Jesus Christ? as Creatures that have evil qualities by kind, are the more offensive to us, because those qualities are Natural to them. As Wolves for their ravenous disposition, Toads and Serpents for their poisonous quality, before such quality or disposition be put forth into act.  
What I have delivered concerning Natural corruption, and the sinfulness of it, it is no other Doctrine, than is laid down in the 39 Articles, Art. 9. as also in the Articles of Religion agreed upon at Dublin in Ireland, 1615. Sect. 23. Original sin standeth not in the imitation of Adam,( as the Pelagians dream) but is the fault and corruption of the Nature of every person, that naturally is engendered and propagated from Adam: whereby it cometh to pass, that Man is deprived of Original righteousness, and by Nature is bent unto sin, and therefore in every person born into the world, it deserveth Gods wrath and damnation.  
What could be spoken more plain for the propagation of corruption to every one naturally descended from Adam, and that this corruption is properly Malum culpae non paenae, that it is not a mere languor, or frailty of Nature, but a pravity and fault, a moral defect; and so that it lays every person born into the world, under Guilt, obnoxious to wrath and condemnation. How strange is it that any should subscribe, and declare their unfeigned Assent to so plain truths, and yet afterwards deny them?   

Sect. 24.  
PROP. XXIV. The Condition of Man by the Fall, being such as hath been described, viz. being both under the Guilt, and power of Sin, it is twice impossible( as I may say) that ever he should be saved by himself, or by the Covenant of Works, and equally impossible, that he should not be cast, and condemned by this Covenant.  
THe Covenant of Works promised life only upon perfect conformity to the Law, and will of God, threatening death to any sin: Now when once Man had broken Gods Law, and lost Gods Image, and had his Nature vitiated and corrupted, he could no more lay claim to life and happiness, but immediately was laid under the Sentence of Death, and did lie open to Gods wrath.  
Now if the penalty threatened, and incurred, be inflicted on the Sinner, this giveth him enough, this sets him fast for ever. intolerable torments, and endless miseries become his portion to Eternity. If he would think of making satisfaction for what is past, he cannot. He can never suffer any thing equivalent to everlasting death. And if he could, yet he should not be saved by the old Covenant, without some new Agreement, wherein it should please God to admit of a satisfaction. Satisfaction is not given to the Law,( as one noteth) but to the Law-giver, as above Law, who can accept of the solutio tantidem, vel aequivalentis alias indebiti. But there is no provision in the Covenant of Works, how a Man may escape and avoid the penalty, after once he is a sinner. Neither is there any more possibility of his claiming and having right, and title to happiness by the promise in that Covenant; the condition whereof we neither have fulfilled, nor can fulfil. And in these respects( as I said) it is utterly impossible that ever sinful Men and Women should attain to life by this Covenant. Alas, we are all Children of wrath by Nature and sons of death, dead in Law, under the Sentence of death. And dead in trespasses and sins, in another sense, sin reigneth, as death reigns; all Men Naturally are under the power of it. Naturally we are without strength, no more than a dead man, can raise himself, are we able of ourselves to help ourselves out of a sinful state, which leadeth to death Eternal.   

Application.  
I Shall now conclude this Discourse concerning Man's estate under the Covenant of Works( both as it was before, and since the Fall) with a few practical Inferences.  
1. What cause is here to admire divine condescension! That ever God should vouchsafe to enter into Covenant with his own Creature, whom he might command at pleasure. What an honour was it unto Abraham, to be called the Friend of God? So it was an honour( sure) to Adam, to be taken into a League of Friendship with God; Lord what is man that thou shouldst so regard him?  
2. What cause is here to blushy at Man's Ingratitude, and most unworthy dealing with his Maker? Hos. 6.7. But they like Men, or like Adam, have transgressed the Covenant, they have dealt treacherously? Oh Adam's treacherous dealing, Adam's perfidiousness, breach of Covenant with God, is that indeed which all his posterity had need to be  told of, have cause with sad hearts to remember and to be ashamed of.  
3. What cause to tremble with astonishment, when we speak, or hear, or think of Man's apostasy from God, and of the woeful, dreadful effects, and consequences of it. The Crown is fallen from our heads, and wo to us, for we have sinned. Thus Man who was created for the special Service and fruition of God, now hath his back turned upon God; neither fit to serve, nor to enjoy him. Man that at his first Creation was a Favourite of God; since, by his fall and degeneration, is become an enemy of God.  
4. O what need now that we look to it, that we get our tenor changed! That we get out of the first, into the second Adam, without a change of state, and a change of Nature, we are miserable for ever. O better we had never been born, than not to be born again. As we are Adam's Off-spring, we inherit nothing but corruption, can lay claim to nothing but hell and wrath. And wo to us now, if God deal with us according to the tenor of the Covenant of Works.  
Perhaps you will say, O but we are under the Gospel Covenant, which is unquestionably a Covenant of Grace.  
I grant you are so externally; but as to your Eternal state, you will be never the better, if you refuse to come up to the terms of this better Covenant; that is, if you don't in a real sense of your sinful and undone Condition without Christ, now hearty give up yourselves to him, to be taught and guided, to be ruled and governed, as well as to be saved by him; or which is all one, if you are not really willing to be saved by the Lord Jesus Christ in his own way.  
I tell you, if you do not come up to the terms of the Covenant of Grace, you do in vain expect, you cannot have any saving benefit by it; no, in that case it leaveth you to the condemnation of the Covenant of Works; I say, it leaveth you where it found you.  
The wrath of God still abideth on you; yea, this will increase it, that to the breach of the Covenant of Works, you add this great provoking sin, of slighting and contemning what the Lord is pleased to offer in the Covenant of Grace. This is the Condemnation; verily you will find it so, you that neglect and slight that great Salvation, offered in the Gospel.  
5. O what cause to pitty poor Children, who are so miserable in themselves without Gods free mercy in Jesus Christ! Since our first father hath sinned, and broke Covenant with God, his blood was tainted, his whole race and off-spring corrupted. This corruption though it came first from Adam, yet immediate Parents are the next cause of the derivation of it. How should this turn our Bowels towards our poor Children? Are they Children of wrath by Nature, and should they not be our Benoni's? Oh how should our hearts ache for them! and how should we pour out our prayers, and tears daily before the Lord for them? O that Ishmael might live in thy sight! should not tender Mothers travail in birth again, till they may see Christ formed in their Children.  
And how should Parents fear entailing a new Curse upon their posterity! There is a curse in the house of the Swearer, a curse in the house of the Thief, and the unjust person, the fraudulent dealer; many take care for nothing but only to lay up riches for their Children: O but take heed that you do not lay up a curse with those riches. That would spoil all.  
Again, how should Parents fear corrupting their Children more and more by a bad example; though corruption comes not into the world merely by imitation, yet evil examples do very much increase wickedness in the world. Aetas parentum pejor avis, tulit Nos nequiores, &c. Hor.  
Lastly, though our Children are by Nature in a sinful miserable estate; yet there is a remedy provided in Christ, and set forth in the Gospel; and how should we fear depriving our Infants of that Ordinance they are capable of, even in infancy! Infants circumcision under the Law pointed at the corruption of the Natural birth; so doth Infant Baptism under the Gospel. They that deny this Ordinance to Infants, would make Christ less favourable to the Children of Believers under the Gospel, than he was to the Children of his people of Old. Though we do not suppose Grace necessary tied to the outward Ordinance, as if whosoever did partake of the one, must necessary partake of the other; nor think, as the Papists, that Original sin hath the Nature of sin, only before, not after Baptism; yet surely, we ought to prise any expression of Gods Favour towards our poor Children; and as we would not seem to slight his mercy, we should fear to deny Children this Ordinance, which the Lord alloweth them, which they are capable of; yea, which is the only Ordinance, and outward means that Infants are capable of. And as we should fear to deprive Children of this Gospel-Ordinance, so how should we fear to deprive them of the Gospel itself! Rejecting Christ and the Gospel, was that which brought wrath, to the uttermost, on the Jews; should we sin away the Gospel, then we deprive poor posterity of the means of Grace and Salvation, and set them in such a state as is described there, Eph. 2.12. to have no hope in the world; Ah Sirs, the despising of Gospel-Grace, may bring uttermost wrath upon us and ours.   
The End of the First Part.   

OF THE COVENANT OF GRACE. Part II.  2 Sam. 23.5. 
Although my House be not so with God; yet he hath made with me an everlasting Covenant ordered in all things and sure, for this is all my Salvation and all my desire, although he make it not to grow.  
I Come now( according to my promise) to give you an account of my Apprehensions, 
Introduction.  concerning the Covenant of Grace. An excellent subject, yet attended with difficulties. Some things I confess would discourage me from adventuring on it, and particularly the variety of apprehensions, and the multitude of controversies concerning it. But that the nobleness and necessity of the Doctrine of the Covenant of Grace, together with the great danger of Mens mistaking, and the dreadful consequence of many mistakes( too common about it) do on the other hand press and engage me to it.  
Indeed I cannot expect to find you all concurring in the same apprehensions with me; yet sure I am, in the main we must agree, and hold together here, or the error will be very gross and dangerous.  
As for any points more disputable( I am not of an imposing spirit) I shall not desire your assent or giving Sentence with me, beyond the merits of the cause, and strength of the proof you shall see produced. Touching what hath been delivered concerning the Covenant of Works;( that first Covenant God made with Man) this is the sum, viz. That God having made Man, had a right to rule and command him; and might only have enforced his commands with threatening of severest penalties. Yet to show forth his infinite Goodness, as well as his sovereign Greatness, to his Laws he annexed a free and large promise of endless life and happiness. Now Man being created a reasonable and innocent creature, could not but consent to the terms God propounded. Thus God promised life and happiness to Man upon condition of perfect obedience, and Man engaged to obey God in all things.  
Adam notwithstanding soon transgressed God's Command, violated his Covenant, utterly disabled himself from performing that obedience the first Covenant required, and so deprived himself of all right and title to that happiness there promised. Lastly, Adam, being the root of Mankind, and having by his sinful fall corrupted his Nature, and begetting Children like himself, unclean, fleshly, corrupt, and guilty before God, it became utterly impossible that any of his posterity should attain to happiness by the Covenant of Works. Thus in discoursing of the Covenant of Works I have shewed you.  

1. What was Man's estate by Creation, viz. holy and happy.  
2. What it was by the Fall, viz. Sinful and miserable.  
Now 3. I am coming to show, what it may be by Grace, in and through Jesus Christ.   
This is declared and made known in the Covenant of Grace.  
Thus the Covenant of Grace is our last and best refuge. It is like a plank after a shipwreck, or like a fair haven in a storm.  
Sinners, who are exposed to all wo and wrath by the breach of the Covenant of Works, may find shelter; yet in and under the Covenant of Grace. Sinners, whom a deluge of miseries doth threaten to overwhelm, may yet be safe and happy, getting into this Ark.  
The Gospel holds forth a pardon to sinners sentenced and condemned by the Law. If we look into the Covenant of Works, there we shall only see matter of terror and ground of despair: but coming to the Covenant of Grace, here we may find opened a Door of hope. Hither must we come, here must we rest, as ever we would be happy, of which we should every one say as holy David here, This is all my salvation, and all my desire.  
These are the last words of David, Verse 1. viz. That David spake as being divinely inspired. The last words of a dying man are oft worthy of a special remark: how much more are the last words of a dying Prophet to be regarded!  
When persons are ready to faint away, then they would call for their strong waters, or make use of the best Cordial they had. Gods gracious promise and Covenant was the choicest Cordial to this holy man of God; he desired no other. Here he had strong consolation, whether his troubles arose from within, or from without; still he could fetch in relief and comfort from this Covenant. Although my house be not so with God] q. d. Though I and mine are not so as we should be, so exact and even in our walking before God, so steadfast in his Covenant; yet he abideth faithful, though I am too inconstant. He hath made with me an everlasting Covenant. Though I cannot but see sad disorders both in myself and others, both at home and abroad, yet his Covenant is well ordered in all things. Though I am subject to change, though my outward condition be oft changing, though I be at great uncertainty in respect of any worldly prosperity; yet God's Covenant with me that is sure, and there are sure mercies( Isa. 55.3.) contained in it. I can be satisfied with that provision the Lord hath made for me in this his Covenant, however things go with me and mine here in the world. Though my house here should not grow and flourish; yet I can cheer up my heart with the thoughts and hopes of those better things, God hath promised in his Covenant. O this is all my Salvation, and all my desire. This by way of Preface.  
Now in speaking of the Covenant of Grace, the saving Covenant, the everlasting Covenant, the better to open the nature, tenor, and use of it, I shall take the same liberty I did before, in setting forth the Covenant of works, viz. lay down such propositions, as seem to be especially needful, and that as plainly and distinctly as the Lord shall enable me, to clear your apprehensions concerning this weighty and excellent subject.  

Sect. 1.  
PROP. I. 

There are but two ways to be thought of, how Man should come to the enjoyment of God and happiness; that is, either, 1. By a perfect conformity to the will and Law of God, by unsinning Obedience; Or, 2. Supposing Man once guilty of sin, then in this case by pardoning Grace and Mercy.  
Or thus, There are but two ways to Heaven, viz. Either by the Covenant of Works, or by the Covenant of Grace.    
NOw since it is utterly impossible to attain to happiness in the way, or upon the terms of the Covenant of Works. [ Do this, and live] can afford no benefit, hope, or comfort to those who cannot obey perfectly, who are already fallen short of the glory of God. Since all are concluded under sin, the whole world become guilty before God, whosoever are saved, must be saved in the way, and upon the terms of the Covenant of Grace, by Gods free pardoning Grace.  
Certainly, it is a most senseless, irrational conceit, as absurd a fiction as ever wild fancy framed, to imagine that any Creature, that is a sinner, and therefore can only lay claim to hell, as his portion,( who if he were condemned to everlasting torments, had but his just deserts.) that such a Creature should ever properly, and in a strict sense, merit any thing of God for himself, much less satisfy and supererrogate for others. Even Bellarmine himself being Judge. Mereri simul aeternam vitam& mortem aeternam repugnantiam includit: Et proinde qui talis esset, deberet vivere in aeternum,& non vivere in aeternum; mori in aeternum& non mori in aeternum, l. 5. de just. c. 12.  
It implieth a contradiction; that one should both deserve eternal death, and also deserve everlasting life. And therefore the Papists have no way to save themselves here; but by flying to that false distinction of sins, that some are mortal, some venial. As if there were any such peccadilloes against God, as either deserved pardon, or did not deserve death; what deserves pardon, does not deserve to be punished.  
Mereri,& non mereri poenam, includit repugnantiam.  
What deserves no punishment, must be counted no fault.  
So likewise Christ needed not to die for those sins, which do not deserve death. Then why does the Apostle say, 1 Joh. 1.7. The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin?   

Sect. 2.  
PROP. II. When the Covenant, by which alone is Salvation, is called the Covenant of Grace, you are to understand, it is so {αβγδ}, by way of Eminency.  
NOt as if there was no grace in the first Covenant made with Man. I have shewed before that it was of Grace, That God( to whom all possible obedience was immediately due from his Creature; of Grace) that He was pleased to engage and promise to do any thing for Man, for the future; and yet further of Grace, that he promised to do so much. But this new Covenant deserves especially to be called the Covenant of Grace, in regard of a more signal Discovery of Gods rich and free Grace in this, than was in the former, that was first made with Adam; was it not a Testimony of Gods wonderful Grace to provide and appoint Jesus Christ his Son, to be surety and Mediator of this Covenant? so was it not an high expression of his Grace, that God should come to so low terms with Man, in this Covenant; requiring no more than Man's sincere and hearty service and obedience, and promising to accept, and graciously reward the same, though weak and imperfect? That the Lord should accept of this, when perfect sinless obedience was eternally a due debt from Man, as he was a Creature; was it not of Grace? Again, the benefits and blessings held forth and promised in this Covenant, are they not such as do aloud proclaim his Grace? The pardon of sin, a fundamental blessing 'tis impossible it should be otherwise, than of Grace. In that the Lord is a God that pardoneth iniquity, transgression, and sin, it proclaimeth and speaks out fully, that he is gracious, and merciful, Exo. 34.6, 7. And does it not speak out Gods abundant Grace, that in this Covenant there are greater privileges held forth in and by Jesus Christ; than innocent Adam could have claimed by the first Covenant, Scil. Influences of Grace promised( whereby the faithful do perform and persevere in the performance of what this Covenant requires) and some new additional degrees of glory. Happiness was not so sure to innocent Adam under the first Covenant, he both might and did fall from it. They that are in Christ have a firmer title by the Covenant of Grace,( where perseverance is one thing promised) and have ground to expect some higher degree of happiness. And is not this wonderful Grace indeed, not only to recover Man fallen out of a state of misery, but further to raise him to an higher happiness.   
Heb. 9.15. 
Mediator of the New Testament.  
Sect. 3.  
PROP. III. The Covenant of Grace is sometimes called, and partakes of the Nature of a Testament.  
THis Covenant( in both administrations of it, scil. under the Mosaical, and under the Gospel administration) is called a Testament. So Heb. 9.15, 16. As it was dispensed before Christ's coming, is called the first Testament 
Unless with Mr. A. we must take the first Testament to mean or intend that Political Covenant made with the Jews, merely as it was political. Vid. Discourse of the 2 Covenants, Cha. 4. p. 73, &c. :( not the first Covenant: for the Covenant of works made with Adam, was doubtless before it.) As it is dispensed since, it is called the New Testament.  
Now this seems to be one considerable difference betwixt the Covenant of Grace, and that of Works. The Covenant of Grace is called a Testament, as the Covenant of works was not. The Covenant of Grace is the Lord Christ's last Will and Testament, concerning his Children and Heirs; what God requireth in this Covenant, is in Christ's hand to work in those, who are given him of the Father: and what God hath promised here, is also in Christ's hand to give. Christ is the Author and finisher of faith, wherever it is, and the Donor of the Crown of life, promised to the faithful, Joh. 10.28. Rev. 2.18. 
Nam sit quod vis, Christum, quatenus servus, damnatus, &c. jus testamenti faciendi non habuisse; anon erit Christus testator quatenus {αβγδ}, anon testamentum moriendo condidisse dicetur, cum infinito illius mortis precio& efficacia, destructa morte, salutem,& vitam nobis pepererit, nobisque omnibus transmiserit {αβγδ}, Guisard. apud lord. Tena in Hebr. p. 823. a.  The Covenant of Grace, I say, hath the Nature of a Testament, where Christ is the Testator; Believers, the Heirs or Legataries; the Goods, Legacies, or Portions bequeathed; the enjoyment of God the chiefest good, perfect happiness( our highest end) together with all things conducing thereunto. A testament is confirmed by the death of the Testator; so this by the death of Christ. It is the Testament in his blood. It was confirmed of old by the blood of Christ in types and sacrifices, Heb. 9.18, 20. and since by the blood of Christ actually  shed. The blood of Christ, his death hath sealed and ratified this Testament.  
That it is both a Covenant, and a Testament in several respects, 
Cum varia& diversa sit, hujus dispensationis ratio, anon variis& diversis nominibus insignienda? Guisard. apud lord. Tena. p. 816. a. A forma conventionis inter Deum,& homines factae, Foedus, a modo sanctionis, Testamentum, ib.  seems plain enough. Tota dispositio testimentariam habet rationem, &c. 
Ames. Coron. Art. 5. c. 2. p. ( mihi) 296.  The whole disposition( or frame of it) hath the Nature of a Testament, as simply considered( says Ames. whether it be taken in the whole, or according to its parts; but if the benefits bequeathed be compared one with another, then one is a condition to another; and in this respect it is propounded ad modum foederis, after the manner of a Covenant. Or take it thus, In respect of God, as he propoundeth it, and men are bound to accept it, as propounded by him; thus it hath the Nature of a Covenant. Though, in respect of Christ, as that which God promiseth, and Man engageth to here, was all purchased by Christ for the Elect, and by him bequeathed unto all those that come to partake of the saving benefits and blessings of the Covenant, so it is a Testament.  
Now here I might propound this Question, to be considered, whether the promise of the first subjective discriminating Grace, or of working of the condition, Jer. 31.33. Heb. 8.10. belong to the Covenant of Grace, as a Covenant, or as a Testament. It seems not to be formally included in the conditional Covenant of grace, nor properly to belong to it as such, but rather as a Testament; but of that afterwards.  
I confess one of great note, straineth this term too far. Making a Testament and a Covenant opposites in this respect, that a Covenant hath conditions, but a Testament is an Instrument of mere bounty, citra ullam conditionem, without any condition; yet 
Nihilominus testamento non repugnant conditions pacti, quia potest testator imponere conditions, quibus deficientibus, haeres non posset adire haereditatem. Tena in Heb. 8. diff. 4. Sect. 1. p. 310. b.  ( place tanti viri) may one not bequeath a Legacy in his Will& Testament, not to be enjoyed, but upon a certain condition.( As for Example, I give A. B. so much, provided he mary C. otherwise not.) Again, Heb. 9.15. we red, Christ is the Mediator of the New Testament; that by means of Death— they which [ are called] might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. This Text which speaks expressly of the New Testament, doth not exclude, but include a condition. Who are they that receive the Eternal inheritance, bequeathed in Christ's Will and Testament? They that are called, says the Text; where doubtless we are to understand effectually called, so called, as that they come into Christ upon the Gospel-call.  
And upon this account I should not restrain the consideration of it, as a Testament to the Elect only,( as Dr. Ames before cited, seems to do.) But supposing it a Will with a Condition, it is of the same extent with the Covenant; being both one and the same. And so Expositors need not perplex themselves( as some of them seem to do) to reconcile Moses( Exo. 24.8.) with the Apostle( Heb. 9.20.) For thus they are fairly agreed, Moses enim loquitur de pacto, said non quovis, nisi dandae haereditatis— Paulus vero de testamento, non quovis, said conditionato, quod eo ipso est pactum: Ergo sine ulla improprietate à pacto ad testamentum transivit Paulus in hac materia, quia simul utriusque rationem habebat. Tena in Hebr. c. 9. Diffic. 12. Sect. 3. p. 412. b.) Moses speaketh of a Covenant, not of any kind, but of giving an inheritance— Paul speaketh of a Testament, not of any kind, but conditionate, which in that respect is a Covenant; therefore without any impropriety, Paul in this matter passeth from the word Covenant, to the word Testament; because it had the reason( or form) of both.  
But that the Covenant of Grace is properly a Covenant, and hath Conditions( though no such conditions as make it ever the less of Grace.) I question not to clear and prove her easter, the Lord permitting.  
At present take notice only, that when the Covenant of Grace is called a Testament, the reason is not, because it is absolute, unconditional; for so it is not; but because it is firm, unalterable. Confirmed now by the Testator's death. Though it be but a Man's Testament; yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto, Gal. 3.15. Now the New Testament is confirmed, by the Death of Christ the Testator, that there is no adding to it, no disannulling any part of it, Neither as to matter, nor form; that this shall be changed any more to the end of the world; no third dispensation to be looked for, whatever some fancy.  
Here then we may all see what our portion is like to be. The first Adam threw himself out of a very fair estate indeed, undid himself and his posterity; our first Father breaking, he left only a stock of corruption to his Off-spring, that as we descend from Adam, we are Children of wrath, and have the curse, due to sinners, entailed on us. That we are ill provided for, if not adopted into Christ's family, if not of the household of Faith. There are none rich towards God, but they that are heirs of him, who is the heir of all things; what has Christ done for thee? Has he remembered thee in his last Will and Testament? Art thou one of those, to whom he bequeathed himself, his body, and blood, and all his saving benefits? say not here, how should I know that? say not, who shall ascend into Heaven to inform me? the word is nigh thee. Hast thou not a copy of of Christ's Will and Testament in thy hand? this blessed Book may resolve thee. Art thou one of those that hear his voice? follow him. Art thou lead by the spirit of Christ? art thou one of those, that are given him of the Father? how shall that be known? thus; if thou hast given up thyself to him. Art thou conformed to Christ? crucified with Christ and the like?   
1 Joh. 3.23. 
This is his Commandment, that we should believe.  
Sect. 4.  
PROP. IV. The Covenant of Grace is sometimes called a Law, and hath the force of a Law.  
IT is called the Law of faith, Rom. 3.27. It is the Law of life, and the Law of liberty.  
The will of God at any time made known to his Creatures is immediately obliging; whatsoever God revealeth to us, we are immediately bound to believe; whatever God requires of us, we are immediately bound to obey. As in the Covenant of Grace there is something that God requireth,( and not only what God promiseth,) it must needs have the Nature of a Law.  
Since the old Original Law of works given to Man at first, is broken, and all Mankind laid under a curse, under the Sentence of Death by that Law, it hath pleased the Lord( of his infinite mercy and compassion towards poor perishing Creatures) to make and set forth a new Law, a remediant Law, a Law of grace, holding forth remission and salvation to rebel-sinners, upon their humble submission, and hearty return to God; yet withall, threatening death without remedy; yea, and much sorer condemnation to sinners that hear of this Law of grace, and come not in upon it. The Gospel hath the ordinary Sanction of a Law, it is backed with a threatening. Yea, it thundereth out the most dreadful Anathema, denounceth the greatest wo to those that have the Gospel published and made known, and yet obey not the Gospel. Ah sirs, this is the condemnation. Gospel-condemnation will be found more intolerable than Law-condemnation. The Gospel doth not only promise, but it commandeth, threateneth, and condemneth. That I cannot but wonder any should question, whether the Gospel have the Nature of a Law. I would fain know what is essential, and proper to a Law, that doth not agree to the Gospel.  
I say, the Gospel is a Law,[ Believe, and thou shalt be saved] is properly a Law; as well as[ Do this, and live.] Do this, and live, was the old Original Law, first given to Man, and the matter or contents of the first Covenant God made with Adam.[ Do this, and live] i. e. obey perfectly, and so thou shalt live by thy own righteousness. This was the old Original Law. Now[ Believe and thou shalt be saved] this is the new Law of Grace, which God hath given to Man, as a Remedying Law,( since the violation of the former) and this is the matter, and sum of the Covenant of Grace. As when men accept, and consent to the terms of the Gospel, whether in heart, or in profession, it becomes a formal actual Covenant. Though it binds as a Law, at least in order of Nature, before men are bound by it as a Covenant.[ Believe, and thou shalt be saved.] i. e. come up to Gospel-terms, and though thou art a sinner, and deservest to die, yet thy sins shall be pardonned, and thou shalt live, for the righteousness of another; thou shalt be saved by Jesus Christ, who is a believers righteousness.  
Here I have given you a brief account of the new Law. And that it hath the proper binding force and power of a Law, to me seems the easiest thing in the world to make out. Thus, all that hear of the terms of the new Covenant, be they heathen, be they strangers to the Covenant, yet are immediately bound to come up to these terms, and immediately punishable upon this very account, if they do not come up to these terms. This is plain as can be, Mar. 16.15, 16. Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every Creature— and he that believeth not shall be damned. In this Text it is evident, the Law of faith hath the sanction of a threatening, as well as of a promise. And wheresoever the Gospel is preached, all are bound to believe and live according to the Gospel upon pain of damnation. So 2 Thess. 1.8. The Lord will take vengeance on them that obey not the Gospel] that implieth a commanding power in the Gospel, sure where there is no command, there can be neither obedience, nor disobedience. If the Gospel ought to be obeied, then it hath the force of a Law. If it be a sin, not to obey the Gospel, then the Gospel hath the Nature of a Law; for where no Law, there no transgression. Again,[ taking vengeance] on them that obey not the Gospel, implies most strongly, that it hath the force of a Law; would the Lord, the righteous Lord take vengeance for no Law broken? would he punish for no crime? Then how should he judge the world in righteousness?  
That is therefore a very gross mistake of him, that holds the Gospel a Doctrine teaching, 
A. E.  not a Precept binding. Do we not red the plain contrary, 1 Joh. 3.23. This is his Commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ: What? is his Commandment no binding Precept? How strange is it, that this should not grace upon,& offend any Christians ears? certainly, to distinguish here betwixt a Doctrine teaching, and a precept binding, is as groundless as that Popish distinction of Commands and Counsels, on which they build their monstrously absurd Doctrine of works of Super-errogation.  
But says the same writer, No Man is bound to believe absolutely, but conditionally, viz. if he will have any benefit by Christ. As a man is bound within the time limited in the pardon, to sue it out under the Broad Seal; which if he neglect to do, he breaketh no Law of the Kings, but only deprives himself of the benefit of the pardon, and of the Kings favour therein.  
Answer. I will not say, that all are absolutely bound to believe in Christ; that is, whether they ever heard of Christ, or no; for the negative unbelief of those that never heard of Christ, is not their sin, but their misery. But upon supposition that men have once heard of Christ, and the Gospel, then it immediately becomes their duty to believe. And they are most severely threatened, if they disobey the Gospel-commands, and continue in unbelief.  
But to say we are bound to believe only conditionally, that is,( as he explains it) if we would have any benefit by Christ; is to say, we are not bound to believe in obedience to Gods Command: but only out of self-love, with respect to ourselves, and the benefit that comes by it. As if he should say, we ought to believe in point of prudence, as that which is good for us; otherwise there is no tie upon Conscience.  
He that believeth not— the wrath of God abideth on him, Joh. 3.36. That is, as he says, mincing it, It doth not come upon him, but he remaineth under wrath, which faith would have freed him from. Yet v. 18. we red, he that believeth is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the Name of the only begotten Son of God.] That unbelief is a sin; and properly a cause of condemnation; yea, more certainly a cause of condemnation than other sins; other sins are damnable, this is damning. Though wrath came upon men at first by the breach of the first Covenant; yet a further degree of wrath comes upon men by the breach of the new Covenant, or by sinning against this new Law of Grace.  
Well Sirs, be clear in this; that the Gospel, or new Covenant hath the Nature of a Law, is a Divine Law, immediately, and indispensably obliging all to whom it is made known. By the very Law of Nature, of our Creation, we all stand eternally obliged both to believe and obey God, & in revelatis,& in revelandis, whensoever God reveals his mind and will to any of his Creatures, that this he requires of them, and on these terms he will be gracious to them, this revelation of the will of God doth necessary infer the creatures obligation to observe it. And before a Man can be bound by any act of his own, he is under a previous obligation, naturally and necessary resulting from his very being and relation to God, as a creature, to attend to the will and pleasure of God, to act and order himself accordingly. And how much more that man is bound to accept of, and submit to such a Law as this, intended and provided for the remedy and recovery of a poor lost creature: a Law of Grace, wherein Gods free grace and infinite mercy shineth forth so illustriously, as it is apt to be taken notice of, than his sovereignty and authority. Yet you must know God doth not stand here to Man's courtesy, or need his concurrence or consent, to make his word of force, and obligatory.  
Nothing can be more certain, than that God in covenanting with men, doth not foregoe or pass away his authority or right of commanding.  
They that under pretence of advancing God's free grace, dethrone his sovereignty; they that level or lessen his authority to set up his clemency and mercy, deal not fairly with him; they have very low thoughts; short, inadequate, and unworthy apprehensions of him.  
For my part I know no stronger Argument against Antinomianism, than this; that it denies that subjection to God, which is naturally, necessary Man's duty, as he is a creature, from which he can never possibly be discharged, while he is a creature; or that it would deprive God of his authority over his creatures. They that would have a believer free from the obligation to obey God in all things, let them ask for him the Kingdom also.  
But attend to this I beseech you; what the Gospel requires, God requires; and what God requires, his creatures are bound to observe and perform. And though Ministers use to pray and beseech you to be reconciled, entreat you to come in to the Lord Jesus Christ; yet we have authority also in the name of God, to charge and command you. Now God commandeth every one of you to repent, and this is his Commandment, that ye believe, that ye receive Christ Jesus the Lord, that ye kiss the Son. And, slight and despise him at your peril, reject him at your peril.[ Believe, and be saved] bindeth every one to whom it is published, as a Law; even such as are not under the bond of the Covenant. And you more especially, who have given your consent, at least by an outward profession. You are bound to believe, not only by virtue of a divine Command, but also as being under the bond of the covenant. O what a crying sin is your unbelief! As it is a breach of a divine Law, it must needs be damnable in its own Nature; and further as it is a breach of such a Law of Grace, a breach of the new Covenant, that holds forth the only way wherein you can be saved, so it is the damning sin indeed; not only damnable in its own Nature, but certainly damning in the event. Sinners that are condemned by the Law of Works; yet may be discharged from that condemnation by hearkening to, and obeying the Gospel, Rom. 8.1. But if condemned by the Gospel, how should such escape?   
Gen. 17.4. 
Behold my Covenant is with thee.  
Sect. 5.  
PROP. V. The Covenant of Grace is betwixt God and Man, not betwixt God and Christ.  
NOte, I am not speaking of that which Divines call the Covenant of Redemption, or Mediatory Covenant. Though, whether that can be any thing, but the eternal deceree of God, concerning Man's redemption and Salvation by Jesus Christ, in which eternal decree, the will of the Son must needs be supposed in the will of the Father, both having one and the same essence, and will:( not only a likeness and agreement, but an indentity or oneness of will) let the Godly-learned consider. And whether those Scriptures that seem to hold forth a Covenant, or agreement betwixt the Father and the Son, are not to be taken as speaking after the manner of men; where there could no way possibly be any the least distrust on either side; where there was not the least need of engaging one another for the further satisfaction of either party, there would seem to be no occasion for formal entering into covenant. What ground we have to conceive a formal Covenanting betwixt the Father and the Son, where we cannot conceive how the proper end of covenanting could have place; Whether the promises in Scripture that run as made to Christ, might not be recorded as that voice came from Heaven, Joh. 12.30. for his peoples sakes, as one compares them: These are things I would leave to them that are able, to weigh and determine.  
Yet I make no question of it, but those that hold a Covenant of Redemption betwixt the Father and the Son from all eternity, and others that see not how that can be so well maintained, but think it is a simplo decree, in which decree the will of all the three Persons, Father, Son, and Spirit, is included; do however both agree in the thing aimed at, though their expressions vary. And they that think it is more properly a decree from eternity, than a Covenant from eternity; yet will say, in this decree the way and manner of our redemption and salvation is as surely, firmly ordered, determined, and provided for, as if it had been by way of Covenant, and the most solemn mutual engagement of both parties. So both come to one in the end.  
But of this,( whether Covenant or Decree from eternity,) 
Reader, since the writing of these notes, I am taught by one, whose judgement I cannot but highly value, and reverence, that Besides the eternal decree of God, there is a Lex Mediatoria ( a Law of Mediatorship) that Christ is under as man, whereby God made his Mediatory Acts his dury, and promised him his reward, of which the certain Salvation of the Elect was much. And this Law was also a Covenant modally. And of this I suppose those Reverend and Learned men, that compiled the larger Catechism. must be understood to speak, when they say it[ was made with Christ as the second Adam.] which they call the Covenant of Grace, taking in that other Covenant made with man( whereof faith and repentance are conditions) as being founded thereupon.  I am not inquiring; but when I speak of the Covenant of Grace, I mean that which stands in direct opposition, and contra-distinction to the Covenant of works. And though I know many very reverend, eminently learned, holy and worthy men conceive otherwise, yet many cogent Arguments enforce me to conclude this Covenant made betwixt God and Man, not betwixt God and Christ. For,  
1. Christ is the surety and Mediator of this Covenant, Heb. 7.22. and 12.24. And therefore not the party whom God here covenanteth with. For if so, he should be a surety for himself, and Mediator on behalf of himself. As for Moses he was not properly a Mediator, but improperly, a type of Christ, the true Mediator. Christ as a Mediator comes betwixt the two parties Covenanting. Upon his undertaking, upon account of Christ's satisfying, or undertaking to satisfy for our breach of the first Covenant made with Man, the Lord was pleased to enter into or make another Covenant with us. This Covenant indeed was confirmed in Christ. But I cannot see how it can be said to be confirmed with Christ. It was {αβγδ}, confirmed, ratified of God with respect unto Christ, looking at Christ, as some.  
Some argue that the Covenant was made with Christ, because he is made the surety and Mediator of it; but I would argue on the contrary. Because he is the Mediator of the Covenant, therefore he is not properly a party wieh whom it is made. What place is left for Man in this Covenant if Christ be both principal, and surety? Or can the same person be both principal and surety in the same Bond?  
2. If this Covenant was made with Christ, then it was made with him, either as God, or as Man, or as God and Man, or Mediator. But it was not made with Christ, as God: For so he makes one party with the Father. Consider him as God, and so the Father cannot be one party, and the Son another; but are both of them to be looked on as one and the same party. Nor was this Covenant made with Christ, as Man; none will say that. Christ as Man was under the Covenant of works, not under the Covenant of grace. Was the Covenant [ Believe, and thou shalt be saved] made to the Man Christ? Or that which is sometimes called the new Covenant [ I will give you a new heart, take away the stony heart, forgive your iniquities] was the Man Christ taken into this Covenant?  
Nor was the Covenant made with him as God and Man, or Mediator; but rather was procured by him, so that in this respect, it is his Testament. His Testament, not made to him, but made or procured by him. The New Testament in his blood: Indeed if we consider Christ as Mediator, so he is properly no party: if we consider him as a party in this Covenant, so he and his Father are one party, and Man the other.  
3. The very terms and tenor of the Covenant of Grace( hinted at even now) do plainly show with whom it is made. [ Believe, and thou shalt be saved] which is expressed in other words and phrases under the Old Testament, as Isa. 55.3. Incline your ear, and come to me; hear, and your souls shall live. Is not this the Covenant that succeeded the Covenant of works [ Do this, and live.] If the Covenant of Grace be made with Christ, then it follows what God requireth in the Covenant of Grace, is required of Christ. That he must believe, and must repent, and turn to God.  
4. The benefits and blessings promised in the Covenant of Grace, are such as are proper to us men, us sinners, and are promised unto Us; not unto Christ. Will any say, that pardon, and free justification was ever promised of God to Jesus Christ? were it not blasphemy to say, that Christ had any sin to be pardonned? And though he was acquitted, and justified before God, yet not of free Grace; but he fully satisfied the highest demands of justice, before he received his discharge.  
5. If the Covenant of Grace be betwixt God and Christ, not betwixt God and Man, then no Man upon earth can be charged with breach of Covenant here, or condemned, and punished, as a violater of the new Covenant.  
Object. 1. We red Gal. 3.16. the promises were made to Christ, that Christ was the seed.  
Answ. There we are to understand Christ mystical, not Christ personal. As Beza in his larger notes, they that think Paul disputes here of the Person of Christ, are in an error, when rather he treats of two people, i.e. Jews and Gentiles, brought into one mass, or body of the seed of Abraham.  
Object. 2. Tit. 1.2. we red of eternal life, promised before the world began; But there was none before the world began, to whom this could be promised, but Jesus Christ our Mediator.  
Answ. 1. Some red {αβγδ}, not before the world began, but before ancient times. Eternal life was promised long ago, 
Calvin. See Ball of Covenant, p. 40.  à multis retro seculis, for many ages past.  
2. Otherwise by[ promised] we are to understand appointed, or decreed; purposed it was, but not promised before the world began.  
3. How incongruous is it to say, Christ was Mediator from Eternity, before the world began? It's true, as God he is from Eternity, but not as Mediator.  
4. If we could understand it no otherwise, than that Eternal life was promised before the world began; yet it will not follow, that this was promised to Christ Mediator: 
Dr. Kellet, Trican. p. 258.  As one, Why may I not say, it is an holy Trialogisme of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, sweetly consenting and concording in the way of Man's Salvation before Man had a being; somewhat like that, Let us make man in our own Image, Gen. 1.26.  
Object. 2. God promiseth to give Jesus Christ for a Covenant, Isaiah 42.6. and 49. of Isaiah 8. therefore the Covenant of Grace was made with him.  
Answer. It follows not, but rather the contrary; if Christ was promised of God, as the great blessing of the Covenant, it implies the Covenant was made, not with Jesus Christ, but with them to whom he was so promised; the Covenant of Grace is a Covenant concerning Christ, a Covenant of him, showing how, or upon what terms we may be interested in him, and made partakers of his saving benefits. How then can it be a Covenant of God with him? The promises are Yea, and Amen, in him, 2 Cor. 1.20. not to him. Or if when he is promised for a Covenant, we understand for a Mediator of the Covenant, that implieth still the Covenant was not properly made with him, but betwixt God and those who have him for their Mediator.  
Object. 4. But fallen Man was unworthy, and unmeet to enter into Covenant with God.  
Answ. I do most freely grant it, I hearty yield this; yet without any prejudice to the Position I have laid down, methinks it is evident, this sets it off as a covenant of Grace indeed; that it is a covenant with fallen Man. O wonderful free Grace! that the Lord should make another covenant with Man after Man's violation of that covenant, made with him at first; it was not so wonderful gracious condescension, that God vouchsafed at first to take an innocent creature into covenant with himself, as that after Man hath proved false to God; yet the Lord should please to treat with him again, and enter into another covenant with him. That God should make a covenant with fallen men, with sinful creatures. Methinks no more need to be said, to prove it a Covenant of Grace. And certainly whatever covenant was made with Christ( as made with him) was not a covenant of Grace, but rather of Justice; and whatever we find promised to him, was but a just reward of his obedience and satisfaction. A reward not of Grace, but of Merit.  
But that God should any more covenant with poor sinful creatures, as David says [ Although my house be not so with God, yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant.] O this we can never enough admire! And verily I cannot foresee any inconvenience, or ill consequence like to attend this assertion, that the covenant of Grace is made betwixt God, and Men;( still supposing Christ to be the Mediator of it) but rather that it doth further advance, and set forth the free grace of God, and lay a stronger obligation upon Men, than that opinion doth, which it opposeth.   
Rom. 10.9. 
If thou shalt confess, &c.  
Sect. 6.  
PROP. VI. The Covenant of Grace, having the true Nature of a Covenant, is not without Condition.  
MAny( I know) deny the Covenant of grace to to have any condition, yea, make this a main point of difference betwixt the Covenant of works, and the Covenant of grace, that( as they hold) the covenant of works was conditional, whereas the Covenant of Grace is absolute. Yea, they will not stick to say, that if you suppose the Covenant of Grace conditional, you turn it into a Covenant of Works.  
Yet many who deny the Term[ condition] will readily yield the thing. Yea, all that have not their judgments woefully corrupted, that have not drunk in the very dregs of Antinomianism, must grant the thing, however they take offence without cause at the term, condition. Certainly, all that have not sucked in desperate principle of error, must yield, and assert the necessity of faith, repentance, and sincere obedience, as without which there is no Salvation; which indeed is all we mean, when we say they are conditions of the Covenant, and of salvation therein promised.  
Some call them qualifications disposing the subject, as I grant they are: but when we are speaking of the Covenant, and what it requires, we cannot use any more apt and proper term, than the word condition. And what is the condition of a Covenant, but that, without which the benefit promised cannot be expected, and upon which it may.  
When another promiseth this or that to you, not simply and absolutely, but upon Terms, upon such or such a Condition, this you know is a Conditional promise. And that upon which the performance of the promise is suspended, is the condition of the promise.  
Now the Lord promiseth life and salvation to us, but if we believe, if we unfeignedly repent and turn to him, if we resolve and set upon a course of sincere and new obedience: and if we will not come up to these terms, he tells us plainly, there is no salvation for us, but we shall die in our sins. Now is it not plain, that these are conditions of the Covenant, and of the promised salvation, without which men can have no interest, right, or title to what is so promised, Undoubtedly they are Conditions, whether men call them so, or no.  
I am very confident, that many are prejudiced against the term condition, upon a mere mistake. As they think, the word either aimeth at the setting up of the power of Nature, or the merits of mens works, or both: when there is no such thing. And I hope sufficiently to clear it to you, before I have done with this Subject, that this Covenants conditions are neither meritorious of salvation, nor to be performed by the power of Nature, or of a mans own free will. Certainly, the Covenant of Grace knows, or admits of no such condition, as will not stand with the honour of free Grace, But the honour of Gods free grace is not onely secured, but proclaimed here, 1. That he would go so low, that he is pleased to accept of sincere obedience, when he might have exacted perfect obedience from all his creatures. 2. That he hath promised, and doth work the condition in his people. 3. That he hath made so large and ample promise to, and doth so gloriously reward his own grace, and workings in his people.  
These things premised to prevent unjust prejudice I come to the proof of the proposition, that the Covenant of Grace hath some condition, or it is properly no covenant. A Covenant is mutuus contractus per sponsionem& stipulationem; It is a mutual engagement of parties, including a promise on the one part, and a stipulation, or condition to be performed or required on the other part, on which the promise is suspended, And this is the difference betwixt a simplo promise, and a Covenant; A promise bindeth one party, to wit, him that makes it: a Covenant bindeth both parties. Thus all Covenants do necessary imply, and include a condition.  
It is a very weak and frivolous exception, to say we confounded the Covenant of works, and the Covenant of Grace, if we make this conditional.  
Pray observe this, the Covenant of Grace having a condition, it follows that it hath the Nature of a covenant, hath that which is proper, and essential to a Covenant: but it will by no means follow, that it is of the same kind with the Covenant of works, unless the condition were the same  
I grant indeed sometimes the word [ covenant] is used for an absolute promise, where there is no stipulation: but then I say it is used improperly. As in Genesis 9.9. to ver. the 14. That which is there termed a Covenant( probably to show its firmness and stability,) yet in strictness of speech is no more than an absolute promise. Now if men will compare the Covenant of Grace and the Covenant of Noah, not onely in regard of firmness, sureness, but of absoluteness too, as equally, with condition; then they must say, that to speak properly, there is but one Covenant made with man, viz. the Covenant of Works; but as for that, we call the Covenant of Grace, it is properly no more, than an absolute promise, properly no Covenant.  
But if the Covenant of Works, and the Covenant of Grace are distinct Species, they must necessary each of them partake of the nature of the genus, that is, have what is essential to a Covenant in general, as this is essential, even a promise with a stipulation or condition; in this they must both agree, or they cannot both be Covenants, But then the difference of the conditions required in these two Covenants, that is the thing, which makes the distinction betwixt these Covenants.  
I hope now you will be able to go along with me here, that to deny the Covenant of Grace hath any condition is to deny that it is a Covenant. I hope Sirs, you will not deny, that there is any Covenant of Grace, to deny conditions.  
2. What is a Condition in a Covenant, but that upon which the promise is suspended, which being put, we may lay claim to what is promised, and without which we cannot claim what is promised. Now is it not the Covenant of Grace that holds forth and promiseth salvation; and it is not the promise of salvation so suspended upon faith, repentance, and sincere obedience, that all who have these same now mentioned may certainly expect salvation, may lay claim to it,( not indeed as a thing thus merited by them, but onely merited by Christ for them, and graciously promised of God to them.) Such, and none but such( I speak of adult persons) can hope to be saved. And is not that a condition of the promise, and of the Salvation promised, which if we have it, then salvation is ours by promise: but if we have it not, it is none of ours, we can claim no such thing; One would think that one Text alone were sufficient to decide this controversy, as great a controversy as it is, Rom. 10.9. If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe with thy heart, thou shalt be saved. Those with whom we have to do in this controversy, will grant I hope, that it is onely the Covenant of Grace which holds forth salvation, that is, happiness as attainable to man fallen. Now we see here, as evident as may be, salvation held forth conditionally in this Scripture, [ If thou believest with thy heart, &c.] therefore the Covenant of Grace holds forth salvation conditionally.  
3. I may argue otherwise from this clear truth, which I hope they would be ashamed to deny, scil. That we are saved by Faith. Now if we are saved by Faith, we are saved by it, either as that unto which( though not for which) God hath promised salvation, and thus it's apparently made a condition, upon which the promise of salvation is suspended: or else we are saved by faith, without respect to Gods gracious Covenant and promise, which if so; then faith should save of itself, by some intrinsic merit, or virtue of its own; which I hope they that deny conditions in the Covenant, would not dare to assert. So  
4. If faith, repentance, and sincere obedience, be not conditions required in the Covenant of Grace, I would said know, by what Law or Covenant they are required, is it the Covenant of Works; or of Grace, that saith, whosoever believeth shall be saved? is it the Covenant of Works, or of Grace, that saith repent that your sins may be blotted out. If this be the tenor of the Law, and Covenant of Works, Then the Law, and Covenant of Works giveth Life: But if this be the Tenor of the Covenant of Grace, if men will grant that, then it is evident, that the Covenant of Grace is not absolute, but conditional.  
5. Suppose the Covenant of Grace absolute, without condition, and then how is it possible for any man, or woman in the world to know, they have an interest in the Covenant, and the blessings thereof without extraordinary divine revelation? So there could be no such duty, as the Apostle Peter exhorts Christians unto, to make their calling and Election, and Salvation sure. If there be no conditions in the Covenant, then all would seem to have an equal share, or no share at all in it. If it be said, God did not intend it for the benefit of all alike yet notwithstanding, it is impossible that those to whom he doth intend the benefits and blessings of the Covenant, should know any such thing( since they are not expressed by name) if there be no conditions, or qualifications deciphering the persons to whom those special blessings do belong. Christians, take heed of entertaining this opinion, as you would not subvert the true ground of spiritual peace, and consolation. This opinion is very prejudicial to all sound, solid, Scripture-hope, and joy.  
6. We have proved before that the Covenant of Grace, doth partake of the Nature of a Law; therefore there must needs be something required. If it were all promise, it could not be a Law. We sometimes red of Gods commanding the Covenant, Psal. 111.9. He hath commaded his covenant for ever. Surely he doth not speak this of the Covenant of Works; for that is not the everlasting covenant, the Scriptures speak of, As one observes. There is mention made of a covenant promised, Deut. 7.12. and there is mention also of a covenant commanded( Deut. 4.13.) not to imply two Covenants, but two parts of the same Covenant, and pray tell me, what is the Bond of the covenant, if it lays no tie upon man? we red, Ezek. 20.37. of the Bond of the Covenant; And surely( as one says) there is a condition in that Bond.  
In Psal. 25.10. to keep Gods Covenant, and his Testimonies, are made all one. Covenant and Testimonies are Synonyma's, meaning Legem foedere sancitam. The Ark was called the Ark of the covenant, because there was kept the book of the covenant, Gods Law, which by Covenant they were bound to observe. [ All the paths of the Lord are mercy and truth, unto such as keep his covenant and his Testimonies. This text cannot speak of the covenant of Works, sure. 1. Because there are none, that keep that Covenant. 2. Because no mercy belongs to that Covenant. No mercy is to be expected, upon the Terms of that Covenant.  
Again, Psal. 103.18. To keep his covenant, and to remember his commandments to do them, are put together, the latter as exegetical of the former. And ver. 17. the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon such as keep his covenant. The covenant of works cannot be intended here, The Psalmist speaks of a covenant of mercy; which is yet a covenant requiring duty. There are commands, as well as promises belonging to the covenant of grace. Commands to be observed on our part, as well as Promises to be performed on Gods part. We must remember and consider, God is a God, that enters into covenant with us; and we are his Creatures, we that are taken into covenant. And how can it seem strange that a God in covenant requires duty and subjection of his creatures. But this will be further cleared when we come to show, what the new covenant conditions are.  
7. Seventhly. If the covenant of Grace hath no condition, then none could be said either to keep it or to break it. Then none could be guilty of transgressing, or forsaking it. There is no thinking, that any man should keep the covenant of works. And if the covenant of Grace have no condition; then there is nothing in this covenant for men to keep. If the covenant be absolute, there can be no breaking of it on mans part. If there are no conditions required, there are none to be observed. If men are bound to nothing in this covenant, then though they do nothing, they cannot be said to fail in any thing, to transgress and break this covenant. As yet men are sometimes charged, Deut. 29.25. Isa. 24.5. Psal. 78.10.37. pray think a little seriously of this; If you say the Covenant is absolute, then it cannot be broken on mans part; then if it be broken, it should be broken by God himself. But it is horrid blasphemy to charge the Lord, that is faithful, with breach of covenant. The objections that are usually made against conditions in the Covenant of Grace, have been answered already in what I premised. To say, that a condition here would derogate, from the perfection and fullness of Christ's merit, or from the freeness of God's Grace in bestowing Covenant-blessings, hath no show of reason, unless some meritorious condition was pleaded for. Those texts, Jer. 31.33. Heb. 8.10. which some urge; I shall speak to, under the ninth proposition.  
Well. I hope you have seen it cleared, and undeniably proved, that the Covenant of Grace hath its Conditions. Now would you bring this truth home to your hearts, and consciences; Sirs, what can you say for yourselves, to evidence your right and Title to the blessings promised? Are you true believers, or not? Are you sound converts, or not? Are you upright walkers, or not? Such you must be, otherwise you cannot escape the condemnation threatened, incurred by the breach of the Covenant of Works, or enjoy the salvation held forth, and promised in the Covenant of Grace.  
I may expect, that this Doctrine will not be pleasing to some. They have been called legal Preachers, and Duty-mongers, &c. that have held, and maintained the Covenant of Grace to be conditional. But I have been wont still to suspect those ways and opinions, which a carnal corrupt heart naturally complieth with. It is too probable, that such are false ways. How pleasing is it to flesh and blood, to tell sinners of an absolute Covenant, where God hath promised to do all, requiring nothing of them. Christ died to save sinners,& if you are sinners, ther is no more to be said or done, but he died to save you; would not such doctrine please the vilest& most graceless wretches. As I remember a ranting Antinomian, that preached such Doctrine as this, about Cambridge, That Fornicators, adulterers, effeminate, thieves, covetous, drunkards, &c. are the onely pieces cut out for heaven, Though certainly, it was extreme blockishness, or something worse than blockishness, not to take notice, that when the Apostle says, 1 Cor. 6.11. [ such were some of you] he immediately adds, but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified. If this were the message, Gods ministers had to deliver, were we to tell the drunkard, the unclean wretch, the covetous, and unjust person, going on to satisfy their lusts, that the promise of pardon and salvation was theirs, as much as any ones; that Christ and heaven did belong to them, as much as to any others; that their Right and Title, is as good as any ones; this could not but be welcome news to them. And if this were Gospel light, I wonder how it is possible that Sinners should hate the light. Indeed I cannot conceive how one that loves his lusts, should not love such preaching. But alas what is it, but to sow pillows under mens arm-holes; This is to strengthen the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, by promising him life. This is to prophesy peace, but so as the false prophets were wont to do. This is a smooth way indeed, but such as leadeth into the broad way. Take heed of it. This is not building souls towards heaven, but rather to hell, to lay a foundation for security and presumption. I would fear to lay principles of despair or presumption either. As I durst not but encourage the greatest Sinner amongst you to leave your sins; but say, as the Apostle, Act. 3.19. Repent, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out: So I durst not encourage any of you to live in sin, as if ye might continue in sin, and yet hope that Gods abounding Grace would extend itself to you in the pardon of your sins. No, if ye live after the flesh ye shall die: but if through the Spirit, ye mortify the deeds of the body ye shall live, Rom. 8.13.   
Mark 1.15. 
Repent ye, and believe the Gospel.  
Sect. 7.  
PROP. VII. The Condition of the Covenant of Grace is not performed by God or by Christ for us; but by us;( the Lord enabling us.)  
SOme that will not hear of the Covenant of Grace having any Condition, yet that they may not be thought enemies to faith, repentance, new obedience, would fain salue the matter thus, 
Mr. Patient, Dist. of Covenants. p. 30, 31.  It is a Covenant without all condition required in the creature, but what God himself performeth.  
Now though I freely grant no man would perform the condition of the Covenant of Grace, without special grace and help from God; yet to say, It is without all condition, but what God himself performeth, is a rash, unsound assertion. For,  
First, It is self-contradiction. It is to say the Covenant is absolute, and not absolute; without all condition, and not without all condition required in the creature.  
Secondly, It is indeed blasphemous to say that God doth believe in us, repent in us, obey in us. He giveth the grace& ability, but it is man that performeth the Act. He giveth his people that special help, whereby they come to believe, repent, obey. But it is one thing for God to enable us to perform the condition, and another to perform it himself. It is below the Majesty of God to perform the condition for us; as it is above us, quiter above our strength, to perform it without him.  
Thirdly, If there be no condition required in the creature, but what God performeth, then the Covenant should run thus, I the Lord do promise remission and salvation unto you, upon this condition that I give you an heart to believe and repent, upon condition that I perform this in, and for you. Thus God should require the condition of himself not of us. Which is most absurd.  
Fourthly, Thus men should not deserve to suffer for non-performance of the condition; it being that which God is to perform, and otherwise not required in, or of the creature. If the Covenant lieth wholly on Gods part, then how are men punishable for not keeping Covenant? This is evident, that such as have the Gospel preached to them, and do not come up to the Terms of the new Covenant,( do not believe, and repent,) they not onely deprive themselves of the life and happiness there promised, but also incur the penalty threatened. Now will God punish any for unbelief, when faith was not required of them; or not required, till the Lord performed it in them? If that position I am disproving, were true, the Gospel should never threaten condemnation for unbelief. Where God performeth this for any, that they believe, they are freed from condemnation upon that account; and as for others, who have not this performed in them, it is not required of them, God requiring no more than he performeth. By this time I hope you are sensible, that it a dangerous assertion, to say, God requireth nothing in the Covenant of Grace, but what he performeth.  
And so it is as false to say, that the condition of this Covenant is performed by Christ.  
It is enough for us( says one) to believe that Christ hath repented for us, 
Saltmarsh.  believed for us.  
But it is not required of Christ, but of us sinners, to repent, and believe. Jesus Christ was made under the Law, and kept it to a tittle, fulfilled all righteousness, he performed the condition of the first Covenant. The Covenant of Works, which Adam broke, Christ fulfilled. But he was not under the Gospel, nor was he concerned to perform the condition of the Covenant of Grace, but onely to see that his people the heirs of salvation do perform it.  
To advice souls that doubt of their Gospel sincerity, to see it in Christ( as Mr. Saltmarsh does) to see it in Christ, who hath obeied perfectly, is miserable to confounded the conditions of the two Covenants, which ought to be most carefully distinguished. And it implieth thus much, as if such were troubled about what doth not at all concern them. Why should any trouble themselves about the condition of the Covenant of Grace, to find it in themselves, if Christ hath performed the same for them? As if souls should disquiet themselves, that they cannot see how they can satisfy Gods justice for their sins, when Christ hath done that, and it is not expected from them. If Christ hath performed the condition of the Covenant of Grace for us, then it belongeth not to us to perform it. It is done already to our hand. And we should not presume to take Christs work out of his hand.  
And if Christ fulfilled the conditions of both Covenants for us, then it followeth, that even as he made us without us, so he saveth us without us; contrary to Phil. 2.12. So likewise it followeth, that all for whom Christ hath satisfied( whether they were all mankind, or all the Elect) are immediately justified, actually discharged from all sin, and condemnation, immediately interested in the benefits and blessings of the Covenant of Grace, in a state of salvation, as soon as ever they are in being; there being nothing required to their interest in the same, but what Christ hath done for them. So it follows, that such were never children of wrath, but always in a state of reconciliation with God, contrary to Eph. 2.3. And so again, that we are not justified by faith: but before faith, and without it, contrary to Rom. 5.1. And then, what should hinder, but that men may be justified and saved, who never do believe, contrary to Mark 16.16. He that believeth not shall be damned. But that the condition of the covenant of Grace is not performed by Christ, but by us, appears from that Proposition cleared and proved before, That the Covenant of Grace is not betwixt God and Christ, but betwixt God and us, or betwixt Christ and us.   
Joh. 6.44. 
No man can come to me, except, &c.  
Sect. 8.  
PROP. VIII. Though we are to perform the condition of the Covenant of Grace, yet we should never perform it of ourselves, without the help of special Grace.  
THis appears,  
1. From the consideration of mans natural condition: what we all are without Grace. Naturally we are without strength, Rom. 5.6. under the power of Satan, Luk. 11.21, 22. blinded and lead by him, 2 Cor. 4.4. Eph. 2.2. unable to discern spiritual things aright, 1 Cor. 2.14. Our minds and wills at enmity against God, so ill disposed, that they cannot subject to, cannot but rebel against the Law of God, Rom. 8.7. and we all found dead in trespasses and sins, Eph. 2.1, 5. Col. 2.13.  
hilary wrote to St. Augustine of many in France, who thought, In naturâ licèt vitiatâ, residuam esse talem facultatem, quae suo conatu posset medicum quaerere, i.e. incipere. A likely thing, that dead souls should seek to the physician of themselves; or that they should come upon a bare external call. Suadela non sufficit, said opus est medelâ. They have too slight thoughts of the corruption of mans nature, who see not special grace of absolute necessity to conversion. That corruption which hath depraved all a mans faculties, which renders man an enemy to God, and his own souls truest good, where this ill constitution of soul is become natural, it must needs be a mighty work indeed to subdue this corruption, to turn the soul from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God.  
2. From the Scripture expressions used, to set forth the first inward discriminating grace, that without which there is no believing, no repenting, or obeying aright.  
The Father's drawing, Joh. 6.44. No man can come to me, except the Father draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. Hereupon says our Amesius. It would seem to be of no less power this drawing men to Christ, 
In Coron. Art. 4. c. 8. Sect. 5. ( mihi) p. 252.  than raising them from the dead: otherwise Christ should attribute the lesser work to his Father, and the greater to himself. Sure it is, the Fathers drawing must denote some inward efficacious work, not mere Moral suasion. For all that are drawn of the Father( in the sense of this Text) they come to Christ,( see ver. 45.) but all that have moral suasion do not come. Those carnal Jews, Christ was preaching unto there, had moral suasion; yet did not come, not being drawn of the Father. And is it not as plain, that the Fathers drawing determineth mans will, is not determined by it? Otherwise he should not so properly be said to draw men, as to be drawn: he should not led, but follow.  
It is giving a new heart, Ezek. 36.26. Does God give a new heart to all? Surely no. Therefore this intended something more, than any common help afforded to all. All have not a new heart given them, If no more were included in it, than moral suasion, then Ministers might be said to give men a new heart, when they persuade them to get their hearts renewed. But that an inward efficacious, heart-changing work is intended in that expression, may appear from Deut. 29.2. Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive] when as he had given them( besides their natural faculties) his word, miracles, abundance of means, fitted to work on them objectively, morally. And certainly Gods putting his Law in our inward parts, and writing it in our hearts, Ezek. 36.27. is more than bare revealing it, more than offering it to our understanding  
Besides the illumination of the understanding, it must needs include a renewing of the will. And there is no obeying God aright, till he give us this heart to obey. NO believing in Christ, till the Lord give us an heart to believe.  
Thus Faith is the gift of God. Ministers may preach the necessity of faith, may persuade to it, but cannot give it.  
It is Gods taking away the heart of ston, and giving an heart of flesh, Ezek. 36.26. The stony heart of man would never yield of itself, or relent of itself.  
It is called regeneration, Joh. 3.3. A being born again, born from above, born of God. And no believing till we are born of God, Joh. 1. v. 12, 13. We must be spiritually alive otherwise we cannot act spiritually. No believing without regeneration, therefore no believing without special grace. Will any say, that regeneration is no more than moral suasion? or that it is common to all? Is this their gratia sufficiens, which they would have given to all? Then if all have regeneration, if all are born of God, it follows, all are the children of God, and all are believers; for so are all that are born of God. Methinks this is plain, All are not born of God; but it is of his special grace that any are thus born again. Yet no believing without being born of God: and so no believing without special grace.  
Not that we are to suppose any interval, or distance of time betwixt the Act of Gods Grace, irradiating the understanding, and renewing, rectifying the will, and the enlightened and rectified mind and wills act of closing with Christ: but that Gods Act is first in order. His drawing in order of nature before mans coming.  
Again, It is {αβγδ}, and, {αβγδ}, Eph. 1.19. The exceeding greatness of his power, the energy of the might of his power, which he puts forth, in enabling souls to believe. Now were it not needless, that he should put forth this extraordinary, supernatural power, if men could believe of themselves, without any special grace, or help from him?  
So it is called a new creation, quickening or resurrection from the dead, 
Anast. Sinait. d. rect. fid. dog. l. 1.  Eph. 2.5, 10. Neque enim ab alio aliquo potes recreari, praeterquam ab eo qui initio te creavit. To create, quicken, raise from the dead, these are special works of divine almighty power.  
3. From the promises God hath made of giving Grace. 
To so●e, which implies, that they have it not of themselves: but must have it from Him. Promisit enim quod ipse facturus fuerat, non quod homines; quia etsi faciant homines bona, ipfe facit, ut illi faciant quae praecepit; non illi faciunt ●t pse faciat, quod promifit, Aug.  When the Lord promiseth to circumcise their heart, to love him, Deut. 30.6. doth not this imply that a natural uncircumcised heart cannot love him?( the uncircumcised heart cannot love God, as the uncircumcised ear cannot harken to him, Jer. 6.10.) And that no man can circumcise his own heart, nor can any creature so prepare, and dispose the heart of another to love God? But that this must be the work of the Lord God.[ The Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart, &c.] So Ezek. 36.26. I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh. The Lord needed not to have made such promises, if sinners could do the work of themselves.  
4 If men may believe, and repent of themselves, without the special help of Divine grace, 
Frustra●n.& stulcè ab alio petimus, quod vel jam habemus, vel quod sic in nostra positum est potestate, ut ab alio dandum, seu faciendum non expect mus. D. Ward.( Grat. Discrim.) p. 343.  then what need they to pray to God for Grace? what need they pray for that, which is in their own power already? As S. August. noteth of the Pelagians, Destruunt etiam orationes quas facit Ecclesia, sieve pro infidelibus,& doctrinae Dei resistentibus, ut convertantur ad Deum: sieve pro fidelibus, &c. de haeres. c. 88.  
I cannot understand how they can hearty pray for grace for themselves or others, that assert the liberty of mans will, in opposition to the special determining grace of God. How shall they pray to the Lord to turn them,( as Jer. 31.18.) to change their hearts, to order their steps in his word, to incline their hearts to keep his Laws, who hold that all God does is to set mans will in aequilibrio, in an equal poise, not that he ever determineth mans will so by his grace, but leaveth it free to determine itself?  
And if we must hold, that God giveth to all men that are alike in their carriage, like grace, in common; not to one more, to another less; then how can I pray or hope, that he should do that for me, which he will not do for every one in the world, of the like condition and capacity with me? Yea, why should men pray at all? If this be the inflexible rule of his dealings with the children of men, there would seem to be no more ground for prayer here, than that we should pray that the ordinances of heaven, and Gods Covenant with day and night might continue to the end of the world, that sun and moon might still keep their course, or on the other hand pray for an alteration of the most settled course of nature.  
Thus all our prayers for grace should signify no more, than such a declaration as this, Lord, thou hast given man freedom of will to choose, or refuse life and happiness, and such means and motives thou hast vouchsafed and given, the better to direct him in his choice. Now this is all that I, or any one can expect at thy hands, that thou wouldst assist my natural faculties in that general way, as thou dost assist the faculties of all men, notwithstanding which general help there is not one of many, but chooseth death and misery before everlasting life and happiness; yet I crave no more, and look for no more, but that common help thou wouldst not deny to any one in my circumstances, and let it be left to my own will, to take what course it pleaseth. Now is this to pray for converting grace, or rather is it not to declare, we have no need of it, or no ground to pray for it? yet, This is the Result of that opinion, which sets up the Liberty of mans will, or power of nature against the special grace of God; which whether it be not very horrid, let those that know what prayer is, and what their own hearts are, how corrupt and ill inclined, and that know what grace is, consider seriously of it, take advice, and speak their minds.  
5. Take away special Grace, deny that, and you must say, believers are no way bound to praise God in special, above other men. How are they obliged to praise God above others, for whom he does no more, than he doth for others? But does not this sound very harshly, that they that believe, and are saved, are no more beholden to the Grace of God, than such are, who reject Christ and the Gospel, and so die and perish? yet so it must be, if God give but the same help to those, which these other had. 
Nec dici potest Petrum ideo accepisse majus beneficium quam Judas, quod habeat gratiam adjuvantem per modum concursus, quam Judas non habet. Nam praeterquam quod Petrus sua acceptatione seize a Juda antecedenter discrevit ad gratiae adjuvantis cooperationem; haec ipsa gratia adjuvans aeque parata est ex eorum hypothesi Judae atque Petro, ac proinde hac ex parte aequale est beneficium cum ex aequo utrisque paretur,& offeratur, Dr. Ward[ Grat. Discrim.] p. 328, 329.  Yea, for as much as many that are now damned did once enjoy more of the means of salvation, more common helps, more of that they call sufficient grace, than some that are saved; if there be not some special grace vouchsafed to these, which the other had not, they should be less obliged unto God, which one would tremble to think of. That some do believe, when others believe not, if you deny special grace, you must say, it is not because God did more for the one, than for the other: but because by the free act of their own will, the one did improve that grace and help vouchfafed to men in common, which the other sort neglected, would not improve. Thus indeed the will of man is made the direct, true, and proper cause of his first conversion and coming unto Christ; and the divine grace and help no more than barely an antecedent, or a faint causa sine quâ non. That which being put, yet it was altogether uncertain, whether the happy effect would follow; which had been in vain, and utterly lost, but that the free will of such thought good to determine the matter on its side. Thus a man should owe the praise of his own conversion, not so much to Gods Grace as to his own free will; his willing to accept of, and improve that famed exciting grace, which others had in common with him, and rejected, or resisted. Thus a man maketh himself to differ, even in that main, that highest point of difference, true saving grace. Surely common grace( which they suppose vouchsafed to all upon equal terms) this cannot make the difference: therefore it must be either Gods special Grace, or mans free will. If you deny the former of these, you give the praise of that to the latter. What a graceless opinion is that( Sirs) which tendeth to make men so ungrateful to Gods grace? Once we find the Pharisee brought in, as giving thanks to God, that he was not as the Publican. But if they that are converted, had not stood out, as well as others, but for some special grace vouchsafed to them, which was denied to others that stand out, they cannot( with understanding and seriousness) give thanks to God for making that difference, which not his grace, but their own free will did make.  
Though some may say, They owe this to God, that he hath given them such liberty of will. As a noble, and ingenious writer speaks of a Jew, 
Ser aph. Love p. 117.  that thought men owed more to God, than the very Angels do; For this reason, that whereas God without any good work of theirs, 
Was not that a blasphemous saying of Seneca, nigro carbone not andum,( Epist. 53) Est aliquid quo sapiens antecedat Deum; ille naturae beneficio, non suo sapiens est.  but purely out of his goodness conferred on them that blessed condition they enjoy; by giving man a free will, by the goodness of which he may glorify his maker, when by abusing it 'tis in his power to dishonour him, he allows man that highest satisfaction, and privilege of cooperating to his own felicity. Thus the Jew.  
But here I digress a little, only in him we may see our own hearts naturally, we are proud, loth to be beholden, would sacrifice to our own nets.  
But that which I was saying, is, that it is not enough for men to aclowledge themselves indebted unto God, for giving them such power and freedom of will; though it is true, thus it appears to be originally from God, that any do accept of Grace offered.( Pelagius that was all for setting up the power of Nature, yet ad frangendam invidiam, and to beguile others, would call it grace.) But grant that the power is from God 
At vero inquies, habuit a Deo id posse. At vero inquam, habuit a Deo posse& in malum ferri, idque ex vestra sententia, nempe, {αβγδ}. Ergo non aliter erit a Deo quod voluntas fertur in bonum, quam quod in malum, Camer. defence. cap. 20. p. 277.  yet if that be all that God doth in converting a sinner, to give him this natural power, and some common grace besides; and so does leave it to a mans own will to strike the concluding stroke, it followeth, God is but the remote cause of a mans conversion; and mans will the immediate cause; yea, the onely cause of the difference, that one man is converted, when others remains unconverted, to whom God vouchsafed equal means and help. This is an opinion therefore, that robbeth God of the praise due to his name, to give undue praise to man. 
Of the Covenant. p. 24.  As Mr. Ball says well, That man believeth, this he oweth unto God, and that not simply alone, but comparatively in respect of others, who believe not.  
6. If faith were of ourselves, if we should believe without any special Grace, then have we something of our own, whereof to glory. But we have nothing of our own to glory of. Boasting is utterly excluded by the Law of faith, Rom. 3.27. 1 Cor. 4.7. The good use of common Grace( which the most abuse) is a considerable something 
Quod ergo minus est, voluntas accepit a Deo; nimirum, ut poneretur in indifferenti quadam medietate, ut crederet, vel non crederet; quod autem majus est, ipsumque eventum specificat, sibi ex se praestitit voluntas ipsa, nempe, ut actu crederet. Suffrag. britain. de 3.& 4. art. thes. 3. p. 140. . And here is something which the adversaries of special grace must deny, that men receive. They will grant men receive to posse credere; but to credere,( which is a great deal more,) that we use that power and common grace better than others, this we do not receive, but have it of ourselves, our free will. And yet the Apostle tells us, God worketh in us, {αβγδ}, to will, as well as to do.  
Now I come to answer some objections against special grace; and its efficiency in the work of a sinners conversion.  
Object. 1. Does not this overthrow the nature of mans will? The will is free, and cannot be forced.  
Answ. The will is not compelled, but inclined, and determined by grace.  
Mans will( considered in his lapsed estate) is not morally free, not free from a vicious sinful inclination. All that do not deny original sin, must grant this. Now hence it follows that without a special work of Grace, turning and changing the natural bent and inclination of the will, a man cannot break off his sins, give up himself to obey God, to be ruled and governed by Jesus Christ. That a man left to himself would do nothing but sin, would never leave the trade of sinning, Gen. 6.5. Every imagination of the thoughts of his heart being onely evil continually. Jer. 13.23. Can the Ethiopian change his skin, &c. Now it is the work of divine grace to enlighten the mind, and renew the will, to heal it of that corrupt inclination, to take off that strong propension of the soul to sin, and its prejudice, perverseness, and obstinacy against God and Jesus Christ. And as this is taken off, the soul is coming on towards God, of unwilling is made willing to believe, repent, obey. And the more that the former sinful inclination, and perverse disposition is taken off, the more willing and free is the soul unto these gracious Acts.  
Now if you can but distinguish betwixt the natural power, or faculty of the will, and the moral vicious habits and inclinations of the will, you will see clearly that Grace doth not overthrow the nature of the will or of its Acts: but onely is contrary to that evil inclination brought in by the fall. They that suppose Gods Grace goeth thus far with all, as to set their wills in an equal inclination, to good as to evil, they will not deny( sure) but that without this grace, mans will was only inclined and determined unto evil. Now if when mans will was wholly, and onely inclined unto evil, the Grace of God could work thus far on it, as to bring it to an aequilibrium, to an indifferency or hovering betwixt two( whereas it was only one way bent before) I say, if Grace could thus far turn the bent of the will without overthrowing the nature of the will, and entrenching on its Liberty, let any man give us a reason, why the grace of God may not go one step further with the will, so as to incline and determine it to good,( that the prevailing bent of the will should be that way) still without infringing its Liberty.  
I cannot see any danger, or inconvenience in granting[ that men have a natural power to believe and obey] rightly explained. That when God commandeth us to believe, repent, &c. he doth not command what is naturally impossible, what we have no more power to do, than to cause the sun and moon to stand still, or to remove mountains with a word. No, God hath given man those faculties, or powers of understanding and will, which are apt to obey, and receive his Commands, if they were not hindered by an evil disposition, and inclination, at first contracted by the fall, and further increased, strengthened and rooted, by the abuse of them in the practise of sin, but though men have the natural powers, or faculties, for want of a right constitution of them, they would never produce any gracious Acts of themselves. A mere natural power is not enough here, where there is no moral power, no true disposition and inclination to that which is truly spiritually good. And there is no such disposition or inclination without Grace. Now as men have a Natural power to believe and obey, but no true inclination thereunto without Grace, so we may say on the other hand, men have a natural power to reject Christ and his commands, where special grace is vouchsafed 
Note, that the Anti-Arminians grant both resistibilitatem connatam, a natural power of resisting( inseparable from the will, as it is a natural faculty)& resistibilitatem adnatam, which is more than a power of resisting, even a proneness to resist, arising from the depravation of the will; yea, and actualem resistentiam, some actual resistance, arising from that vicious adnate power or proneness to resist; they only deny actualem resistentiam vincentem, to be consistent with converting grace. Vid. Dr. Ward. ubi supra. p. 270, 271, 299, 303, 306. , but they are otherwise inclined, they see that in Christ and the Gospel, and have their wills so far rectified by grace, that they would not for a thousand worlds reject him. The prevailing bent of their wills now is fully, hearty, thoroughly to close with, and cleave to him.  
But by this which hath been said, I hope it is not hard to understand, how God by his special grace inclineth and determineth mans will after such a manner, that the will does also determine itself. That his people become willing in the day of his power, Psal. 110.3. As Mr. Ball solidly and judiciously. Repentance is the Cift of God, 
Of the Covenant, p. 344.  but the Act of Man. God is the cause of willing, efficient, but not formal; the cause external and effective: but not vitally efficient &c. plainly thus, It is man that repenteth, believeth by the help of Gods Grace. And grace does so move and incline the will to believe and repent, as doth admirably agree with the nature of the will, According to that speech of one of the Ancients, Gratiâ Dei humanum non aufertur, said sanatur arbitrium: non adimitur, said corrigitur, non evacuatur said adjuvatur. Certainly, the will never Acts more freely, than when made free by Grace. I will run the way of thy Commandments, when thou shalt enlarge my heart. Draw me, and we we will run after thee. Yet take this along with you, that as the influx of divine grace, is very sweet in the souls conversion, So it is very powerful and efficacious. As it doth not oppose the wills acting freely, So neither doth it leave the will at uncertainty. Turn thou me and I shall be turned; for thou art the Lord my God, Jer. 31.18. Necessariò peccat homo ante gratiam, neque tamen haec peccandi ne cessitas pugnat cum Naturali voluntatis libertate, cupotius cum eadem pugnabit been volendi necessitas per gratiam?( Testard. d. Nat.& grat. Sect. 252. p. 211, 212.) As a Learned man observes. It is so ordained of God( as a general Law of Nature) That betwixt the objects appointed, 
Amyrald in Thes. Salm. par. 2. de fide p. 101. Sect. 40.  to certain faculties, and the faculties themselves rightly constituted, there should be such a certain proportion 
Which I see Arminius sometimes grants, Orat. de Aut.& fine Theol. Sequetur intellectus dilatationem ampliatio volunt atis— ex nativa intellectus& voluntatis convenientia, ac ingenita utrique analogia. &c. , answerableness and consent, that if they be fitly applied to one another, it cannot be but there should hence proceed a suitable operation. Thus( there is as he says) inter intellectum ac veritatem ineluctabilis analogia, such an unavoidable proportion and suitableness betwixt the understanding and truth, that the understanding rightly disposed, cannot but assent to truth demonstrated. And there is no less agreement inter bonum& appetitum, that the rational appetite rightly constituted cannot but cleave to good clearly apprehended, and duly presented to it; certainly it must be granted that the understanding cannot assent to that which is false, sub ratione falsi as false; nor can the will choose that which is evil, sub ratione mali, as evil. As I  told you before, mans incogitancy or inadvertency was the first step to the fall, want of a due application of the object to the faculty. Thus on the other hand serious consideration is the first step to recovery. Spiritual things spiritually discerned would produce spiritual affections, and put upon gracious endeavours. It is true, that there is no proportion or agreeableness betwixt a carnal mind and spiritual things. But it is as natural for the soul prepared by divine grace, freely to close with Christ offered, and to submit to his Laws( as desirous in all things to be governed by him;) as it is natural to carnal unregenerate men to sin freely, who are only that way inclined, Though I grant there is a contrary corrupt inclination still remaining in the regenerate, who are renewed and sanctified but in part, yet the prevailing bent and inclination of the soul is towards God and Christ. But  
Object. 2. Where is the iustice of God, in requiring faith of men, and condemning men for unbelief, if it be so, that they have no power to believe without special grace?  
Answ. 1. I should fear advancing and honouring one Attribute of Gods in such a way, as would necessary deny, or dishonour any other of his Attributes. As it is sinful to set up and advance grace after such a manner, as is inconsistent with Gods holiness, or justice. This would be but to reproach our maker. But certainly Gods justice is to be cleared, without the clouding or ecclipsing, without the denying or diminishing of his Grace. For.  
2ly. Is not God just in requiring perfect obedience of fallen man? And are not sinners obnoxious to punishment for every sin, and act of disobedience? Now Arminius will grant you, 
Resp. ad. 9. quest. f. 176.  that a man cannot keep the Law of God perfectly, secundum rigorem, but onely secundum {αβγδ}. Corvinus I think stretcheth the Lawyers saying too far, Lex aut ad obedientiam, obligat, aut ad poenam, 
Censur. Anat. Arm. c. 8. Sect. 7. p. 122.  that one is not obliged by the same Law both to punishment, and to obedience. Which must be taken with restriction, in reference to the same act. For a Law may oblige to punishment for past disobedience, and yet oblige to obedience for future, too; yet says he, when therefore man lay under the curse, he was no further obliged to obedience; 
ibid.  because God would no longer be served by him. For that God will be served of his creature, it is of favour. But as Mr. Ball says. It is altogether undecent, especially to the wisdom and righteousness of God, 
Ball of the Covenant, p. 289.  that that which provokes the execution, should procure the abrogation of his Laws. That that should supplant and undermine the Law, for the alone preventing whereof, the Law was before established. The truth is, it cannot but be the creatures duty to serve God, and obey him in all that he is pleased to command. It is but right and just that God should require this of all, even of sinful creatures. The creatures guilt is no fair plea against Gods right. It is against all reason that mans disobedience should discharge him from a tie to obedience, that his transgressing Gods commands should voided Gods right of commanding. Shall the creatures running into rebellion, deprive God of his sovereign Authority, justle him out of his Throne? As Corceius reasoneth well, 
d. foed. c. 4. Sect. 71. p. 76.  si sublato praemio& introducto reatu poenae cessaret obligatio, then it would seem that man from the beginning could be bound by no Law, but what he voluntarily would accept of. For if by a mans choosing to undergo the guilt and punishment, rather than to perform obedience, the obligation be dissolved, it would seem the Obligation was rather arbitrarily taken on him, as in a free contract betwixt a servant and his master: not that he was naturally, necessary bound to obey God, from his very being; as he was his Creature. And besides it would follow( as the forementioned Author also notes) that there should be no actual sin, but onely the first sin of Adam.  
Thirdly, To come closer to the objection, I would not say simply, that a man hath no power to believe, but no will to believe, without special grace, posse credere naturae est hominum; velle credere gratiae est fidelium. Or thus, we must distinguish of power( as was hinted in the Answer to the former objection) power is either Physical, i.e. Natural; or Ethical, moral. That in Joh. 6.44. No man can come to me, may be well explained by that, John 5.40. ye will not come to me, ye cannot come, because ye will not: ye will not come, without special grace draw and incline you to it: But if mens wills were to it, they should not be kept off for want of power. Did ever any thing hinder any soul's coming unto Christ that was truly willing to come.  
But( you will say) sinners cannot will to come to Christ, but I would ask you again, why can they not will to come to him? If they have Christ held forth, and hear the Gospel inviting sinners to him; what is it but a wicked perverse disposition, and inclination of will, that keepeth them from him, as Mr. Ball says well He that refuseth to come, 
Of the Covenant, p. 244.  refuseth not through inability, as unable, though willing and desirous to embrace it, but willingly preferring some base inferior good before it. And again, That man believeth, 
p. 245.  this he oweth unto God, and that not simply alone, but comparatively in respect of others who believe not: but that man refuseth the promises of mercy, this is of himself, not of simplo or Natural infirmity which might procure pity, but of his own perverseness and love to some inferior good, &c.( you may see more in him to this purpose, p. 343.  
Object. 3. Do you not make God as one that mocketh, in the tenders of his grace, offering mercy to sinners on such terms, and conditions, as they cannot attain to without special grace which is vouchsafed but to a few of many.  
Answ. No God does not mock sinners but is as serious as may be, telling them on what terms he will be gracious to them. That if they will come in, they shall find mercy; otherwise not.  
Thus the Covenant of Grace holdeth forth a possibility of Salvation to sinners, condemned by the Law and Covenant of works, and is there no grace in this? Again, here the Lord requires less, than in strict justice he might require, less than the law of works,( which all men naturally are under) doth exact. And is there no grace in that?  
And what he requires, he hath absolutely promised to work in some. And is wont to work in his people by the calls, invitations, promises, &c. of his word and Gospel. His grace and spirit concurring, and is there no grace herein.  
But let God be true, and every man a liar. Is He not beforehand with sinners? Did he mock the world, when he gave his Son to be the Saviour of all, and every one that would believe in him? Does he mock men, in calling, and persuading them to Christ in the Gospel? should any one of them be rejected, if they came? yea, does he not ordinarily concur with the word and outward means, in some sort to prepare men for converting grace? And can it be proved, that ever he deserted any one in the way to conversion, till provoked by their neglect of him, and rejecting of his grace offered? As one of the ancients, Qui& priusquam deseratur, neminem deserit,& multos desertores sepe convertit. Does he not complain of sinners, Because when he called they refused, Prov. 1.24. Now what an unjust, and unworthy thing is it, for any to charge God, as if he dealt not cordially with us in the offers of his grace, when he denies special grace to none, but such as have first neglected to improve common grace.  
And certainly, men may as soon persuade believers out of their senses, to conceit the Sun is a dark spot, that snow is black, and fire could, and honey bitter, As that God in the Covenant of Grace doth merely pretend and make show of grace and mercy to sinners: but that in very dead he only mocks them.  
O that sinners would try, whether God is not serious. Let the wicked for sake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him return unto the Lord and he will have mercy upon him, and to our God for he will abundantly pardon, Isa. 55.7. As I live saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live, Ezek. 33.11. O sinners will you try, whether the Lord be not serious, O that you could be persuaded to try! you would never repent of this repentance, Turn to the Lord and you would then resolve,( by the help of his grace) never to turn away from him more.  
If now you will say, Alas, we cannot turn. I must tell you from God, then you cannot live. And it is as if a malefactor taken and reprehended should say, I cannot leave this course of mine, I cannot leave my trade of thieving, robbing. A moral cannot, that is indeed a will-not. It is very true, that the {αβγδ} velle, the moral power is not vouchsafed to all. God doth not work in every one [ to will] yet he vouchsafeth means for the removal of impotency natural; So they that have Gospel-calls, have {αβγδ} posse si velint. They might come if they would. All the hindrance is in themselves, in their perverse wills. As Mr. Ball( p. 343.) The invitation is not so hard, that a man cannot fulfil it, if he would: but such as if man would, he could not but execute. Now will you say God is not serious, when he calleth you? But one day it will appear, that you only were guilty in this respect, that you would not be persuaded seriously to attend to Gods most serious offers, indeed sinners will not be serious, but tempt Christ, mock God most shamefully; and yet think to excuse themselves by charging God foolishly, as if he mocked them, and dealt not truly and sincerely with them.  
But seeing the reason why men do not turn to God, is not that the thing required is unreasonable,( what can be more reasonable, than that a sinner who deservs to be for ever damned should judge and condemn himself, aclowledge and turn from his iniquities, and most hearty and gladly lay hold on, and embrace Mercy and a Pardon offered, prising it above any thing in the World.) Since it is thus, God does not require any unreasonable thing of men, but the true direct and proper cause of their standing off, is the unreasonable wickedness and perverseness of their own wills: It is evident that men are in all the fault, that they do not turn to God, and that their Destruction is of themselves.  
And though God takes hold of some by his Grace, and Spirit( as the Angel took hold of Lot, who otherwise had perished in Sodom) thus the Lord by his special Grace prevents some( whom he hath Elected unto Life) that they should not run upon Eternal ruin, with the generality of the World; yet this is a most free Dispensation of his rich Grace. And had the Lord done no more for these chosen Vessels, than for the basest potsherds of the Earth, yet they could not justly have blamed him, as any way behind-hand with them: Had he left all Mankind to perish in their Sins, God had been Righteous and the whole World without Excuse.  
One thing more, They Argue thus, what is it, but to Mock men, for the Lord to Invite and Call on them to come, who( he knows) will not come without Special Grace, which yet he gives not to the far greater part of men Invited. They might as well Argue thus against Divine Prescience: 
Num, obsecro te, non novit certo qui parituri, qui Minus? Deus igitur etiam vestro judicio fuerit Hypocrita qui vocat quos scit non parituros. Non potuit Deus hanc contumaciam emollire,& penitus abolere? Deus igitur vobis quidem arbitris, Tyrannus. Camero. defence. c. 16. p. 273.  If God certainly foresees who will not come in upon the Gospel-Call, why does he once Invite them? Are not all Gospel Calls in vain to such, as he knows will never harken to them, and worse than in vain( because the Aggravation of their Sin and Condemnation?) Will they say, that those gracious Calls will further clear Gods Justice in the Condemnation of such ungrateful, sinful wretches as despised them, that thus they will be left the more without Excuse? So we can say the same.  
Object. 4. Do you not evidently make God a Respecter of Persons, if he gives that special Grace to some, which he denies to others every way equal to the former.  
Answ. I think that it is a good and necessary Distinction, 
Vid. Cameron. defence. c. 15. p. 227, 228, 229, 230.  here to Distinguish between a Benefactor and a Judge, or Rector. Consider God as Rector, and Judge, and so he is no respecter of persons, he gives one Law to all, lays down the same Rule for all; he commandeth all men every where to Repent. And according to the same Law he Judgeth, 1 Pet. 1.17. Who without respect of persons Judgeth. God is an Impartial Judge. In matters of judgement it is a fault to respect Persons, and this cannot be charged upon God, he dispenseth both gracious Rewards, and just Punishments, according to those certain, known Rules laid down in his Word; he giveth Reward unto his Servants the Prophets, and to the Saints, and them that fear his Name, small and great, Rev. 11.18. So in that Text, Acts 10.34. God is no respecter of persons, but in every Nation he that feareth him, and worketh Righteousness is accepted of him. He that Believeth( of what Rank or Condition soever) shall be saved. On the other hand, he that Believeth not( be he who he will, how High or Rich, or Great soever) shall be Damned; God will Judge righteous judgement, and render to every one according to his work. Tribulation and Anguish upon every Soul of man that doth evil, that obeyeth unrighteousness, Rom. 2.5, 6, 9.  
But then secondly, Consider God in those special Acts of Grace and Bounty wherein he is not to be looked on as Judge, but as a Free-Doner, or Benefactor only: And who can say, that here he may not respect some, more than others? As a Benefactor may dispense his Favours where he pleaseth. May not God do what he will with his own? Indeed what is any mans by promise, he will not alien, or take away. He hath promised Pardon and Salvation to every true Believer, and will be as good as his word. Every true Believer shall have them; and none but such may expect them. But as for the working of Faith, and giving of the Condition to which Heaven and Happiness is promised, he hath not so bound up himself. But it is certain, he does that for some, which he denies to do for others, their Equals, or Betters. Here he will have mercy on whom he will have mercy, see Rom. 9.11.13, 14, 15, 16. Mat. 11.25, 26.  
Object. 5. What is that special Grace? you tell us of you know not what.  
Answ. 1. I have proved undeniably that there is such a thing. Now because we have not an Accurate knowledge of it, shall we therefore not acknowledge it? 
Motum hunc sentiunt pii, modum ignorant. Camero. defence. p. 90.  Gods ways( we red, Rom. 11. ult.) are past finding out. As the ways of his Judgments, so the ways of his Grace, Thou vain man, that wouldest know, how the new Creature, the babe of Grace, is first formed in the heart, or thou wilt not believe it to be a work of grace, but the mere product of a liberum Arbitrium, the pure conception, and motion of a mans own mind and will; Let me ask thee dost thou know what is the way of the Spirit, or how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child; so neither knowest thou this wonderful work of God.  
Secondly, Though we cannot define it, yet that it is a supernatural working, but congruous and suitable to the nature and faculties of the rational creature, we are not to doubt. It is a sweet drawing, or a powerful and most surely, and prevalent persuading of the soul to Christ. It is divine teaching, that is, teaching to purpose, Gods giving an heart to perceive; every one thus taught of God, cannot but learn, That divine light which strikes the understanding, and breaks in upon the soul in the work of conversion, it necessary, infallibly, irresistibly, produceth a new apprehension of things, whereas the soul was blind before, now it sees clearly: It was in a state of darkness before, but is now light in the Lord. This illumination of the mind is the foundation-work of the souls renovation and sanctification. powerful and thorough conviction the beginning of conversion. All sides are agreed that the Lord can and does oft shine in upon the understanding with that clear manifestation of the truth, and of the chiefest good, and of the onely and necessary means conducing to the enjoyment of it, that the understanding is necessary captivated by it, cannot but give its full Assent. That to believe the contrary were to believe a lie and falsity under the Notion of a lie, and falsity, which is impossible.  
Now this may give us to understand the way and method of Gods grace so far as it is necessary for us to know it, scil. that he draws with the bands of a man, deals with man as a reasonable creature, worketh upon the will by the understanding first enlightened. And thus we may see how the word commands, calls, exhortations, promises of the word, are means of conversion, That the demonstration of the spirit is the improveing of Scripture Arguments driving them to an head; 
{αβγδ}, utego quidem certe illum locum accipio, Camero defence. p. 90.  the urging and fastening of saving Truths on the mind, applying them so close and home, as no creature can do. And we must needs think, there is a great difference betwixt the discovery of truth by the mere light of natural Reason; and the evidencing of it by the demonstration of the Spirit, as there is a difference of seeing things by the dim light of a candle and of seeing them in the clear light of the Sun: Though there is a common illumination of the Spirit, yet there is also a special illumination. It is true the common illumination leaves men but almost persuaded to be Christians; but the special illumination causeth thorough sound conversion. As the mind and understanding is never thus spiritually enlightened, but the heart is touched, the will rectified. As the soul at first was corrupted by the understanding, so by the way of the understanding it is renewed.  
Thus I hope you have seen this last Proposition of the necessity of special grace cleared. I cannot pass from this point, without hinting what special use is to be made of it.  
First, It should make Christians very humble and very thankful. O sirs, it would become the best of you all to have very low thoughts of yourselves, but exceeding high thoughts of God, and his free, and powerful distinguishing grace.  
For my own part: I can say, ever since I came to understand any thing to purpose in Religion, and Christiany, I could not but have a suspicion, that those opinions were not right, that tend to set up the power of man, and lessen the grace of God in the work of his conversion, and Salvation. And when I first met with that of Grevincho's, 
Quis se discernit? in promptu causa est. Ego me ipsum discerno.  I make myself to differ, I could not entertain it but with abhorrence, As still it seems to me a very impudent, arrogant and graceless speech. What he adds does not at all qualify it, I think.  
Quum enim Deo, ad prae determinationi divinae resistere possem, non restiti tamen, at qui in enim quid in liceat mihi tanquam de meo gloriam? Quod enim potui Dei quidem miserentis est, quod autem volui, quum possem noll., id meae potestatis est. He should have said meae virtuis. q. d. That I have a power to be good, this is of God: but that I am better than another this is of myself  
He would onely aclowledge, that God gave him the power, but that he had a will to use it aright, this he had of himself and might glory of it, as his own. Such men may seem to give the first fruits to God: but clearly rob him of his Tenths. The first fruits under the Law might be one of sixty. The Tithes must be one of Ten. They divide unhandsomely, and take the greater share to themselves, and what is most Praise-worthy, giving God the Lesser share; whereas indeed the whole work of Conversion is his, the will of man never inclining to God, till inclined by his Grace.  
O Christians! be very sensible of the strength of Natural Corruption, and of the Freeness, and Power of Gods renewing Grace. Indeed a right sense of the one would help you to a clear discerning of the other, and a due Apprehension of both would tend to make you more humble and thankful. As the state of Jerusalem is described, Ezek. 16.3. &c. Such is thy Estate by Nature, so Poor, Miserable, and Helpless wert thou, O Christian, thy Birth and thy Nativity as that of the cursed Canaanites, thy Father as an Amorite, thy Mother as an Hittite, and thou all polluted in thy own Blood: Yet when it was thus, the Lord passed by thee, and looked with Compassion on thee, and said to thee, When thou wast in thy blood, Live; yea, he said unto thee, When thou wast in thy blood, Live: He passed by thee and behold thy Time was the time of Love, and he spread his Skirt over thee, and covered thy Nakedness: Yea, he swore unto thee, and entered into a Covenant with thee, and thou becamest his.  
Art thou Implanted into Christ? When thou wast a wild Olive-Tree, didst thou over-reached thyself into the good Olive-Tree? Certainly, this is every whit as strange, as for an evil three to bring forth good Fruit. Boast not, Christian, thou bearest not the Root, but the Root thee.  
Art thou a Child of God? 
Quis credat parieti si se dicat parturire radium, quem suscepit per fenestram? Aut si glorientur nubes, quod imbres genuerint, quis non irrideat? Bernard in Cant. Ser. 13.  It was his Spirit and Power that Regenerated and his Grace that Adopted thee. How hadst thou thy New Birth; certainly not of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but thou wast Born of God, John 1.13. Born of the Spirit, John 3.5. Art thou a new Creature? Who made thee so? Surely thou wilt not say, or think, that thou art thine own Creature: If a man of his own will, without the special Grace of God did Convert and change himself, then should he be his own Creature. But the Apostle hath taught us otherwise, Ephes. 2.10. We are Gods Workmanship, Created in Christ Jesus. To make a new Creature is the Work of God, not of any mere Creature. And to think what a change Divine Grace hath made in you that are Renewed, what a difference from yourselves, from what you were before, and what a difference from others; it should not puff you up with any high Thoughts of yourselves, but lift you up in praise and thankfulness to God. I admire free and special Grace, that hath made such a difference betwixt you and others, where it found none. This is the Lords doing, and ought to be marvelous in our eyes.  
Secondly, You that are under the Influence of Gods special Grace, let it appear more in your lives, you should carry it as a peculiar People indeed. What singular thing do you? What do you more than others? If the Lord hath done that for thee, which he doth for few in the world, does but for a few in comparison; he expects that thou shouldst do more for him. Thou shouldst carry it so as few in the word do. O that you would not think it enough with your Tongues to own, and pled for special Grace, but that your Lives might be a good proof of it; Christians, Experimental Philosophy takes with many now of late: O that more were for Experimental Divinity, Experimental Christianity! And so for this Point of special Grace, I wish that you and I could give the world Experiments upon it, clearly to convince them, that there must be such a thing indeed. O! let others see the Grace of God among us. As was seen there, Acts 11.23. Let the world see that in you,( Christians) which corrupt Nature, which Flesh and Blood would never produce. If you have known and felt the Influence of special Grace, I beseech you, let it appear, that you have not received this Grace in vain. Let it appear in your more singular Piety, exemplary Strictness, Holiness, Humility, Self-denial, Mortification, Contempt of the world, extraordinary Fruitfulness in good Works.  
Thirdly, They that are yet short of Grace may see, whither they are to go for it: Faith and Repentance,( those better things that accompany Salvation) are not of ourselves: No, they are the Gifts of God, and of his special Grace.  
Sinner, How is it? Art thou convinced of the Necessity of Faith, Repentance, Holiness, without which thou canst have no true Hope of Future Happiness? And dost thou see thyself short of these; and so still under Condemnation, being Sentenced by the Law and Covenant of Works, and not coming up to the Terms of the Gospel and Covenant of Grace( the only way to get freed from Condemnation?) And art thou sensible, not only of thy coming short of what the Covenant of Grace requires; but of thy own Insufficiency to attain to it, as of thyself? Dost thou see a wretched Indisposition, and averseness to thy Duty, a across and Crooked perverse Inclination to what would ruin thee? Yet do not despair, there is hope in Israel concerning this thing. And if thou art sensible of thy own wretchedness, and canst be persuaded to apply thyself to God, the God of all Grace, there is hope concerning thee: That God who hath been oft found of them that seek him not, if now thou wouldst seek and sue to him, it may be hoped, he would not deny to be found of thee, see Isaiah 65.1. Mat. 25.27. He that had but one Talent is blamed and condemned, that he went not with it to the Exchanger, that is, says one, to the Promiser, who might have furnished him with a foreign supply. Seek to God in the use of means: None will deny, but it is in thy power, to use the means, wherein God is wont to work Grace. It's good being in the way as Jesus passeth by. That Grace which is not in thy power to command, yet thou hast encouragement to Beg; in as much as it is promised to some, and for any thing thou knowest, to thee among the rest; and this brings me to another Proposition.   
Ezek. 36.26. 
A new Heart also will I give you, &c.  
Sect. 9.  
PROP. IX. God hath Promised to some that Grace, whereby they shall perform the Condition of the Covenant.  
THat which some, not only School-men, but other sound Divines of our own, call the First Grace, who have taught me to call it so sometimes, meaning thereby the first Inward-Special-Discriminating Grace. Though I see the Term is not allowed by others. As a Learned man noteth, There is before it, 1. The first Universal Grace, which gave the world a Saviour. 2. The Fundamental Grace of Impetration by Christ. 3. The Grace of the New Covenant, or Testament made. 4. Common applying Grace, Preaching, &c. with Divine concourse. 5. Inward common Grace, an effect of the former,( of which see Suffrage britain. de 3.& 4. Art. de anteced. ad conv. Sect. 2. p. 100.) which I do not deny.  
But see Jer. 31.33. Heb. 8.10. Ezek 36. ●6, 27. Concerning which Scriptures, it is true, there hath been much Dispute.  
1. Some would have Jer. 31.33,( which is cited Heb. 8.10.) to be the only proper Gospel-Covenant, or New Covenant. And so make this a special Note of difference betwixt the Covenant of Works, 
Marrow of Mod. div. p. 118.& 119.  and the New Covenant, that In the second Covenant God is on both sides.  
In the Covenant of Grace not any Condition to be performed on mans part. No, there is no more for him to do, but only to know and believe, that Christ hath done all for him.  
This is downright Antinomianism: And observe, he plainly contradicts himself: First, saying, [ In the Covenant of Grace there is no condition to be performed on mans part.] And then presently unsaying it again,[ No, there is no more for him to do, but only to Know and Believe, that Christ hath done all for him.] Where he seemeth to grant Faith to be required of man, only he giveth an unsound Description of it.  
But does not Gods taking away the stony heart, and giving a new heart, imply his giving Faith and Repentance? And his causing some to walk in his Statutes, imply his enabling them to yield sincere Obedience? And what Laws are meant, which the Lord doth promise to writ in the Heart? Are they not the same Laws, which were written in Tables of ston? And to what end doth God promise to do this for some, but that he might be their God, and they be his People? Thereby showing what is required of those, who would have him for their God, and would be his People. Certainly, there is no Condition required of us in the Covenant of Grace, which is not here implied; where this is also Expressed, that God himself hath undertaken for some, to vouchsafe that Grace to them, whereby they shall certainly perform the said Conditions.  
As Dr. Preston, of the New Covenant, p. 389. speaking of Repentance, he saith, It is part of the Covenant both on Gods part, and on ours. The condition required of us in the Covenant, is Doing of this, the Action. But the Ability whereby we perform that which is required, is part of the Covenant on Gods part.  
Therefore if any ask,  
Quest. Whether these Scriptures do not contain the substance of the Covenant of Grace?  
Answ. Yea, as Gen. 2.17. containeth the Covenant of Works, where some part of it is expressed, and the rest included and implied. Or as Isa. 58.6, 7. containeth a true Fast, that is, understanding what was taken for granted. Or as Faith is defined in John 8.24. and 11.27. where it is set forth as an Assent to this Proposition,[ that Jesus is the Christ, he that should come, &c.] Supposing what was taken for granted, and expressing what was then most questioned.  
The truth is, the Jews were a self-confident people generally; confident of their own Ability to keep the Law( not understanding the extent of the Law) as they were confident of their own Righteousness, if they kept the Letter of the Law. They were not come to see, and say, as Isa. 45.24. Surely in the Lord have I righteousness and strength. If they were but Righteous according to the Letter of the Law, they thought that enough. They generally restend in outward circumcision. They thought it enough to offer the Ritual Sacrifices, not regarding to offer unto God that more pleasing Spiritual Sacrifice of an humble, broken, obedient heart. And thus they broke the Covenant, which yet they gloried in. Therefore the Lord declares, that the days should come, when there should be a clearer Discovery of the Nature, true intent and meaning of his Covenant, that he was not a Jew, who was one outwardly, nor was that Circumcision, which was outward in the Flesh, &c.( as Rom. 2.28, 29.) And shows here that there should be more abundant Grace given out, where they should perform what the Lord required in his Covenant, that as they had the Law written in Tables of ston before, so they should have it written in their Hearts. And this is called a New Covenant here, as the Command to Love one another is called a New Commandment, though it was given of old; being now more Illustriously set forth and commended to us, by the Instance of Christs Love to us. So had the Lord promised before of old to Circumcise their Hearts, Deut. 30.6. which is the same in sense with this promise of Writing his Law in their hearts: But though it was promised of old, yet it is here spoken of, as a New Covenant; because it was to be Communicated to more, and in a larger Measure under the Gospel. As it might well seem New, the like being never seen before.  
But is it not fairly Implyed here, that they that would have God for their God indeed, must have new Hearts, must be new Creatures, must walk in his Statutes, must led new Lives? which because none would attain to of themselves, and yet God will have a people in the world, therefore he undertakes to prepare them for himself, and to work that in them, which else-where he plainly requireth of them. And therefore we must conclude, it is a Wresting of these Scriptures, for any hence to Argue, that the Covenant of Grace is absolute, which evidently supposes Conditions. And by the like Reasoning one may conclude, that Justification, and Remission of sins is promised absolutely, from Isa. 43.25. I, even I am he, that blotteth out thy Transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. Here Pardon of sin is promised, and no condition expressed; yet they are very greatly mistaken, who have hereupon ranked this among absolute Promises. 'tis a most free and gracious promise, yet not an absolute promise. There is a condition always understood, which other Scriptures clearly express. Surely, we may not exclude Christs satisfaction, and say that God pardoneth sinners without any respect at all had to that, because there is not any mention of it here; neither may we exclude Faith, Repentance from being Conditions of Pardon, because not expressed here.  
I hope these things considered it will appear, that Jer. 31.33. Heb. 8.10. will not prove the Covenant of Grace absolute.  
2. Some, yea and those men of singular worth and eminency, will not allow this of God's giving a new heart, &c. to be so much as a promise; because quoad nos without any determinate object: none can claim by it, or pled interest in it till such time as it be fulfilled. Yet methinks it is sufficient, that it is a signification, or declaration of Gods purpose to bestow such grace upon the Elect, that his truth and faithfulness are engaged to bestow it on them, though the Lord only knoweth who they are.  
When the Lord promised unto Abraham, to be his God, and the God of his seed, was not here a promise to the seed of Abraham, when yet God had the determining of the object? The Lord had set down which of his seed they were, that should have him for their God. As Abraham had other sons besides Isaac; yet God restrained the promise to his seed by Isaac, Rom. 9.7. As afterwards it was restrained to the posterity of Jacob, was not Esau Iacobs brother? And yet that the purpose of God according to Election might stand, it was said; [ jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated,] Rom. 9.11, 12, 13. So when God promised, Gen. 13.15. to give the land of Canaan to the seed of Abraham, yet still he had the determining of it, unto which of his seed he would give it. They were of Abrahams seed whose carcases fell in the wilderness.  
Again, when God promised unto David, that he would set up his seed after him, 2 Sam. 7.12. shall we say, this was no promise to his seed, because the individual person was not directly determined, because it was not said expressly whether the eldest, or the youngest, or which of his sons it was, that should succeed David in the throne?  
Again, though the elect unregenerate cannot lay claim to the promise under consideration, as intended in it, any more than others; yet certainly Jesus Christ may claim for them. As, if a friend hath promised to settle an estate upon your child, though the child may not be in a capacity to pled the promise, yet you can pled it for him.  
Again, when that which some call the first grace, is given unto any one according to that word [ I will writ my Law in their hearts] may we not then claim an interest in the same, for continuance in grace and perseverance? And should we not look upon it as a promise now? And if it be acknowledged a promise, when it is fulfilled, it seems something strange, it should not be so before. Promises are promises before they are made good and accomplished, And not because they are accomplished.  
Methinks this is plain, that [ I will writ my Laws in their hearts] is more than a bare declaration of Gods work, what his work is about the conditions of the Covenant of grace, what God can do. I say more than a declaration, that without his Grace those conditions cannot be performed. Is it not clearly a revelation of his gracious purpose, and pleasure, signifying not onely what he alone can do, but more directly what he will do for some [ I will] doth more directly refer to the purpose, than to the power of God. Now though as this is a discovery of Gods purpose, so far it agrees with a prophesy or prediction; yet as it is a discovery of Gods purpose of working grace, of bestowing good upon some of his Creatures; in this respect it is more than simply a prediction, it hath the nature of a promise.  
3. Some are troubled to know whither to reduce the promise of this first, special, inward, discriminating grace.  
Here methinks it were very strange, should we wholly exclude such promises from having any relation to, or connexion with the Covenant of Grace, which do so clearly evidence it to be a Covenant of Grace indeed. What a wonderful expression of his grace is this, that God engageth to work the conditions in his people! He did never undertake thus for man under the Covenant of Works.  
Now First, Supposing that Covenant betwixt God the Father and his Son Christ, God-man, or mediator; and it is clearly reducible to that Covenant. Many Divines suppose( and I shall not oppose) a federal transaction betwixt the Father and the Son, called the Covenant of Redemption, wherein God the Father is conceived to have given a certain number of Elect ones to Christ the Son, to be brought on infallibly to grace here, and glory hereafter; upon condition, and in consideration, that he would redeem and satisfy for them: on the other hand, Christ is supposed to accept of these terms, being willing to make his Soul an offering for sin, that he might see his seed and bring many sons to glory. According to this hypothesis, the promise of the first grace should refer to Gods engagement and promise to his Son Christ. And though it be an absolute promise in respect of these, in whom the first grace is wrought;( no condition being required in the Elect unregenerate, to interest them in it) yet in respect of Christ it was conditional; he being to give himself a ransom for them, and so to purchase grace and glory for them.  
2ly. Others distinguish betwixt an absolute Covenant, and the conditional Covenant. The absolute Covenant they make to be this in Jer. 31. Heb. 8. of which we are now speaking. The conditional Covenant, the proper Gospel-Covenant, [ Believe and thou shalt be saved] But though we may grant it an absolute promise, it cannot be a Covenant if absolute.  
3. 
Of Attrib. the second part. p. 86.  Dr. Preston distinguisheth betwixt a single Covenant and a double Covenant. A single Covenant, such as God makes with visible Church-members, viz. If you will believe, repent, walk in my ways, you shall be saved: where if men break the condition, God is free, he is bound no further. But then there is a double Covenant, into which the Elect are taken, which is to this effect, If you will believe, and repent, you shall be saved; and that this my Covenant may not be made voided, and of none affect to you, I will give you an heart to repent, &c.  
And this he holdeth is the everlasting Covenant that cannot be broken, which hath sure mercies for all those who are included in it.  
But Mr. Rutherford would rather have it called the Covenant by a metonymy[ This is the Covenant that I will make] that is, these are choice effects, fruits and blessings of the Covenant, which I shall by my effectual and mighty Grace work in them. Rutherf. of the Covenant, p. 347. Again,  
4. Mr. Rutherford distinguisheth( but more darkly) of the Covenant, considering it, in abstracto, vel in concreto. 1. In the Abstract, as holding forth the way of saving sinners, that is, if they believe: Containing only the will of precept. 2. In the concrete, as the Lord carries on the Covenant commensurably to his decree of Election. So the Lord promiseth to the Elect, not onely forgiveness and life, provided they believe; but also a new heart and grace to believe. Thus including his will of purpose. And the same Writer again distinguisheth, and says, 
Rutherf. of the Covenant, p. 340.343.  the Covenant may be taken two ways, either 1. As declared, according to the approving will of God: Or 2. as fulfilled, according to Gods Decree of Election, and will of purpose. Thus I have given others thoughts of it: or,  
5. Why may we not say that the promise of working grace in some, belongeth to the Covenant of Grace, considered as a Testament, rather than as a Covenant? 
Amas. Coron. p. 296. So Burroughs Gospel-worship p. 270.  Tota dispositio( foederis scil.) testamentariam habet rationem, &c.  
Here all is promised, not only pardon, and Salvation upon Repenting, Believing, but the Condition, an Heart to repent, and heart to believe, and perseverance in the same is likewise promised. Though considered formally as a Covenant, it speaks only on this wise: If you Believe, Repent, ye shall be saved; yet as a Testament, it hath this further to say. And as for such as are given to Christ of the Father, you shall have his Grace and Spirit, to turn your hearts against your sins, and incline then towards the Lord Jesus.  
6. Add, that these absolute promises are a proper means to bring men within the Bond of the Covenant, and led men a good step towards the obtaining of what the Covenant of Grace promiseth. Here is set forth the spiritual Excellency of the Blessings promised in the Covenant of Grace, and the way how they may be attained and come by. What is here promised absolutely, would make way for all that good and happiness, which is promised upon such conditions. As they that look not after this Grace promised, they that care not though they miss and fall short of this; care not to frustrate to themselves the Covenant of Grace, to all its saving intents and purposes. Miss of this Grace, and you miss of all subsequent Benefits and Blessings, which depend on it.  
4. The last thing I shall speak to, concerning these Promises, is, what use may be made thereof, though no Unregenerate person can possibly say that he is there intended. Now to the Question.  
Quest. What use can Unregenerate men make of these Promises, who know not that they are intended in them?  
Answ. I shall premise two or three things, and then show of what use they are,  
1. The promise of a new Heart, &c. is an absolute promise. I have  told you so again and again, and will now spend a little time to clear it. When God promiseth to give a new heart, he promiseth this absolutely. This must either be promised absolutely, or not at all. Gratia prima, quae preveniens, itemque operans dici solet, omnimoda est gratuita.— Omnes actus,& dispositiones nostras praevenit& anteit,— ut pote quae ex Deo tantum, non etiam ex nobis pendet. Alting. Elenet. p. 800. Or else we must hold with the Semi-Pelagians, Initium â nobis, incrementum â Deo, If there be no true spiritual good in a man, till the Lord works it, how can we possibly imagine any condition required to his giving this Grace, except we would have Gods own Act, the condition of his further Actings. Non de nostrae voluntatis potestate, said de sua praedestinatione promisit, promisit enim quod Ipse facturus fuerat, non quod Homines. Quia etsi faciunt homines bona quae pertinent ad colendum Deum, ipse facit ut illi faciant quae praecepit, non illi faciunt ut ipse faciat quod promisit. Aug. de praedest. Apud Bedam ad Rom. 4. f. 20. H.  
Certainly, here the preparation of the heart is of the Lord. The heart of ston would never prepare itself for Mollifying Grace. They that would make the promise conditional thus, I will take away the stony heart, if you do not put a Bar, would make just nothing of it. As if God should say, I'll take away the stony heart, if you do not put a stony heart in my way; I'll do it, when it is done to my hands. The work shall be properly yours; yet I will have the praise. Do not they wrong our gracious God, who would put such a sense on his gracious Promise, as if he promised no more, than to take away the heart of ston, and give a new heart, if we put no Bar; Alas, it is plain, he must give a new heart, before we shall cease putting the Bar of astony, and rebellious heart in his way.  
And what sense is this, I le writ my Law in your heart, if you have it in your heart to keep my Law? If you have a will to obey, I'll give you a will to obey. I'll Circumcise your heart to love me, if you put not the Bar of an Uncircumcised heart in my way. That is as if Divine Grace only made such willing, as it first found not unwilling.  
As our Divines, who were present at the Synod of Dort, Promissiones Dei aliae sunt de fine, aliae de mediis ad finem; promissiones de fine, v. 9. de salute sunt conditionatae[ creed,& salvaberis] Esto fidelis ad mortem( seu persevera)& dabo tibi coronam vitae.] Cum autem nemo par sit conditionibus praestandis, Deus quoque promissiones fecit liberrimas& absolutas de dandis ipsis conditionibus; quas ipse in nobis efficit, ut per ipsas, tanquam per media, possimus ad finem pertingere. Deut. 30.6. That is, The promises of God are some of them concerning the end, 
Suffrag. britain. de 5. Art. thes. heterodox. 1. pag. 222.223.  some concerning the means( necessary in order) to the end. Promises of the end, as of salvation are conditional. Believe and thou shalt be saved. Be thou faithful unto death( or persevere) and I will give thee a crown of life. But when none is able to perform the condition, God also hath made most free and absolute promises of giving the conditions themselves, which he worketh in us, that by them, as by the means, we might attain to the end, Deut. 30.6. The Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart, &c.  
Object. But none have ground to hope that God should work Grace in them, who will not attend on the means of Grace, and will not seek and sue to him for Grace. Then are not these Conditions?  
Answ. I confess, attendance on the Word and Prayer, &c. are necessary, which Natural men must be called unto: Being 1. Part of the Creatures Duty. Some of that Homage all men owe to God. 2. The ordinary way and method, wherein God works upon the souls of his Elect. And upon the former account, to neglect the means appears to be a Contempt of God: As upon the latter it apppears to be a tempting of him.  
And yet that these are not conditions of Gods bestowing the first Grace is very evident, For, 1. If this was Conditio cum quâ, God should never deny his Grace to them that attend on the Outward means, use Prayer, &c. 2. If it was Conditio sine quâ non, he should never vouchsafe Converting Grace to any, who do not wait on the means. Now both these are false. Sometimes God is found even of them that seek him not. Though this must be be acknowledged the ordinary Method and way, wherein Gods Grace is bestowed; that they that come to the Means, &c. are not so far from the Kingdom of God, as others, who are Despisers of the Word, and neglect Prayer, &c. Yet sometimes the Lord goes out of his ordinary way, as we see in the Apostle Pauls conversion. The Lord met with him, when he was running away from him, or rather running furiously upon him.  
2. God having absolutely promised this Grace, it shall certainly be conferred on all those, who are intended in the Promise. Otherwise God should change his mind, or his word should fail. There is no saying here, that men may put a Bar. If God should fail of performing what he hath absolutely promised; then where were his Power, or Truth, or Immutability?  
And therefore I cannot but wonder, that any should deny the special Grace of God determining mans will in Conversion. Mark the consequence of it. If when the Lord hath done all, which concerneth him to do, to convert a sinner, it still depends upon the sinners free will to determine the business, 
Quod hic convertatur, ille non, est ex libertate voluntatis. Jo. Arnold.  whether to turn to God, or not; and it may be, that two Persons have equal prevenient Grace, and the one turns to God, and the other does not, will it not follow, that God promiseth to do more, than he can perform? Which I hope they would dread to say, and abhor as blasphemous.  
And yet I can see no way in the world to avoid the Consequence, admitting their Doctrine. Positis omnibus operationibus gratiae, 
Vid. Suffrag. britain. de 3.& 4. Art. Thes. Heterodox. 3. p. 139.  quibus Deus in conversione nostrâ uti posset, manet tamen conversio ita in nostrâ potestate liberâ, ut possimus non converti, hoc est nos met ipsos convertere, aut non convertere. Joan. Arnold. apud pelt. har.  
Were it thus indeed, that when God hath done all be can to convert a sinner; hath done as much for me, or thee, this way, as ever he doth, or can do for any; yet he must ask our leave to make his Grace Efficacious and Converting, and if we please, all he can do this way, shall be to no purpose, the work shall not be done; I dread to say what would follow hereupon. How could he either promise, or predict this concerning any, that they should turn to him?  
This way which many are so taken with, most certainly leadeth to one of these strange conclusions. Either, 1. That men may have a new heart given them, and Gods Law written there, and yet not turn to God, or be in a state of Grace; Or, 2. That notwithstanding God hath promised concerning some that he would give them a new heart, and put his Law in their inward parts; yet it might so fall out and happen, that not one in the world should ever have this new heart given, or the Law of God engraven in him.  
And whereas they will not allow the new heart promised to the Elect, as a Fruit of Electing love, but rather make it a ground of Election, make Election to depend on it; how inconsistent is their Method with Gods Method, with the Scripture-Method? John 6.37. All that the Father giveth me shall come unto me. John 10.26. Ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep. My sheep hear my Voice and follow me.  
Observe hence, The sheep of Christ are they, that are given him of the Father. And they that are given him of the Father are his sheep. These are Reciprocal terms. Again, all that are the sheep of Christ, that are given to Christ, shall come to him, shall believe in him. Again, these only do come to him, none but these come on to Faith in him. Again, men are not given to Christ, or his sheep by coming to him, or because they believe in him: But because they are his sheep, given to him of the Father, therefore they shall come, therefore they shall hear his Voice, and follow him. Neque oves dicuntur, quam Deus previdit credituros, nam& haec oratio nimium dilata esset, vos non creditis, quia Deus non previdit vos credituros, nam contra, Deus praevidit non credituros, quia non sunt credituri.  
3. Therefore the Elect are the Persons directly and fully intended in this promise of Gods giving a new heart, and it is sure to be fulfilled and made good to them.  
4. Yet they can no more lay claim to this promise, as made for them, than others may do, while they are Unregenerate. And the reason is plain, because while they are Unregenerate, they cannot know that they are of the number of Gods Elect.  
These things premised, I shall briefly declare the use of these absolute promises, in these following Conclusions.  
1. They are of use to all alike for Conviction. As implying mans Insufficiency to perform his duty here of himself, in regard of his moral, inseparable indisposedness, and averseness thereunto. No natural man can amend his own heart, or make it new. Was the Law in our hand, there had been no need for God to promise, that he would give a new heart.  
2. These promises are of like use to all for direction. As showing, whither, and to whom we must go for Grace, when sensible of our desperate corrupt estate hy Nature. Our only way is to repair to the God of all grace. As Ephraim did, Jer. 31.18. Turn thou me, and I shall be turned. Tanta est ejus miscricordia, ut sit primus in Conversione,& adjutorio nostro, juxta illud. Thren. 5.21. Est tamen ultimus in desertione, &c. Tena in Heb. p. 640. b.  
3. They are of like use to all for general Encouragement. They hold forth the same general Encouragement to others, as to the Elect unregenerate, They are so proposed, that as none are expressed, none are expressably excluded. As no unregenerate person can positively conclude, that the Lord hath this Grace in store for Him, intended for Him in particular; so none have ground utterly to despair, unless they were sure, it could not be.  
The promise of giving, or working Grace is so contrived and proposed, that it leaveth men without excuse, who do not seriously, and in good earnest seek to God for it,  
There is no laying the blame on Gods Decree, that the Lord never intended to give you Grace, and therefore it would have been but in vain, for you to have applied yourselves to him. Certainly, here is enough to stop your mouths.  
1. That God hath Commanded you to use the means for the obtaining of Grace. As one observes: Gods bare Command is a sufficient encouragement to him that obeyeth it, to hope, that it shall not be in vain. Especially when God denieth no man the grace to believe, but those that by abuse of former helps do ( sensu Evangelico) deserve that denial.  
2. That God hath promised to give his saving, sanctifying Grace to some. This is some more encouragement to seek special and saving Grace in the use and improvement of Common, Preparatory Grace.  
God has promised absolutely to bestow his Grace on some; and you were never  told the contrary, but that he might have this Blessing in store for you. And therefore it is manifest, if you look not out, if you cry not to God for it, you will be most justly condemned for your gross negligence and carelessness, yea, for a plain contempt of his Grace, in not putting forth yourselves to the utmost of your power, to obtain it.  
As you are Creatures, it is your duty to attend to the Will of God revealed, and to carry it suitably thereunto. And here, in the case before us, should we not take notice of the least gracious Hints, he gives us, and improve them to the furthest?  
This is plain, men are not put to a stand in worldly matters, they will not demur upon it, whether they shall Labour in their Callings, or no; because they know not, whether God hath Decreed to Bless and prosper them. Why then do any frame such an Objection against themselves, to take them off from looking out for saving Grace, which is of inconceivably greater concernment to us to look after, than any thing in the world besides.  
And, as an able Pen expresseth it: Though God have not flatly engaged himself to Unbelievers, 
Mr. Baxt. Direct. for getting peace. p. 62.  so as to give them a certainty of hearing their Prayers, and giving them true Grace, on the improvement of their Naturals; yet he hath not only appointed this and other means to get Grace, but also given them half promises, or strong probabilities of speeding.— For as he appointeth not any vain means to man, so no man can name that man, who did improve his Naturals to the utmost, and sought God in Prayer so far as a Natural man may do, who yet missed of Grace, and was rejected. This is the true mean( says he) between Pelagianism, and Antinomianism in this point.  
And any of you, that begin to feel sin a burden, and are sadly perplexed in spirit, seeing yourselves born down with the strength and prevalency of your Corruptions, and Temptations together; yet be not utterly discouraged. Consider what Grace the Lord hath promised, he would vouchsafe to some, without any thing in them foregoing, as a condition, or meet qualification. And is there not ground of hope concerning thee, if now thou hast a heart to look out after his Grace?  
Certainly, there are many exceeding hot in their pursuit after worldly things, and yet lose their Labour quiter, have their designs frustrated, and miss of their expectations. But can you tell of any one Soul, that hath sincerely, and in good earnest sought for Grace, and yet been disappointed? Many seek it remissy, and heartlesly, and miss of it; but the more diligent and earnest we are here, the more ground to hope, we shall obtain it.  
Now to close this Discourse. You have heard of our Misery by the Breach of the Covenant of works; of our Insufficiency of ourselves to perform the condition of the Covenant of Grace, from whence alone is our remedy: Now let your want, and need of Grace, engage you to a serious and diligent attendance on the means of Grace, and quicken you in good earnest to apply yourselves to the Throne of Grace for it.  
Object. But if the promise of working the first Grace be absolute, 
Friendly Debate. p. 45.  it's more than needs, nay, than is good: For we ought to have no respect to these things, but to the Freeness of the Promise.  
Answ. This which I call you to, is no more than needeth, in other respects; though it is not any thing an Unregenerate man can do, that will give him a Title to the Promise, neither is there any Merit of Congruity in this. Yet it is the Duty of men Unregenerate, which they are all tied and bound to, though God is not tied and bound to them upon it, so much as by promise. But there is more hopes of your Conversion, if you are in the way, wherein God is oft pleased to meet with sinners, and to bring them home to himself. More hopes, He will be found of those that seek, than of those that do not seek him. Though God worketh Grace, without any Merit in, or any Condition required of, the Creature; yet not without means. Therefore they that use the means, are nearer to the obtaining of Grace, than those that neglect the means.   
Heb. 12.2. 
Jesus the author and Finisher of Faith.  
Sect. 10.  
PROP. X. That Grace whereby the Elect performeth the Condition of the Covenant, was purchased by Christ for them.  
THey that go the high Arminian way, hold that Christ Died for all, and every one alike; that is, that by his Death he Impetrated Remission and Salvation for all men, if they Believe: Not that he purchased that Grace for any, whereby they shall certainly Believe. And so with them, [ Fieri potest ut impetratio sarta tecta maneat, suisque numeris perfecta constet, etiansi increduli omnes manentes nulli fort essent, qui fructum ejus impetrationis obincredulitatem suam propriam perceperent. v. Pelt. Hac. p. 131. Notwithstanding all that Christ hath procured by his Death, it might so fall out yet, that not one in the world should be saved.  
Now these, howsoever they may seem to enlarge the extent of Christs death, yet they really enervate the merit, and weaken the efficacy of his death. If this be all that Christ impetrated by his death, that God might salvâ justitiâ, with safety to his justice, and honour, make a new Covenant with fallen man, come upon new terms with him, and save him, if he believeth, and sincerely obeyeth; I say if this was all, then Christ might attain his end in dying, and the death of Christ might have its full effect, and yet not one soul saved by it. Now what a faint cause of salvation must that needs be, which being put, yet it doth not follow, that any one in the world shall certainly be saved? yet thus it must be, if the death of Christ, extendeth not further, than to make this a truth, that [ whosoever believeth, shall be saved] without purchasing for any the grace whereby they shall believe.  
And as much as they think, that their way tendeth most to the honour of Christ our Saviour, yet in truth it tendeth to his great dishonour. For so they would make Christ a Saviour, Nomine non re, a titular Saviour, purchasing a Salvation for all, without any full and certain intention of applying it to any. To say that he would be a Saviour as well, though not one should be saved by his death; is not this to mock Christ, as they mocked him who put on him a scarlet rob, and put a reed in his hand, and said, Hail King of the Jews? And thus they that believe and are saved, should not owe one jot more to the merit of his death, than they who perish, and are damned; now is not this a wrong to Christ? If Christ in dying, had not an eye to the salvation of one more than of another: but had respect to all alike, impetrated for all alike; if he merited no more for the Elect than he did for Reprobates; then the one are no more bound to him, for his Love in dying, than the other. Which I wonder how a true believer should hear with patience, and without abhorrency.  
Though I confess, they that go the middle way, do not( that I can find) so rob Christs death of its virtue and efficacy, or deny its proper causal influence into our salvation, holding, that Christ dyed for all so far, as to procure a conditional pardon for them; and this Law of Grace, that whosoever believeth shall be saved: but withall, that in dying he had a further aim, a special eye of respect towards the Elect, to procure their certain performing of the condition, and so their salvation infallibly. That he died not onely that men might be salvable, said ut reapse& certissimé seemen ex sanguine videret, that those who were given him of the Father, might be certainly redeemed, actually saved by him 
Christus Moriendo genuit. Mediâ morte suâ nobis contulit vitam gratiae, Joh. 12.24 .  
Now while so much is granted us, we will freely grant, that the death of Christ is a satisfaction abundantly sufficient for all the sinners in the world: there needeth no other satisfaction to be added, to make it avail to the redemption and salvation of more. God is so well pleased with the Sacrifice of his Son, that for his sake he is ready to be reconciled unto any that come to God by him. And no sinner perisheth for this cause, that the satisfaction of Christ was insufficient, or not of so large extent, as to reach him: but through his own default, falling short of what is required to our having Actual benefit by Christs Satisfaction. The blood of Christ is sufficient to cleanse every one of us from all our sins: onely they deprive themselves of the saving benefit of his death, they render it ineffectual as to themselves, who trample it under foot. The most sovereign remedy does the Patient no good, not being applied and made use of.  
But notwithstanding, sinners die, not because there is no remedy for them, no possibility of Salvation, but because they do not apply themselves to the physician, nor seek to be saved in that way, wherein alone they can be saved; yet Christ died not alike for the salvation of all. Christ laid down his life for his sheep, with another manner of intention, than he laid down his life for the world. He is so the Saviour of his body the Church, as he is not the Saviour of the world.  
That he laid down his life for his sheep, not onely to purchase remission, and salvation for them conditionally( scil.) if they believe: but to procure remission, and salvation for them most certainly and infallibly, and so to procure the working of the condition of salvation in them, to me seemeth plain and clear, from plentiful testimony of Scripture. Isa. 53.10. When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed. As sure as Christ was made an offering for sin, so sure it is, that he shall see his seed, as a fruit of his death, This is contrary to what some teach, that Christ might have his design in dying, and his death attain its end, and have its full effect, though what Christ did impetrate should not come to be applied to any soul in the world. Now if it were so, how should Christ see his seed? And no doubt, but Christ merited so much, that his labour should not be in vain, nor his strength be spent for nought, and in vain: but that Israel should be gathered by him, gathered to him, and that he should be for a light for the Gentiles, and for salvation to the ends of the earth, Isa. 49.4, 5, 6. As he saith, Joh. 12.32. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth will draw all men unto me; where by lifting up from the earth, we are to understand, not his Ascension, but his Crucifixion( as is evident from ver. 33. So the drawing of sinners unto Christ, even of all that are drawn is made a fruit, and consequent of his death.  
Tit. 2.14. Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. He died, not onely that all who turn from iniquity, might be redeemed from wrath to come, but also to redeem his people from iniquity, and so from wrath to come. therefore his Name was called Jesus, because he was to save his people from their sins. He was to destroy the works of the devil: and did spoil Principalities and powers, triumphing over them in his across, when his heel was bruised,( when he suffered in his humanity the lowest part of him,) then he broke the Serpents head.  
He died, not onely to purchase happiness for his people in the end, but also to procure holiness for them, as the way and means, necessary conducing to that end. He gave himself( as we hear before) to purify to himself a peculiar people, Zealous, &c. He is made unto us Sanctification, as well as Righteousness, 1 Cor. 1.31. He gave himself for the Church, that he might sanctify it, Ephes. 5.25, 26. We owe it unto Christ that any of us are Sanctified, as well as that we are justified. Christ  shed his Blood, for his people to wash in, and be clean. As from his side pierced, there came forth Blood and Water, John 19.34. This shadows out the Virtue and Efficacy of his Death, his shedding of his most pure, and precious Blood, being not only for the Expiating of Guilt and purifying of the Conscience; but also for cleansing the heart, Ephes. 1.4. Elected in Christ to be holy. That seemeth to intimate, that it is only in and through Christ, that any come to be Sanctified. And though we are not Elected for Christ, yet we are renewed and sanctified, and so may be said to be Elected unto Holiness through and for him. That God never intended to bestow saving, sanctifying Grace on any of us, but upon the account of Christ, see 2 Tim. 1.9. The holy calling is given in Christ Jesus, and Grace given in Christ Jesus, see Tit. 3.56. Christ is the Author both of Salvation begun, and of Salvation perfected, consummate. All Spiritual blessings are in, and from Christ. Blessed with all Spiritual blessings in Christ. 
Ephes. 1.3.  Is not Faith a Spiritual blessing? Is not Repentance a Spiritual blessing? then they are derived only through Christ. He is the Author and Finisher of Faith, Heb. 12.2. He is the procurer of it. That Faith is given to any, it is given on the behalf of Christ, 
{αβγδ}.  or for Christ, Phil. 1.29. So Repentance is from Christ; from Christ, as a Saviour: Repentance is aswell from him, as Remission of sins, Acts 5.31. By him we are brought into a state of Grace, Rom. 5.2. And when he lead Captivity Captive, he received Gifts for men, yea, for the Rebellious also, that the Lord God might dwell among them, Psal 68.19.( to which the Apostle Peter seemeth to allude, Acts 2.33.) And we red of Christs sending the Spirit, John 15.26. The Comforter, whom I will sand unto you from the Father. And John 14.26. He is sent in Christs Name.  
And may we pray for the Spirit in Christs Name? may we pray for Grace, ask Faith in Christs Name? If so, would not it imply, it was purchased by Christ for some?  
Whatsoever we ask, we should ask in the Name of Christ, we must ask in his Name, if we would receive, John 14.13. and Chap. 16.23. Now what is it to ask in the Name of Christ, if it be not to pled, insist, and depend on the Worthiness, and Merit of Christ, with allowance from him, for the obtaining of what we want, and desire? When we ask in his Name, we eye him in his Mediatory Undertaking. As he is the Son of God, and very God, equal with his Father, so we pray to him, and he properly answers Prayer. But as he is mediator, so we put up our Prayers not to him, but to God through him; I say we pray to him as God. We do not pray in his Name: as Mediator, we pray not to him, but pray in his Name. Now if we may pray for Grace in the Name of Christ Mediator, that Argues it is a thing merited by him.  
Object. It was purchased, but conditionally; that is, if men resist not Gods Call, and thus put a Bar to his Grace.  
Answ. Will any say so? That is to say, Christ hath purchased the Grace for men, whereby they shall believe, upon condition they shall be disposed to believe of themselves. They that do not resist Gods Call, obey it: And they that obey Gods Call to believe, do believe. Thus if Christ should have purchased Faith for us only Conditionally, if we do not resist Gods Call; the meaning were, and it would come to no more but this, 
Vid. Thes. Salmur. par. 4. p. 142. sect. 14.  he hath purchased Grace for us, whereby we should come to Believe, if we Believe.  
Again, may we suppose, that Christ Intercedeth on the behalf of any? as Psal. 2.8. Ask of me, and I will give thee the Heathen for thine Inheritance. John 17.17. sanctify them through thy truth. Ver. 19, 20. For their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the Truth. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word, Luke 22.32. I have prayed for thee( Peter) that thy faith fail not. Now if these are things for which Christ intercedeth, they are things Merited by him. Christs Intercession is like an Advocates pleading, who hath Law and Right on his side, not like a Beggars craving, Heb. 9.24. Is not his Appearance in Heaven a continual real Pleading for his people? How? As a presenting to his Fathers view and remembrance, what he had done and suffered upon Earth, for the Redemption and Salvation of his People. Has not his Blood a Voice? Yea, a louder Voice than the blood of Abel; only it speaketh better things, Heb. 12.24. If Christs Intercession be nothing else, but a pleading of his Merits, then what he Intercedeth for, he Merited. Those Divines that are for Christs Interceding in Heaven by an Express and open Representation of his will to the Father: Yet make his Death the ground of his Intercession. That Christ fervently and immovably willeth and desireth this and that of the Father, for the sake, and Virtue of his Death, and Sacrifice. So that if he Intercede for the Conversion of any, he Merited their conversion; if he Intercede for the sanctification of any, and for their Confirmation in Grace to the end, that their Faith may not fail, he Merited so much for them.  
And so no doubt, that Jesus Christ, the Eternal, and only begotten Son of God, who was One in Essence, and Equal in Power and Glory with the Father, that he should take Mans nature on him, and give his Life a ransom for many; even he who was worth Ten Thousand Worlds of such as we are, that he out of his Zeal for the Honour of God, to clear and satisfy his Justice, and to make way for the glorious Manifestation of his Grace and Mercy, and also out of Love and Compassion towards poor perishing Creatures,( such Love as was stronger than Death;) I say, that he upon such principles and considerations, should so willingly Die for sinners, and bear the wrath of God, which sin deserved, to make way for sinners Reconciliation unto God, and their Eternal salvation: This was such a worthy undertaking, and so highly well pleasing unto God, as deserved indeed, that his Labour and Sufferings should not be in vain, as to the Actual Redemption and certain Salvation of some. Nor is it to be imagined, that Christ would lay down his Life merely to make men salvable, but that he had good assurance, that it should be to the certain salvation of many, that his Blood should not be as Water spilled upon the ground. Can we think that he would have Died upon such Terms, as it should be possible for men to be saved by him; and yet contingent and doubtful, whether any one in the world should be saved? It is not a mere possibility of Redemption, but Actual redemption, that the Saints in Heaven praise and extol him for, Rev. 5.9.12. Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, to receive Power, and Honour, and Glory: For thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy Blood, out of every Kindred, and Tongue, and People, and Nation.  
And if Christ did not( in dying for them) intend their certain Actual Redemption, he only intended a lesser kindness, to wit, what was extended to those that perish, in common with them: but the far greater kindness happens to them besides his Intention, which they might probably enough have missed of, for any thing that Christ did peculiarly for them; and which the other might as well have gone away withal.  
Hence says one, Methinks an Arminian can hardly bear a part with the Redeemed in that Triumphant Song, while he thinks in his heart, he is no more beholden to the Lamb for his Redemption, 
Lyford sensûs Exerc. p. 278. 279.  than Cain, or Judas, and the Damned crew.  
One thing more I pray take notice of. He that could satisfy for others, could as well Merit for others. It was as much, to satisfy for our sins, as to merit and purchase saving Grace for us: It was as easy for the Lord Jesus Christ to purchase that Grace for the Elect, whereby they should Infallibly be brought on to Faith, and so to Salvation; as to purchase Remission and Salvation for men, upon condition that they believe. And methinks, it was necessary to make him a complete and perfect Saviour, that he should do the One, as well as the other. And they would seem not to consult the Honour of our Redeemer so much as they ought, that make his Death a Satisfaction for sin, but deny it to be Meritorious of Grace. It was a Meritorious satisfaction. As it was satisfactory for sin; so it was Meritorious of that saving Grace, without which his people could have had no benefit by his Death, as a satisfaction. As it was satisfactory, it was to Exempt and Deliver us from the great evîl and misery, we were Obnoxious unto; as it was Meritorious, it procured that Good and Happiness, we want. Thus Christs Death was not only to redeem us from the Curse due to sin, but to redeem us unto God. His Blood was not only to pay our Debts, but to purchase a new Stock, and a surer Estate for his People, than that we had lost.  
Since the writing of these Notes, I met with one, 
J. H. Middle Way of Elect. and Redempt. p. 29.  quiter of another persuasion, who holdeth that the Merit, or purchase of Christs Death, or the Price he laid down for our Redemption, was not offered to the Father, to procure of him, that he should give Faith, and Repentance to any; but that he should give Remission to those that repent, &c. For which he Argues modestly thus, 1. The holding otherwise makes Christs Redemption a double thing. Answ. And so the Scripture seems to make it. Teaching in some places, that he gave himself a ransom for All, for the whole World, and tasted Death for every man: And in other places, that he laid down his Life for his Sheep, for those whom the Father had given him, that he gave himself for the Church. 2. It goes quiter against the hair to reason, that Christ should procure the benefit upon condition, and not otherwise; and yet that he should procure also the performance. To what purpose do we make such a labour about, as this? Answ. It is no more against the hair, then that Christ should have the Elect especially in his Eyes; or then it is against the hair, that he should deliver them from wrath to come, by saving them from their sins. It was no Labour about, when Christ died with a special intention of redeeming the Elect effectually, and of being the Author of certain Actual Salvation to them, to take in, and intend the necessary means leading thereunto. 3. Then there is nothing in mans salvation but of purchase, and we shall be beholden to Christ for all, and to God for nothing. Answ. We are never the less beholden to God, for that he gave his son Jesus Christ to be our Saviour, and to do all this for us. Surely, the Father is to be acknowledged, and praised for all that Christ has done in order to our salvation, see John 6.38.39.40. and Chap. 17.4. Christ came into the world, to do his Fathers will, and finish the work, that his Father gave him to do. And are we not beholden to God for the pardon of sin? which this Writer grants, to have been purchased by Christs Death for those that Repent, and Believe. And Heaven, I hope, is Gods Gift, notwithstanding Christs purchase. 4. The Death and Redemption of Christ is for All, for every man, &c. Answ. What was said in answer to his first Reason, will take off what he says here. There was a general, and lesser benefit extended to the world by Christs Death, again there was a special and greater benefit intended to the Elect by it. The latter contains the former, not 'vice versâ: In regard of the former, he is the Saviour of the World, in regard of the latter, the Saviour of his Body only. p. 30. Gods sending his Son is one thing, and his sending his Spirit another. Answ. Yet the sending of his Son was to make way for sending of his Spirit. And the Spirit is sent in Christs Name, with what it implieth, I have shown before. Ibid. Let it be true on the one hand that Christ by his Redemption, hath indeed procured no more for Paul and Peter, than for Judas and the Reprobate. Answ. But that is scarce true, when Paul says, Gal. 2.20. Who loved me, and gave himself for me. I cannot think, he meant no more, than so as he loved and gave himself for all the Reprobates in the world. This would not keep up the Honour of his Redemption to the height, as he there pretends.  
Pag. 31. It is true, we come in the Name of Christ, to ask his Spirit and Grace; that is, we ask it through Christs Merits. A fair concession,( which one would think was no less than giving away his cause: But he distinguisheth here.) There is the Merits of his Person, as well as the Merits of his Death. Answ. That there was any Merit in his Death, it was from the Worthiness of his Person. But why could not Christ have procured our Reconciliation to God, and Salvation, by the Merits of his Person, as well as the effectual Vocation? And thus would not this Writer make Christs Death and Oblation, as he insinuates, that others make some part of his Mediatorship, more than needs.  
Pag. 33, 34. I must offer moreover, If Christ had purchased Faith and Repentance for some, which all have not, the Reprobate might here have something to say, &c. Answ. No more to say, than against Gods Decree of Election, which yet he maintains. Will he allow the Reprobate to say, That the reason why he repented not, as the Elect did, is because God had decreed to give Repentance to one of them, and not to the other. According to his Reasoning here, in regard of Gods decree of Election( which he holds with us) Christs Purchase and Redemption should as well be a mock to the Reprobate. But as God hath intended and promised, and Christ hath purchased Faith and Repentance for the Elect, so that they come certainly to believe and repent; they owe it unto Gods Grace, and Christs purchase. And as for others that fall short of Grace here, and so of Salvation hereafter, it is through their own fault. God, and Christ have done enough to leave them all without Excuse.  
Other things I pass by, being spoken to before.  
Now this Proposition, that Christ is the purchaser of Grace, may be of good use. As  
( 1.) This speaks encouragement to poor distressed souls, who have a deep sense both of their own weakness and unworthiness. Though thou art never so unworthy of Grace, yet Jesus Christ is worthy, for whose sake it may be freely Imparted to thee. Grant, that thou art unworthy, that he should own thee; yet surely he hath deserved to have a people in the world, that should own him indeed, believe on him and submit to him. He is worthy to have a people to serve and Honour him. And he hath taught us to pray, [ Thy Kingdom come,] though we are unworthy to be Translated into his Kingdom. He is worthy to be our Ruler, though we are unworthy to be acknowledged by him, as his Loyal Subjects. He that hath Fought for us, Died for us, is worthy to be our Head, though we are unworthy to be his Members. Well, here is Encouragement for such as begin to inquire after him, only they fear, they should have no part in him, sear that they shall be rejected of him: Rather if thou canst not be satisfied without Christ and his Grace, it is a sign, the Lord hath begun with thee, to bring thee over to himself. It is to be hoped thou art part of Christs purchase, which he will not lose. Converts are the travail of his soul, And he is abundantly satisfied, to see this Fruit of his sorrows. When souls become willing to bow to his sceptre. It is the day of Christs Power, Psal. 110.3. It is the day of Christs glorious Conquest, and Triumph; it is as a Coronation day to Christ, Cant. 3.11. The day of the gladness of his Heart. Let the thoughts of thy former unworthy carriage and disposition be humble, but not discourage thee. Remember, that he hath received Gifts for men, yea, for the Rebellious also, that the Lord God may dwell among them. He hath subdued many a rebellious Creature by his Grace, and made them Loyal Subjects. And if now thou art lamenting after him, it is to be hoped, he is at work with thee.  
Object. But they are so very few in comparison, that ever attain to an Interest in Christ, and saving Grace, that I know not how to hope, it should be ever so well with me.  
Answ. If they were never so few, yet while there are any, and so long as the thing is possible, thou art to seek it above all things in the world: And if thou must die and perish, yet thou shouldst resolve to die and perish in pursuit after Christ, and Grace. If any place of Profit or Honour be to be disposed of, many will presently put in for it, will make Friends, and employ their Wit and Interest to obtain it; many will seek, though but one can go away with it: But here all that seek Christ and Grace aright, are in the way to find him.  
( 2.) You that are partaking of Christs purchase, that have received some Grace of his fullness; remember where you had it, and be, 1. Humble. 2. Thankful. 3. Watchful.  
1. Be Humble, you may not say, my hand hath got me this wealth: Now I live, saith the Apostle, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.  
2. Be Thankful, O how thankful should you be for Christ, and how thankful to him? What praise is due to him, who hath loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own Blood, and sanctified us?  
3. Be Watchful, to preserve Grace. Remember what it cost: As David said of the water of the West of Bethlchem, Is it not the blood of the men, that went in Jeopardy of their Lives? O precious Faith, which cost the precious Blood of Christ, to purchase it! when you are careless of maintaining and preserving Grace received, would not this Argue, that you have very low thoughts of the purchase of Christs Blood? Did he not think it too much, to  shed his Blood, to procure Grace and Peace for thee: And dost thou think any pains too much to preserve thine? Does not that deserve to be cherished with our Prayers and Tears, which cost the Blood of Christ, to procure it for us?   
Ezek. 36.32. 
Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord God, be it known unto you.  
Sect. 11.  
PROP. XI. There is nothing required in the Covenant of Grace, or that the People of God can perform, which can Merit at Gods Hand, but what the Lord promiseth upon such or such condition, is as much of Grace, as if it were bestowed without any Condition.  
INdeed a Learned man observes, that according to Distributive-Governing-Justice, so Adam might have been said to Merit, doing all that could equally be required of him; that is, keeping the Law of Innocency. Yea, understanding Merit, or worthiness, as nothing else but a Moral aptitude for the reward; the Fathers are not to be condemned, that speak of[ the Merit of good Works] meaning only according to the Distributive, Governing, Paternal Justice of God in the Law of Grace. But according to the terms of Commutative Justice( which giveth one thing for another, as in Buying and Selling) no Creature can possibly Merit at Gods hand,( vid. Mr. Baxt, Christian Directory, p. 129. sect. 3.1.2, 4. And Preface to Mr. Allain's Discourse, &c. p. 10, 11.) Merit in this last sense would utterly exclude, and deny Gods Benignity, and Mercy. As Beza in Luke 17.10. said& ipse Legis contextus omnem merendi dignitatem excludit: Nihil nisi prorsus gratuitam benig nitatem promittens ipsam observantibus: Cum ipsum quoque legal pactum non aliunde quam à mera Dei benignitate proficiscatur,  
But further to cut off occasion from our Adversaries here. We grant the Obedience which the Faithful perform by the help of Gods Grace, is not to be reckoned among their sins. For coming from a right principle, and being directed to a right end, it hath what is Essential to an Action Morrally-good; though not coming up to that degree of perfection, which the Law in its Rigour doth require, it is not perfectly good. But this Imperfection is but gradual, and not such as specifieth in an evil action, for the kind of it.  
Again, The faithful are worthy, {αβγδ}, Rev. 3.4. God accounts them worthy, in his righteous judgement, accounts them worthy of his Kingdom. But how worthy? Surely not in such a sense as would Derogate and take off from his Free-Grace, and Christs Merits. They are not worthy absolutely, considered strictly in themselves: But worthy for Christs sake, and worthy comparatively. Of the two, the Saints are more worthy than sinners. They are rewardable, being in that state, and capacity, to which the reward is graciously promised. And as there is some conveniency betwixt the Seed, and the Fruit, or Crop; betwixt holding out in the Conflict, and wearing the Triumphal Crown; betwixt running out the Race, and bearing away the prise; betwixt the Means, and the End; so betwixt the Obedience of the Faithful, and promised Happiness. We may grant, they have Dignitatem non-repugnantiae,& dignitatem condecentiae.( As Mr. Fenner.) They are not contrarily affencted, and inclined, but in some measure disposed and made meet for Heaven. Though they have not Dignitatem equivalentiae: They can do no service proportionable to such a reward, Rom. 8.17. So they are not worthy in strict Justice, without any thing of Grace or Favour shown them; only it is worthy of God to reward them, not according to their slender service, but according to his own Bounty and Munificence.  
Note, 1. It is of special Grace, 
Vid. Maldonat in John 15.16. collat. cum Gerhard. Har. c. 177. p. 1025. a pr.  that any do perform the Condition. And therefore the Creature cannot thus Merit any thing at Gods hand; but rather the contrary, upon this account God merits the greatest Love, and highest praises from such of his Creatures. Indeed they are hereby most deeply indebted to him, 
Deo autem nunquiddicimus, red mihi quia dedi tibi? Quid de dimus Deo, quando totum quod sumus,& quod habemus boni, ab illo habemus? Nihil ergo ei dedimus. Aug. cum dvo sint ad se invicem relata, meritum& debitum, profectio meritum est solius Dei, debitum vero hoins est: licet adversarii haec invertant, Doceantque debitum esse Dei meritum vero hoins. Rolloc.  as they cannot but acknowledge to Eternity, Ephes. 2.8. By Grace ye are saved through Faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the Gift of God. Nonne hoc modo& liberum Arbitrium,& bonae intentiones,& preparationes fictitiae& merita,& satisfactiones conticescant opportet. Calo.  
This Faith upon which Salvation is promised, is the Gift of his Grace, Phil. 1.29. {αβγδ}; therefore Salvation, cannot but be of Grace too. Where the Condition is of Grace; the benefit promised cannot but be of Grace. How should that Merit for us, which is the free Gift of God, which he( of special Grace) was pleased to bestow on us?  
2.( As we have heard also) Christ hath purchased saving sanctifying Grace for all those, who attain to it as well as Salvation thereupon. And hence it follows, that there is no proper Merit but in Christ. We are to thank Christ, both that we have Faith( any of us) and that Salvation is sure to them that believe. And one says well: How far is the performance of the condition from Meriting the thing promised, 
Great. prapit. p. 198.  when Christ Died for this end, that God might justify and save them that perform it. Be thou faithful unto death, says Christ, and I will give thee a Crown of Life. And how impossible is it, that our being faithful unto death should Merit the Crown of Life from Christ, since it was he that purchased our Faith and Perseverance? Surely Christ is before-hand with us here; nor can we come ever even with him.  
How absurd is it to say, that Christ hath Merited this for us, that our works should Merit? Then instead of being saved by Christ, we should rather be our own Saviours. So we might say, to the works of our own hands,( dipped in Christs Blood) ye are our Saviours. And what needed Christ to have Merited Heaven for us, if we were to merit it by our own works? see Gal. 2. ult. It is called the Purchased possession, in regard of what Christ hath done; not that we could purchase it by any thing, we can do. And if it was purchased by Christ for the Faithful, then surely there is no need, that they should purchase it anew. If they must merit Heaven, this would deny Christs having merited it for them: I say, this were a denial of the merit of Christ, or a denial of Gods Justice in not giving Heaven to them, when it was purchased for them, except they will purchase it over again. Or else they must think, that God is behind-hand with them, if Christ hath Merited Heaven for them, and they merit Heaven themselves; one Heaven should not be enough. What enemies are they to the Grace of God, how hard would they make him, to take a double price for the same Possession?  
Yea, the Opinion of mens merits would make Jesus Christ the Redeemer indebted to his redeemed ones. O prodigious absurdity. Is it not plain that he hath power to give eternal life, that he gives eternal life, Joh. 17.2. And would it not be a strange mingling of heaven and earth,( horrible confusion) for a believer to come to Christ, and demand of him, Lord give me the life and happiness, which I have merited at thy thy hands? Rather is it not he, that merited for his people, and so hath it put into his hands to give them?  
Object. But if salvation was purchased by Christ, for believers, will it not follow, that it is not of Grace?  
Answ. No: it is given for no merits of theirs; though for the merits of Christ. Indeed it is of Iustice to Christ, because he hath merited salvation for believers: but of grace to them, because they could no way merit it. But if one supposeth any merit in them; he therein denieth, and directly opposeth that of the Apostle Paul, That they are saved by grace. If of grace, then not of their own merit; If of their own merit, then not of grace.  
3. How utterly impossible it is, and therefore incredible, that the most eminent Saint should merit heaven, who must( with jacob,) aclowledge himself less than the least of mercies, and for the very least of his sins deserving no less than hell? Though his sins are pardonned, that he is not bound over to hell and condemnation; yet the reatus simplex remaineth, that we must say of such a pardonned sinner; if God should deal with him according to his deserts, he could look for nothing but hell.  
If a believing, repenting sinner, if the most humble mortified sinner in the world should merit forgivelife and happiness; then their must be more good ness, necessary supposed in his faith, repentance, obedience, than there is evil in his sins: But there is more evil in one sin, than there is good in the most perfect obedience of any creature. And if there was more good in a Saints obedience, than evil in his sins; then what need had such of the satisfaction of Christ; Then Christ dyed in vain for them who might have satisfied for themselves.  
Again, while the sins of a believer do in their own Nature deserve hell, if he could merit heaven on the other hand by his obedience, then it would follow, that the same person, at the same time should deserve both to be pardonned, and to be condemned, should both deserve heaven and hell, so the penitent should be saved, but the sinner damned.  
4. How impossible is it that the condition of the Covenant of Grace should be meritorious, when this is ever necessary included, indispensible required, as part of the condition, that we do utterly renounce our own righteousness, disclaim all self-merit, self-worthiness, that we see our misery and desperate lost estate without the free grace of God in Christ, that we freely acknowledge our iniquity, and ill deservings at Gods hand, and put no confidence in the flesh. Yea we should be ashamed, and confounded in ourselves, even when the Lord is pacified towards us. And Jesus Christ hath  told us: Every one that exalteth himself, shall be abased, and he that humbleth himself, shall be exalted. And hath taught us, 
Theologi Reformati meritò vocem meriti repudiant, quia sonat aliquid superbnm. Le Blank Theses. Quomodo fides justificet, Sect. 57. p. 22.  when we have done what is commanded, to say,( i.e. to believe and acknowledge seriously) that we are unprofitable servants, and deserve not so much as thanks from our Lord and master. Luk. 17.9, 10.  
And could men do all, 
Si quis devotus, si quis solicitus, si quis spiritu fervens, caveat sibi ne suis fidat maritis, ne suis in nitatur operibus, alioqui nec hujuscemodi quidem animum intrat gratia. Bernard. In Annum Dom. ser. 3.  the Covenant of Grace requires, that is repent of sins past, turn from sin, and set upon a strict course of obedience for time to come, &c. and onely fail in this one point of disclaiming self-righteousness, and self-merit, to abide by the merit and righteousness of Christ alone, to procure their acceptation with God, and salvation; I say, could men do all, that the Covenant of Grace requires, besides this: but in stead of denying, and going out of themselves, should rely and depend on their own righteousness as meritorious of the favour of God, &c. they would find this but a smother and cleanlier way to hell. I know not how better to express it, than in the words of a late Writer. As Works every way perfect and meritorious( supposing their were any such) would in themselves hinder pardon by Christs death, being essentially( in their own Natures) inconsistent; so a mans conceiting his works meritorious, is by Gods Law of Grace, excluded from any interest in this propitiation, for he hath made it a part of the Condition, that men be sensible of their unworthiness and undone estate without Christ and pardon. Thus let men go never so far, do never so much, yet an opinion of merit were enough to spoil all they do, and enough to defeat them utterly of all saving benefit by the Covenant of Grace, they not coming up to the condition of it. To stand upon our own worthiness, is to fall from Grace, Gal. 5.4.  
5. To hold the best works of the most gracious souls meritorious, is to deny the Covenant of Grace. A Covenant of Grace it cannot be, if it requires and insists upon meritorious works. Grace and merit are {αβγδ} inconsistent. Though Grace will stand well enough with Christs merit, yet not with the merit of Saints( as I showed before.) If Salvation be by meritorious Works of our own, then not of Grace: If it be of Grace, then not by Meritorious works of our own. And to talk of meriting Ratione pacti: 
Si opera merentur vitam Aeternam ex pacto& ordinatione Dei; non merentur eam inerinseca sua dignitate. Alting. Elenct. p. 801.  By virtue of Gods Covenant and Promise, What is it, but clearly to subvert the thing they would establish? What is it but to fall upon their own Swords, to contradict, and confute themselves? That good works are not meritorious of Heaven and Happiness of themselves, but only the Lord hath promised Life and Happiness in that way,( let them talk what they will,) this is a plain proof, that they merit not at all by way of Condignity, or in respect of Commutative Justice; but it is of Gods free Grace to promise such a reward, undeserved.  
Indeed the Popish Doctors Hobble miserable in their Disputes about the Merit of mens works. Some of them teaching, that good works Merit by virtue of Christs Merits; others, by virtue of Gods promise, and compact. Some holding that they merit ex justitia, of strict Justice; others, that they merit ex gratitudine, as if God was bound, at least in a way of Gratitude to reward them so. Directly contrary to Luke 17.9, 10. But no wonder that these Babel-builders have their Language thus conconfounded.  
I know the word [ Merit] hath sometimes been used very improperly to signify no more, than simply to obtain. As in the speech of Cain,[ mine Iniquity is greater,( according to the Vulg. Lat.) Quam ut veniam merear. 
See more in Bishop Mortons Appeal for Protestants, l. 2. c. 2. sect. 3, 4. & antidote. contra merita. c. 3. sect. 3. ] When nothing is more abhorrent from Reason; than that sin, any sin should deserve, or merit forgiveness. What? Both deserve pardon, and deserve punishment? what can be a plainer contradiction? Doth the same Fountain sand forth sweet water and bitter, salt water and fresh?  
Use. Get a clear apprehension of this certain truth, that there is no merit in what the best of men can do. There is a vast difference betwixt the condition of Salvation, and the Meritorious cause of Salvation. And yet sometimes Antinomians, who are so much against Conditions, seem to befriend Popish Merits, saying, That Christ giveth perfection to our works, and we fulfil the Law in Christ, and our works are perfect, and free from sin, as Christs Actions were. Yea, eton hath this senseless saying, Justification is meritorious of all the Favour and Blessings of God.  
But let us learn to distinguish betwixt a Conditional and a Meritorious cause. We are Justified and Saved by Faith, saved in the way of Repentance, Obedience. We are not saved without them( Christ is the Author of Salvation only to those that believe in him, and obey him) that these are necessary Conditions. Yet we are not saved for Faith, or for our Repentance, Obedience, for any worth or desert in them, but only for the merit of Christ: They are nece●●ary Conditions of salvation therefore; but no Meritorious cause. An Error here, is an Error in the foundation of Salvation. It was the Jews overthrow, their seeking to establish their own Righteousness. As it is enough to ruin any in the world, To build off from Christ, the only Foundation, is Ruinous work, such foolish building would undo any man. There is salvation in no other but Christ. No hopes, that ever we should get to Heaven, if we come not unto Christ: No coming unto Christ, if we go not out of ourselves.   
Ezek. 18.25. 
Here now, O House of Israel, is not my Way equal?  
Sect. 12.  
PROP. XII. The Condition of the Covenant of Grace not being required properly to Merit, and purchase the Blessings promised; it follows, that it is only required to make Way, and qualify us for our Enjoying and partaking of them.  
NOw after man had broken with God, one would be apt to conclude, that God would never take him into a new League, unless it was upon some higher, and harder terms; as it is usual among men. Yet it is quiter otherwise in the Covenant of Grace. God condescends to as low terms as it is possible for any man reasonably to desire. As if the Lord should treat sinners thus: Poor Creatures you have destroyed yourselves; but in me is your help. You are a company of Rebels, that deserve to die, yet I am ready to pardon, and to be reconciled to you, in and through my dear Son,( who in tender compassion towards you, willingly interposed betwixt you and Justice, and died to satisfy for, and save as many of you as should own him for their Redeemer, and return to their allegiance to me.) Now here I offer to be at peace with you; only I must secure the Honour of my Free-grace, and my Sons Merits, as I must also keep up the Reputation of my just Authority, Holiness, hatred of sin.( As I cannot but hate sin, though I am willing to be Reconciled to sinners.) And I must have you at some better pass, not to sin wilfully, as those that neither fear to offend God, nor regard at all how they wrong their own souls. Now, what say ye? Are you ready hearty to acknowledge your sin and wretchedness, to accept of a gracious pardon, and Salvation offered, standing no longer in your own Justification, but utterly renouncing your own Righteousness? And do you resolve to be subject to my Authority, to obey my Commands for time to come, unfeignedly grieving and being truly humbled for your coming short, and failing in any part of that duty you owe to me your Creator, Redeemer, Owner, governor? That is, in short, are you really willing to give up yourselves to me, to be Guided and Governed by me, and saved in my own way?  
Then I here, faithfully engage, upon the word of the ever Living God, the Faithful God that keepeth Covenant, that I will be your God, your Portion, your Exceeding great Reward. I will be, and do all that can be desired, to make you for ever Happy.  
Now is not this a fair proposal? Is it not wonderful, that the Great God should ever make such a gracious offer to sinful, provoking Creatures? Suppose an Earthly Prince offering a Pardon, and promising his Princely grace and favour to a company of condemned Traitors, and Rebels, if they would seriously confess their guilt, aclowledge and accept of his Princely grace and clemency, and promise Loyalty and subjection for time to come; Would you not say these were very fair, easy and equitable terms? And that in wisdom and honour he could require no less? And what doth the Lord require more of us? O sinner! thou that hast been a rebellious wretch, what doth the Lord require of thee, but only to aclowledge thine Iniquity, to accept of Christ the only Saviour, and give up thyself to be governed by him, hearty bewailing and mourning for it; when at any time thou hast forgotten him, and that Love, Duty, Service, and Thankfulness, which thou for ever owest unto him? And is it not wonderful Grace, that on these terms the Lord is ready to receive thee? Doth he promise, that [ If the wicked turn from his wickedness, and walk in Gods Statutes, he shall surely live;] his sins shall not be mentioned unto him,( as Ezek. 33.14, 15, 16.) And will any deny this to be a gracious promise, because conditional? Is it not plain, that what the Lord calleth for here, is of Right, and a due Debt from us? But that he promiseth to receive sinners upon their return; this is not of Debt, but of Gods abundant Mercy, and Free-grace.  
And how should he in Honour go lower than he doth, or in Faithfulness to the Interest of the souls of his people?  
These three things therefore make up the Condition of the Covenant of Grace.  
1. Repentance towards God, without this no Remission or Salvation: Except ye repent, ye shall surely perish. But on the contrary, If the wicked turn, he shall surely live, he shall not die, Ezek. 18.21.  
2. Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. If ye believe not, ye shall die in your sins, Joh. 8.24. But, Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, Act. 16.31.  
3. A resolution to perform sincere, and new obedience, 2 Thes. 1.8. The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven, to take vengeance on them that obey not the Gospel( that yield not evangelical obedience:) But he is the Author of Eternal salvation to them that obey him.  
Under these three,( Repentance, Faith, and sincere Obedience) is included whatsoever the Covenant of Grace requireth, and where one of these is, there are the other. They are inseparable: and where one is name, the other are understood. As what goeth under the name of faith working by love, Gal. 5.6. is called a new creature, Gal. 6.15. and keeping the commandments of God, 1 Cor. 7.19.  
Under the old Testament the condition of the Covenant of Grace is ordinarily expressed by turning to God,( Ezek. 33.11. Seeking him( Amos 5.4. Prov. 8.17.) walking uprightly,( Gen. 17.1. Psal. 84.11. keeping his commandments,( Psal. 103.18.  
In the New Testament it is more ordinarily expressed by faith, faith in Jesus Christ, Mar. 16.16. Joh. 3.36. &c.  
Not but that all that were saved before Christ came in the flesh, were saved by him( who was the Lamb slain from the beginning of the world, as some take that in Rev. 13.8.) not but that it was for his sake, that any were accepted of God, and saved before: see Ast. 15.11. but after his coming in the flesh, then a more explicit faith in Christ, was required of all that would have salvation by Christ. And therefore the Gospel was written( as the Evangelist John says of the writing of his Gospel, Chap. 20.31. that we might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the son of God, and that believing we might have life through his Name. Not that [ believing Iesus to be the Christ, the Son of God] was the onely thing required, or all that was necessary to our having life through his Name: But this added to what was before required in order to Salvation: Before his coming there was no pointing at him, so as John Baptist did, Joh. 1.29.36. Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. But Christ being come, he could say, If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins; and he saveth those that come unto God [ by him] others he will not save. Therefore he saith, Joh. 17.3. This is life eternal to know thee, the true God, and Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent. So joh. 3.36. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life, he that believeth not, shall not see life. So observe what the Covenant of grace requireth for the honour of Christ as Redeemer, and of Free-grace.  
I am not ignorant, how some have argued, an explicit knowledge and belief of Christs death and satisfaction, not to have been absolutely necessary to the salvation of those, that lived before Christs coming  
And yet methinks, it is plain, that the faithful, that lived and died before Christs coming in the flesh, as they had some means of attaining to the knowledge of a Redeemer, so they had some knowledge of a Redeemer, though it was more general and confused, not so clear and distinct, as what Christians now have: But the doctrine of mans Redemption was preached to Adam immediately after his fall [ The seed of the woman shall break the Serpents head] And job could speak of his Redeemer, job 29.25, 26, 27. I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth. And faithful Abraham, Christ testifieth of him, joh. 8.56. Your Father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. And jacob invocates the Angel of the Covenant, Gen. 48.15, 16. God before whom my fathers, Abraham, and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day: [ The Angel which redeemed me from all evil] bless the lads. This Angel was his Redeemer,( And so the Messiah is called, Isa. 59.20.) Again, the same Patriarch, when he lay a dying, breaks forth into this sweet note, Gen. 49.18. I have waited for thy salvation, O Lord: which the two Chaldee Pharaphrasts explain thus,( as Ainsworth noteth) our father jacob said, I expect not the salvation of Gideon son of joash, which is a temporal salvation; nor the salvation of Samson son of Manoah, but the salvation of Christ the son of David, who shall come to bring to himself the sons of Israel, whose salvation my soul desireth. The Patriarks that dyed in the faith, saw something in the promise, which they did not live to see fulfilled, Heb. 11.13. Though it was a far off, yet by faith they saw it, and dyed in the Faith, and confident expectation of it, as jacob that said, I have waited for thy salvation, O Lord. As Christ  told his disciples, that many Prophets, and righteous men, and Kings have desired to see the things that ye see, and have not seen them, Mat. 13.17. Luk. 10.24. So he says, that the Scriptures of the old Testament testified of him, joh. 5.39. and ver. 46. Had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me, for he wrote of me, Luke 24.44, &c. And to him gave all the Prophets witness, Act. 3.18.20, 22.& 10.43. Luk. 1.69, 70, 72, Act. 7.52. 1 Pet. 1.10, 11. As the Sacrifices under the Law pointed at Christ the Lamb of God, the true Sacrifice, that takes away the sins of the world. So it was foretold, that he should make his soul an offering for sin, and bear the iniquity of his people, Isa. 53.10, 11, 12. And Dan. 9.26. After sixty two weeks shall Messiah be cut off. Thus it was revealed, that he should be put to Death; yea, and that he should rise again, Psal. 16.9. Thou wilt not suffer thine holy One to see corruption. And Psal. 110.1. Setteth forth his glorious Exaltation, The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool. Now when so much of him was revealed before, methinks it is strange, if the Faithful then should know nothing of him. Was the Spirit of the Lord so straightened then, as not at all to own and bless his own means here?  
But though I confess, it is not in me to determine, how much Knowledge of, and Faith in the Messiah was necessary then; and though I grant the generality of the Faithful then might know very little,( if any thing at all) of the way and manner of the Messiahs procuring Redemption and Salvation; of which the Prophets themselves were put to inquire, and search diligently, 1 Pet. 1.10. Yet methinks, this is very clear.  
That Pardoning Grace was not a thing unknown to them, but plainly declared, that they might know, Salvation was not of Works, but of Grace. As the Lord had proclaimed his Name to be The Lord, the Lord God, Merciful and Gracious, forgiving Iniquity, and transgression, and Sin; and that will by no means clear, Mundando non mundabit, 
{αβγδ}  h. e. neminem per se pro mundo& innocent habet, said quos mundat& Justificat, mundat ex solâ suâ gratiâ.( F. co.) Omnes egent Dei misericordiâ.( Menock.) apud M. Pol. in Synops. Exod. 34.5, 6, 7. so Psal. 130.3.4. If thou( Lord) shouldst mark iniquities; O Lord, who shall stand? But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayst be feared. Isa. 55.7. Let the wicked forsake his way, and return to the Lord, and he will have mercy on him, and will abundantly pardon. That the Faithful of old had a sense of their need of pardoning Grace, is evident. As David describeth Blessedness, Psal. 32.1, 2. Blessed is he, whose Transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity, and in whose Spirit there is no guile.( i.e.) No guile allowed, but lamented and abhorred. So this was plainly taught, that the true Israelite, the guiltless person, the upright man could not attain to Blessedness, but by the way of pardoning Grace. So they that offered the Sacrifices of Righteousness, might not trust in their own services and sacrifices, but in the Lord, Psal. 4.5. And David( a man after Gods own heart) acknowledgeth Gods Forgiving-mercy, Psal. 103.3. Who forgiveth all thine iniquities. And Solomon prayeth for them that should return to God with all their heart— that he would forgive, 2 Chron. 6.38.39. And Hezekiah, that the good Lord would pardon every one that prepareth his heart to seek God, 2 Chron. 30.18, 19.  
And thus far the condition of the Covenant of Grace was all one under both Testaments, to secure the Honour of Free-grace.( And they are utterly unworthy of any Grace and Favour from God, that will not acknowledge it.) O! How is Gods Free-grace, and Infinite mercy magnified in the Pardon and Salvation of a sinful Creature? Free-grace is the Attribute that God delights to Honour, and doth Honour especially in a sinners Salvation. And he will have this right done unto it, by all, that would attain to Salvation; he will have them see and aclowledge, that if ever they be saved, it must be by Gods Infinite Free-grace. 
Quod& si nos puerili animositate gratis salvari nolumus, merito non salvamur. Excludit miseriae dissimulatio miserationem: Nec dignatio locum habet, ubi fuerit praesumptio dignitatis. Bernard. In Dedic. Eccl. Ser. 5. ( I am speaking of the Adult.) As ever any of us would be saved, we must be sensible of our own unworthiness( as Jacob, that acknowledged himself less than the least of mercies, Gen. 32.10.) We must renounce our own Righteousness,( as Job 9.20. If I justify myself, my own mouth shall condemn me. As the Church confesseth in Isa. 64.6. We are all as an unclean thing, and our righteousness as filthy rags.)  
There was never any Saint, or truly Righteous person in the world, accepted, and saved for any inherent Righteousness found in him: But only of Gods Free-grace, through the satisfaction of Jesus Christ, eyed, and accepted of God for him. And we red of the Jews, Rom. 9.31, 32. which followed after the Law of Righteousness, that they attained not to the Law of Righteousness: Because they sought it not by Faith, but as it were by the works of the Law.  
This therefore is essential to the condition of the Covenant of Grace, that we aclowledge all that God doth for us, according to this Covenant, or all that he here promiseth to do, to be of Grace, of Free-grace. And if men could do all, that the Covenant requireth besides this, and then rest in the same, as a satisfaction to God for their sins, and a compensation for his Favours, as making him amends; this were to turn the Covenant of Grace into a Covenant of Works.  
This you are to note,( and I pray you observe it.) The condition of the Covenant of Grace, is not to satisfy for our breach of the Covenant of Works, but to Interest us in Christs satisfaction. It being so agreed betwixt, or decreed by God the Father, and his Son Christ, that none shall be pardonned and saved upon account of his Satisfaction, but only such as come up to the terms of the Covenant of Grace.  
And truly the Design of the Covenant of Grace is so clear for advancing Christ, and Free-grace; that after many deliberate thoughts, I am afraid to give any more to Faith itself, in the business of a sinners Justification and Salvation, than our sober Divines give to Repentance, and other Graces. Upon serious thoughts, I dare not contend for any Causality, or Efficiency in Faith itself; no, not in the least and lowest Degree. If in any respect it is to be preferred to other Graces, it is in this( to use the phrase of a Learned Divine) that It is the sinners Self-denying acknowledgement of his sin and misery, and inability to help himself. Not that Faith could of itself procure our Pardon and Justification: But only God hath promised to them that believe, an Interest in Christ, and his Righteousness. How doth Faith Interest us in Christ and his Righteousness for Justification, and Salvation? Certainly, not by any intrinsic virtue of its own, but by virtue of Gods gracious promise. The Papists would have Faith to justify, as it is a Grace disposing ad justitium, and as a part of our Inherent Righteousness: Justificatio sine dubio motus quidam est de peccato ad justitiam, says Bellarmine. So he undestandeth that of being Justified freely by his Grace, Rom. 3.24. Per gratiam, idest, per justitiam ab illo donatam,& infusam. But if we admit of their notion of Justification( more properly Justification) then we should be Justified naturally and necessary upon the Working, or( to use the common word) Infusing of a principle of Grace, or Righteous habits. As it followeth also, that we can only be said to be justified in part, till such time as our Inherent Righteousness be perfect. And consquently that in part we are all Unjustified; and so all should be liable to Condemnation still.  
Others speak of the to credere, the condition of the Covenant of Grace, Justifying, God taking and accepting of it, as if it were a perfect fulfilling of the Law. Thus Faith by Acceptilation is supposed to stand in the place, and stead of Perfect, Exact, Legal Righteousness and Obedience. And I confess the Expression of Faith being counted for Righteousness, Rom. 4.3, 5. would seem to countenance such an Opinion, at first blushy. But we must not put such a sense on this Text, and expression of Scripture, as would overthrow other Scriptures. We red 1 Cor. 1.30. That Christ is made of God unto us Righteousness. Where Bellarmine grants, Non esset absurdum, si quis diceret nobis imputari, Christi justitiam& merita, cum nobis donentur& applicentur, ac si nos ipsi Deo satisfecissemus: Though it be a giving up his cause. But they that place Faith in the room of perfect Obedience, teaching that by Gods gracious Acceptilation the one is reputed for the other. they wrest the Scripture, and deny the gracious Imputation of Christs Righteousness to them that believe.  
So far as I am able to apprehended, that which answereth to the Righteousness, and Obedience, required in the Covenant of Works, is the Righteousness and Satisfaction of Jesus Christ alone,( who is called, The Lord our Righteousness, who is made of God unto us Righteousness, our Pro-legal Righteousness, as one.) As also we are said to be made the Righteousness of God in him, 2 Cor. 5.21.) That as man should have been Justified, and for ever Happy by the Covenant of Works, for his own Righteousness inherent in him, and wrought by him, had he obeied perfectly: So that any man is Justified, and saved now, it is not for any imperfect Inherent righteousness of his own, but for the Righteousness of Christ alone. his complete and full satisfaction to Gods Law and Justice. But now if you ask, How the Righteousness, and satisfaction of Christ becomes ours, to Justification and salvation? Or how it cometh to be imputed to the Justifying of some, when it is not imputed to others? The answer is, because the Lord hath set down in the Covenant of Grace upon what terms, or in what way the Righteousness of Christ shall become ours to Justification, and salvation; and some come up to those terms, others not.  
And so the expression of faith being accounted, or imputed unto righteousness] must either be an Hypallage,( as Beza, &c.) meaning that righteousness is imputed to them that believe, Rom. 4.11. or faith must be put there for the object of faith, Christ apprehended and received by faith, or else the words may be understood thus, that faith is that, which in the eye of the new Law passeth for righteousness, subordinate to Christs righteousness. Being all( summarily) which is required of a man himself, that he may be just in the eye of the new law of Grace, or the Gospel, or that he may have a right and title to the righteousness, which consists in the remission of sins through Christ,( see Mr. Allens Discourse, p. 48.49, 50.) But the words cannot possibly be intended by the Apostle, to exclude Christs Righteousness imputed to them that believe, for that would make him contradictory to himself.  
And so I conclude, that faith is not instead of perfect Legal righteousness: but the righteousness of Christ, which is imputed to us, ( made ours) when we believe, come up to Covenant-terms. So we red in Rom. 10.4. Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth, and Chap. 8.3.4. what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh, {αβγδ}, and a sin-offering; or a sacrifice for sin,( as it should have been translated, and I wonder Beza should oppose it, when in his note upon Heb. 10.6. He is contrary to himself and readeth {αβγδ}, sacrifice for sin.( But God sending his own Son, to be a sacrifice for sin, thus he) condemned sin in the flesh; That the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. As if he had said, The Law and justice are no Losers by us, who are in Christ Jesus. Though our obedience be imperfect and short of the Rule; yet Christs satisfaction is full and perfect, which by Gods gracious promise and Covenant, is freely made over to all that believe.  
But thus you have heard how the design of the Covenant of Grace is to advance Gods free grace, and the merits of Jesus Christ, and accordingly it is a main essential part of the condition of the Covenant, that we aclowledge free grace the moving,& Christs righteousness the meritorious procuring cause of all that good, and blessedness proposed, and promised in the Covenant. As they are altogether unmeet to partake of such benefits, as will not aclowledge from whom they receive, and how they come by them.  
Now to apply this, before I proceed to that part of the condition, which is a enterprising of Gods Authority, and swearing fealty to him.  
Let me ask, what spirit you are of? Have you high thoughts of yourselves, and would you be something in yourselves? or have you learnt to deny yourselves, and to have admiring thoughts of Christ, and free Grace? Luk. 18.9. &c. There our Saviour put forth a parable to certain that trusted in themselves that they were righteous. Two men went up into the temple to pray, the one a Pharisee, the other a Publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus, God I thank thee, that I am not as other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this Publican. I fast twice in the week, &c. And he trusted in this, thought this enough to commend him to Gods acceptance, and to procure his salvation. He looked no further. The poor Publican he stood afar off, and would not lift up so much as his eyes to heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. He saw himself a lost undone creature, unless it would please the Lord to show forth his wonderful free mercy. He had a deep sense of his own wretchedness, and unworthiness. Now saith our Saviour, ver. 14. I tell you, this man went away justified, rather than the other. For every one that exalteth himself shall be abased, and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted. Now Sirs, how is it? Are we for exalting ourselves, or for exalting Christ, and grace? It is true, naturally we are all for establishing, and setting up our own righteousness; and are loth to own our poverty and wretchedness, to be so great, as indeed it is; are loth to think of being so much beholden to Jesus Christ, and free Grace, as indeed we must be, if ever we be saved. But know this, it is as certainly damning for men to trust in their own righteousness, as to go on impenitently in sin and wickedness. It may be because thou art not so bad as others, thou thinkest thyself too good to go to hell: that thy sins do not deserve hel; or it may be thou hast been humbled after a sort,& hast reformed many things, hast left thyswearing, cursing, lying, thy drunkenness, thy open Sabbath profanation;& now thou livest after another fashion, thou art a diligent hearer, hast set up the worship of God in thy family, art just in thy dealings, &c. and therefore now thou thinkest, thou deservest well at Gods hand. But alas, one thing thou lackest, thou must sell all, and come to Christ. Thou must count all things dung, thine own righteousness filthy rags, and desire only to be found clothed in the righteousness of Christ. Alas, alas, while thou trustest in thyself, as having such a righteousness of thine own, thou art upon a false bottom, thou art but a proud Pharisee, and many Publicans are more likely to enter into heaven, than such self-righteous ones. If when we cannot deny, but we are sinners; instead of humbling ourselves before God, and suing to him for Grace and pardon, in and through Christ( the way that he hath set forth, wherein alone sinners may be reconciled to him.) We will go our own way( as if Gods way were too low) so we will think to make God amends some other way; what is this, but to deny Pardoning, Gospel-grace, and( as one says) to spit in Christs face? What is this, but to make the Death and satisfaction of Christ needless? As what needed Jesus Christ to Die for sinners, to satisfy Gods Justice, if any thing that sinners can do, may satisfy? Well sirs, look to it: Christs satisfaction was never intended, or provided for such, as think themselves sufficient to satisfy, and make God amends; such as hope their sins are not so great, but they may be Expiated by their good prayers, works of Charity, or Righteousness, that they have done. Were it so indeed, then Jesus Christ might very well have spared his great pains taken, and undergone about it.  
The truth is, there are very gross and dangerous mistakes both ways: Too many that would take Christs work out of his Hands, as Self-justiciaries; others again would cast that, which is their own proper work, upon Christ, as Antinomians. The sound Christian must warily avoid both these Rocks, both extremes.  
Indeed Christ hath satisfied for us, for our breach of the Covenant of Works, if we perform the condition of the Covenant of Grace. But he hath not performed the condition of the Covenant of Grace for any( though he hath purchased that Grace for some, whereby they shall perform it.) But Christ was made under the Law, to fulfil the Law: Not under the Gospel, to perform the condition of the Gospel. He hath not repented for us, believed for us. Had he done these, then there were nothing at all for us to do; but he should save us altogether without us.  
Christ's satisfying for mans breach of the Covenant of works, will not exempt us from a necessity of performing the condition of the Covenant of Grace. As our performing the condition of the Covenant of Grace, is not that which satisfieth for our breach of the Covenant of Works. Sirs, be very clear in these points: Certainly, they are of very great weight. Suppose I am questioned, as being a sinner; what have I to pled here, but the satisfaction of Christ? But then suppose my Interest in Christs satisfaction questioned; in this case I have nothing to pled, but the condition of the Covenant of Grace. If I truly repent, and believe, then by Gods promise, and Covenant, I am assured of Remission and salvation by Christ. But for us to place any Act, Grace, or Duty of ours in the room of Christ, is a most dreadful presumption, and an undoing mistake. They that here would turn Christ out of Office may indeed expect, that he will turn them off to shift for themselves. They that are not willing to be saved by him, and saved in his way, cannot be saved. So necessary it is, that we all come to a deep sense of our own wretchedness, and unworthiness, and to be hearty willing that Christ and Free-grace should have all the Honour of our Justification, and salvation. As a personal worthiness, so a conceit of such worthiness in ourselves, will not stand with a Covenant of Grace, or with salvation by Grace.  
Pardon, and peace with God, and Heavens everlasting Happiness, are too precious privileges and Blessings, to be cast away on such, as have no sense what it cost Jesus Christ to purchase them, and such as make light matters of them; and such as are so well conceited of themselves, as to look upon all as Deserved, and Due to them. The Water of Life is for souls that are a thirst. And Christs Wine and Milk for them that have no Money to buy. They that come with the Prodigal, Give me the portion of Goods that falleth to me; that think they may lay claim to Heaven, as their own, as a due Debt, shall go without it: They have no part, nor lot in it. Rather it is meet to come to God with the returning Prodigal, hearty confessing; Father, I have sinned against Heaven, and before thee, and am no more worthy to be called thy son, or to have any portion, or Inheritance among the children. Job 33.27, 28. He looketh upon men, and if any say I have sinned, and perverted that which was right, and it profiteth me not: He will deliver his soul from going into the pit, and his life shall see the Light. Now,  
2. I come to speak of the condition of the Covenant of Grace, to show what it requireth, to keep up Gods Authority; and evidence his Purity, Holiness, and Hatred of sin.( As I have  told you, though he is willing to be Reconciled to sinners, yet he can never be Reconciled to sin. As I also  told you in my Discourse of the Covenant of Works, that God in entering into Covenant with man, did not lay aside his Authority, and commanding Power over man.)  
I confess I meet with one of very great worth, that makes faith the onely condition. Faith, 
Mr. Obad. Sedgw. of Covenant, pag. 183. 185.  and no other thing.  
Yea, faith considered only as uniting us to Christ;( which he says is a point as difficult, and weighty as any that he meets with) Faith as justifying, doth not bring us into Covenant,( says he) for our justifying follows our being in the Covenant, &c. where by being in Covenant,( as all along in his Treatise) he meaneth, being internally in Covenant, or keeping, and standing to the Covenant, so that one may lay claim to the blessings promised in the Covenant.  
But I would fain know, whether souls are united to Christ by any other faith, than such a faith, as justifieth, and sanctifieth too?  
And elsewhere the same author telleth us, although forgiveness of sin be not the effect of mans repentance,( for then we should forgive ourselves, yet repentance is required to the obtaining of forgiveness; citing those texts, Isa. 55.7. Ezek. 18.21. If the wicked will turn— where it is plainly made the condition: And, if faith be any more, if remission and justification be the effect of mans faith,( then as he saith) we should forgive ourselves, and justify ourselves.  
Again, where he is proving a condition, expressly determined in Scripture,( as agreeing to the Covenant of Grace,) amongst other texts, requiring faith, he citeth these, Act. 2.38, 43, 19. Repent and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, 2 Cor. 6.17, 18. Come out from among them— and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my Sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty;] which Scriptures make repentance, and conversion, as well the condition of the Covenant.  
If now you should say, that you know not what to think of the Condition of the Covenant of grace. And Ministers distracted your minds, saying sometimes it is this thing onely, and sometimes it consisteth of other things, as well as that.  
Yet know, we are all agreed thus far, that where one grace is in truth, there are other graces with it. Where saving Faith is, there is repentance, and a disposition and resolution to perform sincere obedience. They are inseparable. As Moralists speak of a concatenation of virtues 
So the stoics, {αβγδ}. Diog. Laert. in Zeno. l. 7. p. 513. , there must needs be a concatenation of saving graces  
Indeed the seed of God includes all graces in it. And all graces make one new creature. The new heart is both a believing heart, and an humble; a penitent heart, and a pure; and a loving heart, and a thankful heart; &c. And so he that will have Faith, and no other thing, the condition of the Covenant of Grace; yet afterwards telleth you what it is, to wit," the bringing of the heart into Christ.  
Because I have long had the same apprehensions touching this matter, I will recite his words at large, thinking them very well worthy of your observation: when he is speaking of the principle of grace, renewing, saving grace; says he, According to the several ways of working, it hath several names,( e. g.) As it is the turning of the heart; it is called conversion. As it is the humbling of the heart; it is called godly sorrow. As it is the the turning of us from sin, it is called Repentance. As it is the bringing of the heart into Christ, it is called Faith, &c. As it is the abasing of the heart, it is called Humility. As it is the gentle tempering of the heart, it is called meekness. As it is a submitting of the heart to God in sufferings, it is called patience, &c.  
Now if you attend to this; that all grace is radically, or virtually in that seed of God, you will know what to say to those nice questions, whether faith or repentance be first? And whether we are first united to Christ by; and then receive sanctifying graces from him? It quiter cutteth off such questions as these. As that faith, which uniteth unto Christ, supposeth the understanding enlightened, and the will set right; that is, the soul renewed. So that question, whether faith be seated in the understanding, or in the will? would appear to be an impertinent question. As many Philosophers of late can see no reason to suppose those faculties really distinct from the soul.  
Methinks, this may ease your minds of any perplexity, that the seeming difference among sober Divines, about the condition of the Covenant, may occasion. Take notice of this I pray; they that make faith the onely condition, yet are far from supposing that faith goes alone; No, it hath the whole train of graces attending on it. The new heart, that which the Apostle Peter calleth, a divine, or Godlike Nature, hath them all.  
Another sound Divine I meet with, 
Bulkley of Covenant, p. 334. &c.  makes faith the whole condition of the Covenant of grace, but there he takes Faith in so large a sense, as to include sincere Obedience. And so he telleth us, when God saith in the Covenant [ I will be your God,] the meaning is not only, that he will be a God of Mercy to us, to pardon and bless us; but a God over us, to Rule and Govern us: And that Faith closeth with him in both respects.  
He grants, The Covenant betwixt God and us, is, like that between a King and his People, Faith sets God upon the Throne, and saith, Reign thou over me.  
And again, If he do at all make a Covenant with us, he will be a God to us, as well to Rule us, as to save us; to say, Live as ye will, yet you shall be saved, is the Devils covenant, not Gods.  
Now I would not take such for Adversaries, who agree in the thing, only they differ in words, in the manner of expressing themselves.  
Faith indeed is the only Receptive condition. As in its own Nature it is an Accepting or Receiving of Christ offered in the Gospel, in which respect it is chosen and appointed by God, and is the great Summary condition of the Gospel: But then besides Faith,( the Receptive condition) there are other Dispositive conditions, which are either necessary implied, and included in Faith, or are necessary Attendants on it. For which see what the Lord required of Abraham, Gen. 17.1. I am the Almighty, or All-sufficient God, walk before me, and be thou perfect. Or be sincere, upright. Or[ be thou perfect] though thou art not already perfect, yet be pressing on towards Perfection. As it is a constant Note of Sincerity and Uprightness, to strive after Perfection. And no less is required of us, 2 Cor. 7.1. Having therefore these Promises,( wha Promises? Those Covenant promises mentioned, Chap. 6.16, 17, 18.) let us cleanse ourselves from all Filthiness, and be perfecting Holiness, {αβγδ} in the fear of God. Though we are not perfect in Holiness, while here, yet we must be perfecting Holiness: This is required of all Gods Covenant People. And who are they that deal not falsely in his Covenant, but such as walk uprightly, whose hearts depart not from him, Psal. 44.17, 18. Who are they that keep his Covenant, but such as give themselves to keep his Testimonies, Psal. 25.10. Keep them, as Zacharias, and Elizabeth his Wife, Luke 1.6. As David, who desired to have a respect to all Gods Commands, would lay all Gods Judgments before them: Though they cannot yield sinless Obedience to any one Command, yet their desire is to Obey all Gods Commands. They Obey his Laws Impartially, though but Imperfectly, Psal. 15.1, 2. Lord, who shall dwell in thy holy Hill? Who shall go to Heaven? The Answer is, He that walketh uprightly.  
And what can be more plain, than that this is part of the condition of the Covenant of Grace; even from those very Texts. which may pled and urge against all conditions. They who have God for their God, whom he owneth for his People, have his Law put into their Inward parts, and written in their hearts. View over again, Jer. 31.33. &c. with the other Texts, Parallel to it, which I had occasion to speak of before, under the Ninth Proposition.  
So Mich. 6.6, 7, 8. Wherewithal shall I come before the Lord, will the Lord be placated, appeased with thousands of Rams, or with ten thousands of Rivers of oil? Shall I give my First-born for my Transgression, the Fruit of my body, for the sin of my soul? He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do Justly, and to love Mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.  
And surely, it is meet to be said unto God, I will not offend any more: That which I see not, teach thou me; If I have done iniquity, I will do no more, as it is Job 34.31, 32. Is it not meet, that when a sinner cometh to God, desiring conditions of peace, be unfeignedly sorry for sin past, and resolved against sin for time to come, fully purposing not to persist in any way of sin: Surely it is meet to be said unto God, Lord be at peace with me, and by thy Grace I will now break my former League with sin; O! I would no more return to Folly. I would not that other Lords should any more have dominion over me.  
Thus now you have heard, what are the terms of the Covenant of Grace, as to secure the Honour of Gods Free-grace, and of Christs Merits, so to assert Gods Authority over us, and evidence his Love to Holiness, and hatred of sin. And as ever you would enjoy the Blessings therein promised, as ever you would have the pardon of sin, and an Interest in God, and Eternal happiness, you must come up to these terms: And be it known unto you all, that if you do not like well of these terms, you may stick to the Covenant of Works, and from thence receive your Doom: But certainly, you cannot claim any part in that Happiness, held forth in the Covenant of Grace. God cannot in Honour condescend to any lower terms. Should he pardon Offenders, who had a purpose to Transgress again, to go on in sin? would not this be an emboldening of sinners? Would not it be a slain to his Righteous Government? A great blemish to his Infinite Wisdom, and Goodness too? Most true it is, his Grace is Dispensed freely, yet not promiscuously. Though the Pope is prodigal of his pardons which cost him nothing, and indeed are nothing worth; though he grant out Pardons and Dispensations for sins to come, Sins to be committed, yet the Wise and Holy God setteth more store by his Pardons. He cannot but account highly, of what was purchased at no lower Rate, than the most precious Blood of his dear Son. Of all things in the world, he cannot endure to have his Grace in Christ abused. Though he is a God that pardoneth Iniquity, Transgression and Sin, yet he will by no means clear the Guilty, or acquit the Wicked, as it is, Nah. 1.3. Ita misericors, ut maneat justus,& Sanctus. They shall not have a pardon from him, who would not care how they abused it. But only such as would say with Ezra: Should we again break his Commandments? He healeth their Back-slidings, whom he freely loves, and graciously receives.  
O sirs, we( as we are Gods Messengers) should fear to conceal any part of our Message: As we are his Ambassadors, we should fear to hid from you any part of our embassy. Would it not be unfaithfulness to God and to your souls, did we shun to declare all the Counsel of God concerning you? Well, I must tell you what you are every one of you to trust to, God hath Sworn by his Holiness, and he will not lie, he will never alter this thing that is gone out of his Lips; he hath given you Propositions of peace in writing, you have the Tables of his Covenant, signed with his own Hand; Sealed in the Blood of his Son: You have heard the Contents what it is that the Lord requireth of you. Now what say you? Are not his Ways equal? Are not the terms very fair? Are not his Offers exceeding gracious? If you are not pleased with them, you may take your course; yet I must say, refuse them at your peril. As I must warn you, and in the Name of the Lord, I warn you this day, that you never look that he should offer Mercy to you upon other terms than these. I call Heaven and Earth to record against you this day, that you have had Life and Death set before you, and I warn you every one, that you do not presume of any part in Christ or Salvation purchased by him; or that any of the saving Benefits, and Blessings held forth in the Covenant of Grace, are yours, if you are not indeed sensible of the evil of sin, and truly humbled for sin if you do not truly renounce your own righteousness, and really resolve to forsake all known sin, to practise all known Duty, to walk before God, and be upright.  
How is it possible, that they should be true to their League with God, faithful in his Covenant, who yet continue in League with any Lust, any known sin, Gods declared enemy; and who refuse to come under any known Law of his?  
Know this, that as a Pharisaical righteousness cannot, so neither can an Antinomian faith save any of you. The Apostle James would tell the Libertines of his dayes, that the Devil had a faith as well as they. Indeed Libertines have another Gospel, not the true Gospel of Christ. Therefore they must needs have another faith, not the true Faith of Christ.  
Some would persuade themselves, and others too, that Christ hath done all: That they must see their Repentance in Christ, and Gospel-obedience in Christ, which is a very short cut to Heaven. But how smooth and specious soever this Doctrine may seem to some, yet it is most false, corrupt, and dangerous Doctrine. Christ never satisfied for our full and final breach of the Covenant of Grace, though he did for our breach of the Covenant of Works. Not but that sins against the Gospel are pardonned for the sake of Christ. Not but that Christ satisfied for sins against the preceptive part of the Gospel, and Non-performance of the condition for a time; but these are pardonned to none, but those that come to perform the Gospel condition, that is, Believe and Repent in time.  
show me one Text, that will prove, there was ever any sinner in the world, pardonned and saved in a state of impenitency and disobedience. Christ hath  told us, what is the portion of Hypocrites and Unbelievers, Mat. 24.51. Luke 12.46. And if any of you continue such, there you may red your Doom. Look what sentence he gives forth now in his word, he will not contradict, but fully ratify in the last and great day.  
And see what he saith, Mat. 7.21. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven; but he that doth the will of my Father which is in Heaven. And Luke 19.27. Those mine enemies which would not, that I should Reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. As Jeptha said to the men of Gilead, Did ye not hate me, and expel me? and why do ye come to me when you are in distress? Such as reject Christ now, will find such welcome to him another day, that they shall be rejected of him.[ If I deliver you, shall I be your Head?] Christ will not be our Saviour upon other terms. He will certainly refuse to be our Saviour, if we refuse him as Lord. Him God hath exalted to be a Prince, as well as a Saviour. Him God hath appointed not only to be a Deliverer, but also a Leader and Commander, Isa. 55.4.  
And thus I have spoken of the condition, of the Covenant of Grace. 1. As securing the honour of Christ, and free-grace. 2. As securing the honour of Gods Authority and Holiness, Now  
Thirdly, I will add a few words concerning the condition, as it respects the Interest and benefit of souls, Are not his ways equal, when he requires nothing, but what is for our advantage? See Deut. 10.12, 13. And now Israel what doth the Lord thy God require of thee, but to fear the Lord thy God, to walk in his ways and to love him, to keep the Commandments, which I command thee this day for thy good, So Deut. 6.24.  
Is it not good, that such weak imperfect creatures as we are, have our help laid on Christ, who is mighty to save? Is it not better that we have such an all-sufficient Saviour to lean upon, than to stand on our own legs? Tutissimum est,( As Bellarmine was forced to say at last, after a great contest against it) propter incertitudinem propriae justitiae,& periculum inanis gloriae, fiduciam totam in solâ Dei misericordiâ& benignitate reponere; would not any enlightened conscience choose and think it safer to abide by the perfect righteousness and satisfaction of Christ our surety before Gods bar; would not such an one much rather desire to be found in that long white rob, than to be found in the short covering of his own imperfect righteousness? That to despise, slight, and reject Christ, is exceedingly to wrong our own souls?  
Again, is it not good that the heart be humbled for sin, broken for sin, the more to loosen it from Sin, and to engage it the more against sin for time to come? And though worldly sorrow is a burden causing the heart to stoop; yet certainly you that know what Godly sorrow is, you find much more hearts ease in it: Have you not many times gone awy with lighter hearts, hearts more at ease, from prayer, from the word, from a Sacrament, when you have had them kindly melted into Gods sorrows?  
And is it not good to be divorced from sin? what are ye the better for any lust, you have harboured in your bosoms? Have they not been Delilah's to you? What fruit, what fruit of those base lusts? Oh how may you be ashamed! All that kindness you have shown to your lusts, hath it not been great cruelty to your own souls? How have they robbed you of your strength, of your peace, true peace and comfort, of sweet communion that you might have had with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ, and with the Holy Spirit the Comforter! O what have you lost, to enjoy your base lusts? when the Prophet saith [ his soul is not right in him] Non est recta anima, Hab. 2.4. The Apostle hath it thus, Heb. 10.38. My soul shall have no pleasure in him, yet to the same sense, quia rectitudo ainae, in semetipsâ consistit in eo, quod placeat Deo,& è contra, eo ipso quod placeat Deo, in se est recta. lord. Tenu. in Heb. 10. dip. 7. Sect. 2. pag. 473. b. And after all sin would rob you of your souls and ruin them for ever.  
Would you have Christ and your Lusts together? Heaven and your lusts together? But that is impossible, Abstracting Gods decree, and positive constitution, it is impossible in the very nature of the thing. [ What communion hath light with darkness?] If it be good for souls to contract with Christ, to receive Christ, it is then good to break with sin, and part with sin. As Christ cannot endure his greatest enemy to be his corrival; so neither can one heart be in League, in love with two, so contrary; while you love the one, you will despise, yea hate and be at Enmity with the other.  
And what should you do with your Lusts in Heaven? You would find no company there, fit for you, no Objects there, no entertainment there fit for you. How miserable is Dives in Hell, with his perpetual scorching, parching thirst, while he cannot obtain a drop of water there, to cool his Tongue? And would it not be a Torment to sinners to be in Heaven, with their craving Lusts, where is nothing suitable to satisfy them? No fuel for Lust in Heaven; no Work, no Employment in Heaven fit for you. O sirs, without new hearts, What should you do in the new Jerusalem? Without clean hands, and pure, holy hearts, What should you do in Gods holy Hill? If the enjoyment of Heaven be a thing desirable, then also it is desirable that we be sanctified, made meet for that Inheritance of the Saints in Light. It is impossible in the Nature of the thing, that we should be happy in the Fruition of God, till first we are made Holy, and conformed to him.  
And you that have no delight in the Service of God, in holy Duties, to whom the word is a burden, and Prayer a burden, and Sabbaths wearisome days: Alas, what should you do in Heaven? Would those Carnal hearts of yours like well to keep an everlasting Sabbath there, that are so weary of these short Sabbaths here; saying, When will the Sabbath be ended? How would you like to be continually admiring, and adoring, and extoling God and his Infinite glorious Perfections, Christ and his Incomparable, Matchless Love and Grace; as those that think Eternity too little to take the Height and Length, and Breadth and Depth thereof. Thus it may appear that what God requires in the Covenant of Grace, is plainly necessary in order to the Rectifying and Healing of mans corrupted Nature, to make it capable of true Blessedness; to make it capable of what the Covenant of Grace doth hold forth and promise.  
O my Friends, how easy were it Expatiating here, and to show what enemies they are to their own souls, and what brutish, unreasonable Creatures they are, that think what God requireth in the Covenant of Grace, is very hard. Surely they know not what is good for themselves. Consider once again, what it is the Lord requireth of us, and is it not, as if he should bespeak us after this manner.  
Poor Creatures, though there is cause as you are Degenerated, and Apostatised from me, just cause indeed that I should sentence you to Hell, to depart from me, as accursed for ever; yet for my son's sake, and to manifest my Rich Grace and Mercy; I do here declare, I am ready to receive you again into favour, that your souls should live for ever in my Sight, and that upon as good Terms, as ever you could possibly wish for yourselves. You have seen when I had put Righteousness into mans own hand, he soon lost it, to his undoing; well now it is in a safer hand, my Son Jesus Christ hath brought in everlasting Righteousness; and though you have no Inherent Righteousness of your own that can justify you in my sight, yet come to my Son Christ, and he hath that for you, wherein I cannot but be satisfied, and well-pleased.  
Your sins have been very Injurious to you, defacing my Image in you, and exposing you to my Wrath, separating betwixt you and your God, depriving you of my Gracious presence; but now hearty aclowledge and be wail them, watch and strive, and resolve against them; and though you cannot Live absolutely free from sin while here, yet your sins shall be pardonned, and sin shall not have Dominion over you, nor hinder your communion with me. Do but continue Fighting, and you shall have the Victory, and Triumph at last in Glory.  
You have been walking contrary to me, wearying yourselves for very Vanity: O! but now at last bethink yourselves, consider your ways, and return to me; O! forsake not your own Mercy. As averse as you have been from harkening to my Commands, yet if now at length you would incline your ear to me, you shall find that my Commandments are not grievous; no, my yoke is easy, my Ways are Paths of Pleasantness: Not one that ever served me in Truth, that will say they have served an hard Master. O sinners, as ever you wish well to yourselves, either here or hereafter, shake off your sins, that have corrupted and would ruin you, and take up my Yoke, and and ye shall find rest for your souls.  
And now, Sirs, what can you say why you should not accept of Gods terms? What can you say, but that If here you turn a deaf ear to him, you indeed forsake your own Mercy to follow lying Vanities, and choose Death rather than Life?  
It may be some will think I have used more words than needed, in a case so plain: But this is a Matter of as great Concernment as any thing I can possibly speak of, and therefore not to be slightly passed over.  
Till you come to apprehended and accept of the terms of the Covenant of Grace, there is no peace betwixt God and your Souls. Do you ask: Is it Peace? I must tell you: No. What Peace, so long as you slight Christ, the only Peace-Maker? What peace, so long as you will not lay down your Arms, abandon your Lusts, and submit to Gods Righteous sceptre, will not be governed by his Laws, that is, so long as ye will continue Rebels? Alas, while it is thus, there is no peace. And hitherto all Treaties and Offers of Grace, all Gods gracious Parleys with thee, all the Beseechings, Pleadings, Warnings of Gods Messengers and Ambassadors have been in vain, as to thee, who art not yet persuaded to quit all thy Carnal confidences, to forsake sin, and come in to God.  
Yea, there is no possibility of thy Salvation upon other terms than these, except the Lord Jesus Christ would come again into the World, and Die once more, to save thee in and with thy sins, as he hath dyed to save his from their sins. But that can never be, Christ being raised from the dead, dieth no more; and there remaineth no other sacrifice for sins, or wouldest thou have God set forth a new Gospel, and some other Covenant, but that he will never do for any sinner in the world. No: this is the everlasting Gospel. This is the new Covenant( the terms whereof you have heard opened to you) the new Covenant, that shall never wax old, to give place to another. Oh that self-confident, secure, and presumptuous sinners might be convinced and awakened by what hath been said.  
As on the other hand, the poor in Spirit, the humble, and contrite ones should be encouraged and comforted.  
Thou that art so much, so oft discouraged at the thoughts of thy own sinful vileness and address; rather be encouraged, that thou seest thy own vileness, a thing which the most neither do, nor have any mind to take notice of. It is not a sinners address that bars him from Christ, but ones presuming on his own worthiness. If now thou hast such a sense of thine own unworthiness, as humbleth thee, and heighteneth thy esteem of Jesus Christ, and raiseth thy heart, and desires up to him, that it is the constant cry of thy soul to God, O give me Christ, or I die, and am undone for ever; This is a good hearing, this is comfortable, and be of good cheer, the Master calleth thee, Ho! every one that is athirst, come; And come all ye that are weary and heavy laden. Are thy sins now a burden to thee? But come to Christ, and he will ease thee.  
And though thou canst not say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin; yet it is thine earnest svit unto God, that he would creat a clean heart within thee. And thou art so far from indulging and allowing of any lust, that thou criest out, O wretched man, or woman, when shall I be delivered! O that this thorn in the flesh were once plucked out! Is there no member of the old man, that thou wouldest have spared? No, not the right eye, not the right hand?  
And though thou fallest short in thy obedience, yet thy will and desire is to follow God fully, and his commands are not grievous. Thou dost not account it a grievance, that God requires so much but this is the grief of thy soul, that thou dost no more. And how would it rejoice thy heart, couldst thou serve him more,& serve him better? well, thy unworthiness, thy wants, and weaknesses should not so much discourage thee, as the riches of Gods free grace in Christ ought to encourage thee. Is thy heart right with God? Then surely he will give thee his hand, his gracious helping hand; yea as thy heart is for God, and is now against sin, God will also be for thee, yea, his heart is towards every one, that offereth himself willingly. And so, as much as thou art wont to complain of unworthiness, and weakness, yet surely thou mayest say, In the Lord have I righteouseness and strength; poor troubled heart, now encourage thyself in the Lord and in his gracious Covenant. This is all thy salvation, and here is all that thou canst desire, surely thou shalt be satisfied with favour, and full of the blessing of the Lord. To thee belongeth all the good and happiness included, and promised in the Covenant of grace, of which thou mayest hear something in the next proposition.   
2 Sam. 23.5. 
All my salvation, and all my desire.  
Sect. 13.  
PROP. XIII. The benefits and blessings promised in the Covenant of Grace, and sure to all that perform the aforementioned condition, are exceeding great and many, are indeed inexpressible, inestimable, and inconceivable.  
O That I could borrow the tongues of men and Angels for a while! what need of the tongue of the Learned here? yea, of that wine of the Kingdom, which would cause the lips of those that are asleep to speak? might one of us poor mortals have the privilege( with him in 2 Cor. 12.4.) to be caught up into Paradise, to hear how those blessed ones above set forth, and magnify Covenant-blessings, continually praising and adoring that Free-grace of God in Christ, that brought them to a participation thereof, should we not hear {αβγδ}, such lofty strains of heavenly Eloquence, as our low capacities would not be able to repeat after them?  
As when Jacob first heard of his son Joseph's honour and advancement in Egypt, his heart fainted: so it might be astonishing news to us, to hear what great things God hath promised, if we come up to Covenant-terms. As when the Queen of Sheba had seen the glory of King Solomon, there was no more spirit in her: how ravishing should it be to the souls of the faithful, to see and hear what glory God holds forth to them in the Covenant of Grace. Here are riches of glory on the vessels of mercy. O the riches of the glory of this mystery! unsearchable riches indeed. See Rom. 9.23. Col. 1.27. Ephes. 1.18.& 3.8.  
It is not to be thought, that any man on earth, much less that such a worm as I, should make a full discovery of all the Blessings, and glorious privileges contained in Gods gracious Covenant. Indeed, eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entred into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him, 1 Cor. 2.9. As we cannot by searching find out God to perfection,( Job 11.7.) so neither can we fully know, or describe the happiness of those, who have a special interest in God. As one says, we shall never see the Covenant of Grace fully unfolded, till( according to Heb. 1.12.) the Heavens come to be folded up; or rather till we see Heaven itself opened.  
The Grand promise here is [ I will be their God] a promise containing all the rest. A promise containing Him, whom the Heaven of Heavens cannot contain.  
Who is he that feareth the Lord, that obeyeth the voice of his servant, let him no more walk disconsolately; but encourage himself in the Lord his God. Well mayest thou rejoice in thy portion. Deus meus,& omnia. O rejoice in his Highness for ever.  
Obj. But was not God the God of jeshurun? as Moses said, none like unto the God of jeshurun. And yet Jeshurun forsook God, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his Salvation. And when the Lord saw it, he abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters, Deut. 32.15, 19. To the Israelites in common pertained the Adoption, and the glory, and the Covenants, as the Apostle saith. Yet with many of them God was not well pleased; but overthrew them in the wilderness. Yea, sometimes he said of them, you only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities, Amos 3.2.  
Answ. Grant all this, yet it is no denial, or diminishing of your happiness, who have a special propriety in God; nor should it be any damp to your joy, and rejoicing in Him.  
As there is a twofold call, so there is a twofold relation to God; as a twofold manner of being in Covenant with God, so a twofold interest in Him. Observe it, there is a common, external, and ineffectual; and again there is a special, internal, and effectual call to God: So there is a more common Relation to God, and a more special Relation to Him. A Common interest in God, and a Special interest in him.  
Indeed a great privilege it is to be a people near unto the Lord, to be so much as externally in Covenant with Him. Yea, it is far better to be continued in his House and Family, though under the discipline of the Rod, than to be driven out of his house and heritage, though it were with Babylon, to sit as Queen in the earth. Better to suffer affliction with the people of God, to enjoy his word and ordinances, the ordinary means of salvation; than to enjoy the largest share of worldly Pleasures, Plenty, and Prosperity, without them. Thus Englands Mercies( were the Land more Impoverished than it is, yet) are to be prized above the Treasures of both Indies. That was a desperate profane speech of him, that said, He would not change his part in Paris, for a part in Paradise. The Barrenest part of Gods Hill, is to be chosen before the fatest Valleys, where God dwelleth not. So Lot found: Surely, they have cause to say, The Lines are fallen to them in pleasant places, and they have a goodly Heritage, that dwell in Emmanuel's Land. Happy are the People, that hear, and know the joyful sound: The Damned, with whom God will parley no more, count such happy. The Heathen, that are without God in the world, and strangers to the terms and Tenor of his Covenant, did they understand their own Estates, would count such happy. But as it is the Misery of those without, generally, not to know their Misery; so of too many within the Church, not to know, or consider their own happiness, what Advantages they have for Heaven above others. As our Saviour, weeping over that sinful City, that rejected him and his Grace; that choose rather to Die and Perish, than to be gathered under his healing Wings:[ O, if Thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace, Luke 19.42.] If thou hadst known these things, then mightest thou have been for ever happy.  
But therefore thou that hast attended to the things of thy peace, and hast come in upon Gods Call, thou art happy: Now is Salvation come to thy soul. And if there be enough in God, in Christ, in Heaven to make thee happy, thou shalt be for ever happy. Others have had Life and Salvation offered, but could not see to take it. But happy thou indeed, who hast( with Mary) chosen that good part, which shall never be taken from thee. To thee this everlasting Covenant( which I am opening) shall be a spring of Everlasting Consolation.  
Now you may look upon God, as your God indeed. I say, God is yours. And though this be a short Sentence, soon utrered, yet is it so Copious a Subject, as you might be Meditating on all your days, and yet never be able fully to comprehend the Happiness included in it. When I say, God is yours, I have said all, I can say no more: For all Happiness is implied, and included in it.  
The misery of the Damned is comprised in two particulars, scil. In poenâ Damni, and In poenâ Sensus, in what good they have lost, and are deprived of for ever, and what evil they feel, have Inflicted on them, and must ever lye under. On the contrary, the happiness of the Faithful is summed up in these two Points, to wit, Freedom from Evil, and Fruition of Good. And how safe are they, who have God for their Shield? How Rich are they, who have God for their Portion, an All-sufficient God for their Reward? O exceeding great Reward! As holy David says here, This is all my Salvation, and all my desire: Or as some red it, He is all my Salvation, and He is all my desire.  
[ 1.] That now you have a special propriety in God, this is all your Salvation.  
( 1.) It speaks you freed from the guilt of sin. So Jer. 31.33, 34. Where the Lord promiseth to be their God, he addeth: [ For I will forgive their Iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.] Sin unpardoned separateth betwixt God and souls: Therefore God evermore forgiveth their Iniquities, unto whom he gives himself. Now what a blessed privilege is this, to have your sins pardonned! Even as David describeth Blessedness, Psal. 32.1. Blessed are they whose Iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. What would not a condemned Traitor, or Malefactor give for the Kings pardon? And what is a Pardon from God worth then, which could no other way be Purchased, but by the most precious Blood of his dear Son? But you who have felt what a burden sin is, and have sometimes cried out of that burden, as intolerable; certainly, you cannot but account the pardon of sin a Mercy and privilege inestimable. O blessed change indeed, for one that was a Rebel, sentenced to Death by the Law of Heaven, to have the black Sentence reversed, and to become a Favourite of God: For a Child of Wrath to become a Child of Love. The pardon of sin carrieth Redemption in it, Col. 1.14. In whom we have Redemption( through his Blood) even the Forgiveness of sins. The pardon of sin connotes Justification, or is all one with it. The way of Justifying one that hath been a sinner, an Offender, being by the pardoning of all, wherein he hath offended. The pardon of sin speaketh peace, and Reconciliation with God, 2 Cor. 5.19. God was in Christ Reconciling the World unto himself, not imputing their Trespasses unto them. The pardon of sin infereth Adoption, Gal. 4.5.  
( 2.) It speaketh you delivered from the dominion of sin. Though your Corruptions will be a Disturbance to you while in this Imperfect state, yet sin shall not have dominion over you: For ye are not under the Law, but under Grace, Rom. 6.14. You are not barely under a Law commanding, but under a gracious Covenant, which as it requireth Duty, so it encourageth with a promise of Grace, and help to perform it. The Lord hath promised, as to Forgive, so likewise to Subdue the Iniquities of his People, Mic. 7.18, 19. Though there be some Life in the Members of the Old-man, as you feel to your sorrow; yet it is wounded at the heart, of which wound it shall never recover. So  
( 3.) It speaketh you safe from the final Prevalency of Temptations. Your God is greater than all: Neither Men, nor Devils are able to pluck you out of your Fathers hand, John 10.29. Therefore the Gates of Hell shall not prevail. You are still liable to be tempted, yet being in firm League with God, you shall have seasonable succour from him. As Saul encouraged the men of Jabesh-Gilead, To morrow by that time the Sun is hot, ye shall have help. So God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able, 1 Cor. 10.13. He will quench Satans fiery darts, before they shall have quiter drunk up your spirits: Yea, the God of Peace shall bruise Satan under your Feet shortly.  
( 4.) It assureth of a seasonable Deliverance out of spiritual Troubles, so it may support one under present sad disertion. You have now shot the gulf, you are passed from Death to Life. And though you may be full of Fears sometimes, and passing sentence against yourselves; though your condition for the present may not be so comfortable, yet it is safe. You may sometimes walk in Darkness, yet the Lord will be your everlasting Light: Your days of Mourning shortly will be ended. The Lord will be a Sun as well as a Shield, to the Upright.  
( 5.) It speaketh Exemption, or Deliverance from outward Troubles, when it may be good for you. God is known in Zions Palaces for a Refuge, God is in the midst of her▪ God shall help her, and that right early. And because thou hast made the Lord which is my Refuge, even the most High, thy Habitation: There shall no evil befall thee, Psal. 91.9, 10.  
( 6.) Or it speaketh Deliverance from the evil of Affliction. You may be Afflicted but not Forsaken, Psal. 89.32.33, 34. I will visit their iniquities with stripes. Nevertheless, my loving Kindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my Faithfulness to fail. My Covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my Lips. Yea, as it is, Neh. 13.2. Our God turned the Curse into a Blessing. Your God will do as much for you, will turn Crosses into Blessings. No evil shall befall you, but what hath Rationem boni, what God will turn to good, Rom. 8.28. As it is, Ezra 8.22. The hand of our God is upon all them for good, that seek him. Yea, even his Afflicting hand too: His Afflicting hand is never on them, but for good. So I may allude to that Passage, 1 Sam. 16.4, 5. When Samuel came to Bethlehem, the Elders trembled at his coming, and said, Comest thou peaceably? And he said, Peaceably: I am come to sacrifice unto the Lord: sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice. So indeed you may be set on trembling, when Sickness comes, when Poverty comes, when such an Affliction comes you may fall a trembling; whereas, if you stay and inquire about the end of its coming, you may be satisfied, that it comes peaceably. It is not the Wound of an Enemy, nor the Chastisement of a Cruel one: But a Call from God, your Father, to sanctify yourselves, and offer up some Lust, some sin, or other, a Sacrifice. It may be Sickness comes as a Cure of thy spiritual Indisposition, security, and Deadness; it may be crosses in Estate come, to cause thee to offer up thy Pride, Luxury, Sensuality, Covetousness. As when David would know of the Children of Benjamin, whether they came indeed to help, or to betray him: They answered( 1 Chron. 12.17, 18.) Thine are we, David, and on thy side: Peace, peace be unto thee, and peace be to thine helpers; for thy God helpeth thee. O the happy estate of those that are at peace with God! He will cause the very stones of the Field, and the Beasts of the Field, and what was most likely to offend, and annoy them, to be at peace with them. Great peace have such indeed, nothing shall offend them. Afflictions come not to harm, but to help them. As they said, We are thine, David; so if God be yours, then all things are yours. All changes that come, are on your side, your helpers.  
( 7.) It speaketh your security from final apostasy, and so from final Condemnation. Now your condition is safe indeed, safe to Eternity. Though you may not therefore give way to sinful Security, which is opposite to an holy fear, and cautiousness. No, but therefore your estate is safe, because God hath promised to keep you in his fear, Jer. 32.40. I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me. And they that have his Grace, not to depart from him here, shall not be sentenced to depart from him hereafter. You that are brought in, and kept close to God here, shall not be banished, separated from God hereafter: You whom God Justifieth here. he will not condemn hereafter. The Lord knoweth them that are his, and will own, and openly aclowledge them before the whole world at the last day.  
Thus you that come up to Covenant Terms, and so have the Lord for your God, you are delivered from the greatest evils; and delivered by lesser evils, that come upon you. I say, by lesser evils, God delivereth you from greater, who will deliver you from all evils at last. Thus God is your Shield, and all others are but as Paper-shields, or Painted-shields, compared with the Shield of thine help. Salvation is of the Lord. All Salvation; if God be for us, who, or what can be against us? No such Guard against evil in all the world, as God, the chiefest Good. See here the safety of those, who are in firm League with the Almighty, under the special protection of God most High. See the wonderful Immunities of such, as have him for their Protector and governor: Well might David say of it, This is all my Salvation.  
[ 2.] Yea, further in this special propriety in God, there is included all Good, that a gracious soul can desire, Psal. 73.25. Whom have I in Heaven but thee? and there is none upon earth that I desire besides thee. You that have the Lord for your God indeed, how can you desire more, than God hath promised to be unto you, and to do for you? You have all, in having him, who hath all things, and can do all things.  
Not that you are Godded with God, as some have spoken blasphemously. But remember ye what followed the Ambition of our first Parents, their affecting to be as Gods, sacrilegious Ambition. Thus the Devil lifted them up by his Temptation, that he might bring them down, to be like himself. Such Heaven-daring pride as that, must needs have a fall. As Tyrus is threatened, Ezek. 28.2.6.8. Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am God, Because thou hast set thine heart as the Heart of God: They shall bring thee down to the Pit, and thou shalt die the death. Such high-flown spirits, as talk of the fullness of the God-head dwelling bodily in the Saints, are not the Children of Light, but the Children of Pride, erratic stars, to whom( without a self-abasing sight of themselves) is reserved the blackness of Darkness for ever.  
It's true, God gives himself to his People, to be enjoyed, and glorified of them; but not so, as to be Debased, and Degraded in them, to the condition of his Creatures, nor so as to Exalt, and Raise them above the condition of Creatures. He communicates his Mercy freely, but his Glory he will not give to another. As Pharaoh heaped Dignities, and Royal Favours upon Joseph: Only( said he) in the Throne will I be greater than thou. God will do wonderful things for his People: But as for those that talk of their being Godded with God, they would un-God him; and deify themselves.  
But I come to you, who have a special Interest in God.  
( 1.) God is yours in the sweetest Relations. God is your Shepherd. And what doth the Psalmist infer from thence? The Lord is my Shepherd, therefore I shall not want, Psal. 23.1. God is your Teacher, John 6.45. And there is none that Teacheth, like him. God is your Father, as Christ said, John 20.17. I ascend unto my Father, and your Father, and to my God, and your God. If your God, then your Father. 2 Cor. 6.18. I will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my Sons and Daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. And what a privilege is this, to have God for your Father, and to be owned as his Children. The Children of God can never be left Orphans. The Sons of God can never want an Inheritance. Surely, Heaven is enough for all Gods Children. In our Fathers House there is Bread enough, and there is Room enough, John 14.2. God is your Husband, Hos. 2.16, 19. O happy Match for thee, to have thy Maker for thy Husband. He is a meet help indeed. An All-sufficient God is a meet help indeed for poor Indigent Creatures; only we are infinitely unworthy of him, not meet for him of ourselves. 'tis his Infinite Free-grace that accounts, and makes us meet.  
( 2.) All Gods Attributes are yours. There is no Attribute, or Property of his, but may speak terror unto, and will set against all those, that are, and keep at a distance from him. Even the Patience of God, which such have abused, will pled, and witness against them; the Grace and Mercy of God, which they have slighted, and rejected, will rise up in judgement against them one day. On the contrary, there is no Attribute of Gods, but speaketh good to them that are at peace with God. O what a rich Store-house of Comfort is here, to have all Gods glorious Attributes engaged, and at work for you! His absolute sovereignty, and infinite Power engaged, and at work to uphold, protect, and defend you. His perfect Wisdom, and Omniscience, to see to you, and to order all things for the best, that concern you. His tender and neverfailing Compassion, to pity you. His rich Mercy, and boundless Love, to relieve you. His constant Truth, and everlasting Faithfulness, to perform all the good promises that he hath made unto you. His Holiness to Transform you into the same Image, to assimilate you. His Justice, to avenge you of your Enemies, to execute judgement for you. His Omnipresence, graciously to accompany you. His Unchangeableness, and Eternity, to continue his loving Kindness to you, and to Crown all he does for you in endless Happiness.  
As when the Spouse had given a Lively, Lofty, and Lovely Description of her Beloved, Cant. 5.10. &c. My Beloved is white and ruddy, the chiefest among Ten Thousand. His Head as the most fine Gold, his Eyes as of Doves. His Cheeks, as a Bed of Spices. His Lips like lilies, dropping sweet smelling myrrh. His Legs as Pillars of Marble, set in Sockets of Gold. His Countenance as Lebanon, excellent as the Cedars. His Mouth most sweet; yea, he is altogether Lovely. Then she concludes thus exulting, and making her boast of him, ver. 16. This is my Beloved, and this is my Friend. So you who have now given up yourselves to be the Lords, after the largest survey of the Divine perfections, you can possibly take, you may sit down, and rest in this sweet close, This God is our God; and he will be our Guide even unto Death, yea, unto Glory. This Almighty, All-commanding, alwise, All-knowing God, this Immense Being, this Holy, Just, Loving, Gracious, and Merciful God; this Faithful, Unchangeable, Eternal God, is our God for ever and ever. This, this is the Heritage of the Servants of the Lord, and their Righteousness is of me, saith the Lord: So likewise their Bliss, and Happiness.  
( 3.) If God be yours, his Christ is yours. Indeed it is in, and through Christ, that God is yours.  
Though they speak not the words of Truth, and Soberness, but like men forsaken of God, and Reason too; like men given up to strong Delusions, who talk of their being Christed with Christ. And that is a weak, and frivolous Objection,( which might seem to befriend them) scil. If Christ and his Righteousness be made over to Believers, then they should be Mediators, Saviours, as Christ is. It follows not. As the Husband giveth himself in Marriage to the Wife, but that maketh not the Wife an Head, or Husband. Christ and his Righteousness is made over to us, to a certain end, that is, to our Justification, and Salvation, not to make us Saviours: He is made unto us Redemption, 1 Cor. 1.30. but we are never said to be made Redeemers by him. Aliud est justitia Christi Mediatoria quoad officium: aliud est justitia Christi Mediatoris quoad Meritum. As Dr. Arrowsmith. Or it is for the sake of Christ, with respect to his Righteousness, and Satisfaction, that we sinners come to be pardonned, Justified; not that we are as perfect, as Christ himself: But being interested in him, we have his Satisfaction interposing betwixt us and Gods Justice, and procuring Pardon for us.  
Now blessed art thou above Millions of Men, and Women, who mayst say, Christ is mine. Yea, this is Inconceivably more, than if all the Kingdoms of the world were thine. He is the Pearl of greatest price. All things in the world, but Loss, and Dung, compared to this Pearl. O the precious Blood, and precious Benefits of Christ! O the unsearchable Riches of Christ! O the fullness of Christ! In him all fullness dwells. There is an Infinite fullness both of Merit, and Grace in him.  
He is and hath all that souls stand in need or can desire, to make them happy. He is the great Lord Treasurer of Heaven. And, O the Treasures of Wisdom, Righteousness, and Strength, that are with him! Ho, every one that thirsteth come, Isa. 55.1. Whosoever will, let him take of the Water of Life freely, Rev. 22.17. There is enough in Christ to fill, and satisfy all the thirsty souls in the world; enough in Christ for every one that will come, be they never so many. One Christ is enough for all the Faithful: Yea, Christ alone is enough for them. For whom I have suffered the loss of all things( says the Apostle) and do count them but dung that I may win Christ, Phil. 3.8. All things were accounted nothing in comparison of Christ; better want all things than want Christ. He is All in all, yea, he is All even out of all. Though you should have nothing here, yet enjoying Christ, you may be happier, than if you possessed all things in the world. He is the Hundred-fold Father, and Mother; as Mr. Vines used to say. He is the Hundred-fold House and Land, the Hundred-fold Estate spoken of, Mark 10.29, 30. And you would not count him a poor man, that had put off his Lumber and Trash, and turned his Estate into Gold and Jewels, things of the greatest value.  
Hast thou a Christ? why then thou hast the Heir of all things, even him, who will be all things to thee, 1 Cor. 1.30. He is made unto us Wisdom, and Righteousness, and Sanctification, and Redemption. If Christ be ours he will be our Prophet, to Instruct us, our Priest to Expiate our sins, and sanctify us; our King to Redeem and Save us.  
Thou that hast Christ, thou hast the true Light: and he shall give thee Light, when others still abide in darkness.  
Thou hast the Sun of Righteousness risen on thee, while others are under the power of the Prince of darkness. O the glorious Apparel of the meanest Saints clothed with the Sun! Every true Believer shines in the Beams of this Sun of Righteousness, and is far more richly arrayed therewith, than Herod, was in his Cloath of Silver, glittering in the Sun. 
Josephus.   
Thou that hast Christ, thou hast the true Bread that came down from Heaven. The Bread of Life, while they that are strangers to Christ, feed upon ashes, feed upon Husks, things which can never satisfy. Thou that hast Christ, thou hast the Well of Life: Thou mayst drink freely of the Water of Life, while others( alas) have only broken Cisterns, and stinking Puddles to go too.  
What a full Christ is this? Our Light, and our Righteousness, and our Peace, and our Life; in a word, our All.  
( 4.) If God be yours, then his Spirit is yours. Indeed some speak of the Person of the Spirit, being given to, and the Person of the Holy Ghost dwelling in the Faithful; which yet they thus Caution. You must not conceive that thereby he doth make us one Person, with himself, or that he doth Communicate unto us any Personal, or Divine property of his own( for that is Incommunicable) Lyford senses exterr. p. 141. Now such as go this way must not be ranked in our thoughts with those I speak of before, men of corrupt minds, and profligate principles.  
Though I confess I have some doubt, whether the Expression of the Spirits personal In-dwelling in the Godly, be safe, as they lay it down. For either it would seem, not to hold forth enough, scil. To import no more than that he is essentially present in them, and so he is every where present, Psal. 139.7. Whither shall I go from thy Spirit, or whither shall I flee from thy presence. Thus the wicked have his presence, what ever they are doing, wheresoever they are: Or else it would seem to import too much, scil. a personal Union of the Holy Ghost, and Believers, which all that are sober must deny. Otherwise they must hold the Spirit Incarnate, as well as the Son, and that the Spirit and a Believer, make but one Person; and so( as Christ the Son of Mary, was the Son of God, the human Nature being taken into the Person of the Son of God) every Believer should be the Holy Ghost. Again, we red as well of God the Father, and Christs dwelling in the Faithful, and making their abode with them. And what reason there is to imagine some peculiar way of the Spirits In-dwelling different from that of the Father, and the Son, I am not able to apprehended.  
But you that have given up yourselves to God, How is his Mercy magnified towards you? They are not mean things that he gives to you; No, he gives you Himself, he gives you his Son, he gives you his Spirit. O thrice happy Creatures! who have a special Interest in God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. O unspeakable Gift! O infinite Gift! As when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he swore by Himself. So, when he promiseth himself, his Son and Spirit, we must say he could promise nothing greater. As Araunah gave like a King; what God giveth to his people is like a God: as Christ is called the gift of God, Acts 8.20. Certainly God could give nothing more like himself,( John 10.30. John 5.7.)  
As Christ said, Whether is greater the Gold or the Temple that sanctifieth the Gold? Whether is greater, the Gift, or the Altar that sanctifieth the Gift? The holy Spirit is such a Gift as sanctifieth all other Gifts; and so of all Gifts the greatest. The Evangelist Luke, for [ good things] inserts [ the holy Spirit,] in Mat. 7.11. How much more shall your Heavenly Father give[ good things] to them that ask him. Which is thus, Luke 11.13. How much more shall your Heavenly Father give[ the holy Spirit] to them that ask him. Gods giving the holy Spirit to any, is the giving of all good Things, in Pignore. His giving the Spirit is an Earnest and Pledge of more, that he intendeth to give. It is a leading Blessing, that comes to make way for more. It is given to prepare you for Mercy, to prepare you for Glory. Think of those sweet and excellent Properties and Appellations given him in Scripture.  
He is the Spirit of Truth, and so he will led you into all necessary Truth, John 16.13. He is the best Teacher, 1 John 2.27. Ye need not that any man teach you, but as the same anointing teacheth you. O! there is none teacheth like him. He is the best Guide. Men may be deceived, and may deceive others, may mistake and misled others; so cannot the Spirit of Truth, you that are led by the Spirit, you have a good Guide indeed, a faithful guide, that will not suffer you to err damnably, will not suffer you finally to miscarry; he is the Spirit of Wisdom, the best counselor.  
He is the Spirit of Grace, Heb. 10.29. And Love, Joy, Peace, Long-suffering, Gentleness, Goodness, Faith, Meekness, Temperance, are the Fruit of the Spirit, Gal. 5.22, 23. And what are the most precious Fruits of the Earth, to the Fruits of the Spirit? Now let not the Eunuch that hath joined himself to the Lord, say, Behold, I am a dry three. Instead of the briar, shall come up the Mirtle-tree. Of a dry three the Spirit of Grace, can make a fruitful Bough; like Joseph, can make a three of Righteousness, full of good and pleasant Fruits. His presence is enough to turn a Desert into an Eden, a Wilderness into the Garden of God.  
He is the Spirit of Power, that though we are weak indeed, yet we may be strengthened in the Inner man by the Spirit, Ephes. 3.16. May be enabled to tread down strength, to mortify our corruptions, through the Spirit, Rom. 8.13. Thus we are enabled to discharge Duties, the Spirit helping our Infirmities, Rom. 8.26. Thus we are enabled to walk in Gods ways, Ezek. 36.27. I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my Statutes.  
He is the Spirit of Life: The quickening Spirit, Rom. 8.11. Can these dry Bones live? Yea, if the Spirit of Life enter into them. David oft prayeth for quickening. Such as are alive in a spiritual sense, should desire and pray to be more lively. Well, it is the Spirit that quickeneth, as it was with the Prophet Ezekiel, Ezek. 3.24. The Spirit entered upon me, and set me upon my feet.  
He is the Spirit of Liberty. The Free-spirit, Psal. 51.11. Uphold me with thy free Spirit, where the Spirit of the Lord is there is Liberty, we are oft straightened, alas: But it is because we are a-wanting to ourselves, and because we do not entertain the Spirit of his good liking, cherish his Motions, follow his councils; we are straightened in ourselves, but the Spirit of the Lord is not straightened.  
He is the Spirit of Glory, the Comforter. And you that carefully attend to his quickening Counsels shall in the end attain to his cheering Comforts. And what is the Joy of Harvest, to that Joy in the Holy Ghost? What is the Joy of them that divide the spoil, to the Joy of Gods salvation? As we red of the Spirits helping Believers in Prayer with groans unutterable, Rom. 8.26. So will he in due time furnish them as well for the work of Praising God, filling them with Joy unspeakable, and full of Glory, see Rom. 14.15.  
And such( as you have heard) is that good Spirit of God, which is given unto all those, who truly give up themselves to God. O blessed souls indeed! O thrice happy Creatures! To whom God gives Himself, his Son, and Spirit, rejoice in the Lord ye Righteous, and again, and again, I say rejoice. Let not the Consolation of God seem small to you. If there be any Consolation in the God of all Consolation, if any Consolation in Christ, if any Comfort to be had in the Spirit, the Comforter, it is for you. Gladness it is for the Upright in heart. What more can be wished to make you happy, than is included in the Apostles Valediction, or Benediction, 2 Cor. 13.14. The Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Love of God, and the Communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Now these are all with you indeed, and shall be ever with you. As christ promised, John 14.16, 17. The Spirit of Truth, the Comforter, shall dwell and abide with you for ever. O happy Creatures, that have the good Spirit of God your Guide, and counselor, your Companion, and Comforter; The Spirit of Truth to teach you, the Spirit of Grace to sanctify you, the Spirit of Power to assist and help you; the Spirit of Life to quicken; the Spirit of Liberty to enlarge you; the Spirit of Joy and Peace to revive and comfort you; the Spirit of Glory to rest upon you. Though earthly Friends may fail, may forsake you; yet here is a Friend indeed, that will stick to you, and abide with you for ever.  
( 5.) The good Providence of God is still at work for you. My Father worketh hitherto, and I work, says Christ, John 5.17. Gods attributes are still at work for you. His Eyes at work. Behold the Eyes of the Lord is upon them that fear him, upon them that hope in his Mercy. The Eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole Earth, to watch over those, whose hearts are upright towards him, His Hands are at work: The good Hand of our God is upon all them for good that seek him; yea, many times his Arm is made bare, his Arm is stretched out. That the Heathen, and their Enemies are forced to aclowledge, The Lord hath done great things for them▪ It shall be said of Israel, What hath God wrought? Who raised up the Righteous man from the East? O how great is his goodness, which he hath laid up for them that fear him, and which he is also laying out on them, which he hath wrought for them before the sons of men!  
The Providence of God is two-fold, there is a common Providence, and a special Providence.  
A Common Providence over the Creatures in general, as they are Gods Creatures. A Special Providence over the Faithful, as in nearer Relation unto God, his Children, his Friends, and Confederates. As God hath a Special propriety in them, so he hath a special care of them.  
We red he preserveth Man and Beast, Psal. 36.6. But more especially that he preserveth the Faithful, Psal. 31.23. He is the Saviour of all men, but especially of them that Believe.  
Yet even the Common Providence of God is a special ground of Encouragement to his People, That he is the Preserver of all things. If he provideth for the young lions, and the Ravens that cry; much more that he will provide for the Sheep of his Pasture, and for his Lambs; while he Feeds his Enemies, he will not let his own Children starve.  
Again, That he Governeth all things, without whom no man can lift up Hand or Foot in all the world, without whom not a Dog that can move his Tongue. He that ruleth in Jacob, over-ruleth all to the ends of the Earth.  
But come we to his Special Providence over the Faithful. So, all the Paths of the Lord are Mercy and Truth unto such as keep his Covenant, Psal. 25.10. By the Paths of the Lord, there we are to understand, not the Paths of his Precepts, wherein he would have us to walk, but the paths of his Providence, wherein he walks towards his people: The way of his proceedings.  
And what is said of these paths? They are all [ Mercy and Truth] which some make an Hendigdis, like that Jer. 22.3. execute Iudgment and Righteousness; that is, Execute righteous judgement. So here Mercy and Truth, i.e. Mercy indeed. Or we may take them as distinct, as holding forth thus much, that God doth not only begin with them in a way of mercy, but goes on with them as he had begun. His mercy to such is constant. He continues his loving Kindness to these, even of his truth and Faithfulness; or thus, Truth hath reference to some word that God hath spoken: Not to the word of threatening here, because Mercy is joined with it: What can it refer to therefore, but the word of Promise? signifying Gods performing promise, keeping Covenant with such as keep Covenant with him? So the meaning is, in all the passages of Divine providence God is still intending good, and extending Mercy, and performing promise to his people.  
His Patience may be exercised towards others; but his special Grace and Favour, his loving Kindness and tender Mercy is drawn out towards you.  
God may show some Mercy to wicked men, in some of his ways. But alas, their Mercies are not pure Mercies, No, there is wrath also mixed with their Mercies. As the murmuring Israelites had Quails and a Curse. But you have real Mercies, a blessing with Estate, a blessing with Health, &c. Gods special Love with Common Mercies, greatly Enhaunsing and Raising the Value of them. They come not as Wind-falls of common Providence( as one expresseth it) but are sound Fruits, growing on the Promise. So there is Mercy in all Gods Paths towards you. You shall meet with it at every turn, Mercy shall prevent you, and follow you, and compass you about. Yea, in the end you shall find Mercy in the crossest Paths of Providence, wherein at present you may apprehended nothing but Severity.  
Again, whatsoever Mercy God sheweth to sinners, yet they have no assurance thereof. How soon may Gods Patience be turned into Fury, and his Goodness into Severity? But God hath promised that he will not turn away from you,( jer. 32.40.) to do you good. But you who have a care to walk before God in sincerity and truth, you shall find all his ways Mercy and Truth. And this leads me to another privilege of yours.  
( 6.) The Promises are yours, exceeding great and precious Promises. You are the Children, and Heirs of the Promise. Promises are held forth to others; but they are also made over to you. To the Jews in some sense pertained the Covenants, and the Promises, Rom. 9.4. God had written those great things to them, and offered those great things to them, yet they not looking after the Condition required of them, it was in effect as if God had made no such promise. But you that can pled the Condition is performed, nothing can bar your right to the Promise? God will never pled a [ Non est factum] against those who may pled the Condition is performed. As the Lord said to Abraham concerning the Land of Promise, Gen. 13. Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art, Northward, and Southward, and Eastward, and Westward: For all the Land which thou seest, to thee will I give it. So I may say to you concerning the word of the Kingdom( as the Gospel is called, Mat. 13.19.) The word of Promise, look it through from the beginning to the end, search this good land that floweth with Milk and Honey, a Land of Brooks of Waters, of Fountains, of Depths, that spring out of the Rock Christ; where are both the Upper Springs, and the Neather Springs, Promises concerning this Life, and the Life to come; a Land of Vines, and Fig-trees, and pomegranates; Dig into its Mines full of hide Treasure, more precious than Gold that perisheth, all is your own. The whole Land is before you, this Goshen, this Paradise, is given you, till you come to be Translated to the Heavenly Canaan. Your Joseph sends you these pleasant, and precious Fruits, to revive and cheer your spirits, till you come to a fullness of joy in his presence, come to the sight and Fruition of Christ in Glory. Look up to Heaven, are you able to number the Stars of Heaven? Neither can you take the just sum of what the Lord hath promised you; They are called the deep things of God, 1 Cor. 2.10. Here are deep Mines, deep Mysteries, who shall led us into these hide treasures, unknown to the World? What need of the Spirit of Wisdom and Revelation to enlighten our minds, that we may know what is the Hope of his Calling, and what the Riches of his glorious Grace?  
O precious Promises indeed! promises of more Grace. To him that hath more shall be given, and he shall have in abundance, Mat. 25.29. God giveth more Grace to the humble, Jam. 4.6. Promises of perseverance in Grace, Jer. 32.40. John 4.14.  
Again, there are Promises made to Grace, of which I could easily recite many: But after one hath used his utmost skill to open these Treasures, and to give you an Account, how much is contained in them, he must end with[ an &c.] After all, he must aclowledge there is much more behind undiscovered, like that Path( Job 28.7.) which the Vultures eye hath not seen, as may allude to the Expression. It is quiter beyond our Arithmitick to find out the Total of the Divine Promises. So its impossible that any true Believer should know how rich he is in the Promises. O! the Promises are a long Field indeed, and much hide Treasure in this Field; yea, an unknown Treasure.  
( 7.) Gods Ordinances are yours, especially intended for you, and blessed unto you. Ministers are yours, as 1 Cor. 3.22. Whether Paul or Apollo, or Cephas, all are yours, given to the Church, for the perfecting of the Saints, Ephes. 4.11, 12. To be helpers of your Faith and Joy. Ministers are Gods Stewards appointed to give you Meat in due season. Gods Servants to conduct you into the Presence Chamber of the great King. Ordinances they are the Chariots your Joseph sends to bring your souls nearer to him.  
And O how amiable are his Tabernacles! O the pleasures of his House! O the sights of God, that you have sometimes in his Ordinances! Sights of his Power, sights of his glorious Grace. Have you not seen his Goodness pass before you? Have not his Footsteps dropped Fatness into your Souls? How oft that coming from the Word, or from Sacraments, you might have said as they, Luke 5.26. We have seen strange things to day. God manifesting himself to your souls, so as he does not to the World. All the Paths of the Lord are Mercy to his People, as we heard before, but in the Paths of his Ordinances, in the Walks of his courts, there they are wont to find his choicest Mercies: There especially the Lord commandeth the blessing. Blessed they are in the House, and in the Field, but more blessed in Gods House, more blessed in his holy Mountain. There is an Expression, Deut. 11.21. [ As the days of Heaven upon the Earth,] i. e.( Quamdiu mundus durabit,) which I only allude to here. The days we spend with God in his Courts, are as the days of Heaven upon Earth. Blessed are they that dwell in thy House, they will be still praising thee, a day in thy Courts is better than a thousand else-where, Psal. 84. To enjoy God here, this is Heaven upon Earth. Is not this the Mount of Transfiguration? The Gate of Heaven? The Mount of Blessing? Is it not good to be here?  
Well, you that have a special Interest in God, have a special right to the Ordinances of God; and may expect a special blessing on them, may look to enjoy God in them: Or if the Lord should see good to cut you short of Sanctuary-priviledges; yet you should still enjoy the God of Ordinances, he would be a little Sanctuary to you.  
( 8.) Gods Creatures are yours. As Jehoshaphat,[ My People are as thy People, and my Horses as thy Horses.] When God is for you, what Creature of his can be against you?  
Angels the best and noblest Creatures, are your Friends, Heb. 1.14. And full little do you think how many ways they do Befriend you, how many ways they are ministering, and helpful to you: True, there is no ground for the Invocating of Angels; but there is ground enough, why you should give thanks to God, for the Angels ministering unto you.  
Again, Devils and wicked men( the worst of Creatures) are your servants. Though it be quiter besides their intention, sore against their will and Inclination. Though they intend evil against you, God will turn it to good.  
So likewise other Creatures. The World is yours, 1 Cor. 3.22. The World is an appurtenance of your Inheritance, of that Estate which God by Covenant, and dead of Gift hath settled on you, and confirmed to you. If inferior Creatures had a Tongue to speak, would they not say as Hushai, Whom the Lord shall choose, his will I be? Or as the men of Benjamin, and Judah, We are thine David, we are on thy side. It is a burden and bondage to the Creatures, to serve those who are Enemies to their Maker. The Earth groaneth under such, and if God would but give the word, it would immediately open her Mouth, and swallow them up.  
I do not deny but wicked men have a right to their Estates, and to the use of the Creatures. But the People of God have a better right than they.  
That is certainly a mistake of some, that think all wicked men Usurpers of the things they enjoy. If they have a right before God: I ask( says one) by what Covenant. Is it by the Covenant of Works? Then they must fulfil it? Is it by the Covenant of Grace? But they are not within it, cannot claim by it. Answ. It is true, they fulfil neither Covenant, and therefore have not a right by Covenant. But their Enumeration here is not full enough: Dater tertium. These things may be passed over, and men may have a right to them, and not by Covenant, Deut. 25. I have given Mount Seir unto Esau for a possession, ver. 9. I have given Ar unto the Children of Lot for a possession, without any Indentures drawn betwixt God and them. By his Providence he determineth the Bounds of mens Habitations. He that giveth unto all men Life and Breath, giveth them Food and Raiment. Though wicked men shall be called to account for their Mercies, yet not as Thieves, or Usurpers; but as ill-users or abusers of them, as unfaithful Stewards.  
Wicked men therefore have a right to their Creature-comforts; but not so good a right as you. They have[ a right by actual Collation, De presenti.( As Mr. Baxter somewhere) but not by promise, De futuro.] They have a right by common providence, you by Covenant, and Compact. They have a right as Servants to their daily Bread, you have the right of Sons. Not indeed that any deserve the least Mercy at Gods Hand, as the Labouring Servant is worthy of his Meat; but a Servant may take his Masters allowance, and hath a right to the Clothes his Master gives him; only he hath no assurance of being provided for by his Master still. The servant abideth not in the House for ever, but the Son abideth ever, John 8.35.  
You that are earthly Parents, know how to give good things to your Children: And much more does your Heavenly Father, and he hath enough to give, The earth is the Lords, and the fullness thereof. Says the Father, Be a good Child, and while I have any thing, thou shalt not want. And so says God to you, You that fear me you shall never want any good thing; your Heavenly Father knoweth what is good for you, and hath promised, you shall never want, what is good for you. And how can you desire more? What? Would you have more than enough? when enough is more than all? Dimidium plus toto. Would you have more than is good? That were to wish evil to yourselves.  
( 9.) Heaven is yours, if God be yours, his Kingdom your everlasting Home, and Inheritance, Luke 12.32. As he said, Son, thou art ever with me and all that I have is thine: So, if the Children of God, then Heirs of God; then you shall be ever with him, ever with the Lord, and Inherit that everlasting Kingdom, prepared by the Father, purchased by the Son for you. Of which Kingdom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered. Indeed as high the Heavens are above our Heads; so high above our understanding, and apprehension is the Glory and Felicity of Heaven. No greater difference betwixt the Throne, and the Footstool, nor so great indeed as betwixt the Kingdom of Heaven, and the most flourishing Kingdoms upon Earth. What is said of Mount Sion( the Type,) Psal. 48.2. Beautiful for Situation, the joy of the whole Earth is Mount Zion: The like may much more be said of Heaven; Beautiful for Situation, the Joy, yea, the Glory of the whole World. Here is the City of the great King. O the serenity of Heaven! no scorching heat, nor piercing could there. Here is a glorious Kingdom indeed, above the Clouds, yea, above the Stars.  
O the Lightsomeness of Heaven! no Night there. And no need of the Sun there, Rev. 22.5. O the pleasures of Heaven! Paradise was but an obscure Type, a dark shadow of it. No pricking Brier, or grieving Thorn there. In this Kingdom there is nothing to offend. No sorrow nor crying there. No pain there, no feeble person among the heavenly Tribes: There is health without sickness, and joy without sorrow, and pleasures without pain. There is hidden Mannah, and Rivers of pleasures, and never fading Crowns of Glory.  
O the riches of that Kingdom, there are Treasures that fail not. Solomon made Silver to be in Jerusalem as stones, 1 Kings 10.27. But the new Jerusalem is described and represented, as if it were all Gold, and precious stones, Rev. 21.18, 19, 20. Many a poor man goes to Heaven, Iam. 2.5. Many poor in this world, yet rich in Faith, and Heirs of the Kingdom. But that Kingdom will for ever enrich all that come to it. There, and there only is the enduring substance. So now it is poor Dives, poor Dives, who is shut out of Heaven, but rich Lazarus. No poor to be seen in the streets of the New Jerusalem, no complaining in those streets.  
O the peaceableness of that Kingdom! no Serpent in the celestial Paradise, no Cananite in that Land of Promise, neither the Alarm of War, nor the Voice of the Oppressor that shall ever be heard there. No hurting or destroying in that holy Mountain, no possibility of a foreign Invasion. There is a great Gulf fixed, Luke 16.26. No fear of Intestine Divisions in that Kingdom. There Love shall be perfect. There Luther, and Calvin are agreed. There is the sweetest Harmony without the least jarring Discord. There the Faithful dwell at ease, and delight themselves in the abundance of Peace.  
O the Stability and Permanency of this Kingdom! And this Crowns all the rest; it is an everlasting Kingdom: The New Jerusalem lieth four square,( it is a Kingdom that cannot be moved) the Length and the Breadth, and the Height of it are equal, Rev. 21.16. it is ever like itself. The Glory of Heaven shall never suffer the least Eclipse. O blessed state indeed, to be ever with the Lord!  
But after all, I must tell you, we have but a very short sight of those things that are within the veil. Indeed did Believers fully apprehended the Riches of the Glory of that Inheritance reserved in Heaven for them, they would stand in need of more patience, to be willing to stay their time, God hath appointed them upon Earth,( though they should live in the most flourishing and prosperous Estate here;) than ever the Martyrs stood in need of, to endure the most grievous Tortures, and cruel Deaths.  
Thus you have heard something of the First and grand Covenant promised [ I will be your God] how wonderful comprehensive it is. It is as high as Heaven, What canst thou know? The Measure thereof is longer than the Earth, and broader than the Sea.  
Again, the second is like unto it, scil.[ Ye shall be my people,] Jer. 31.33.  
It is true, sometimes this imports our Duty, and the Condition of the Covenant. And if we would have God for our God, we must be his people, we must give up ourselves to Him, and account ourselves no more our own. But to be his People, as well holds forth the exceeding great privilege, and Happiness of those, that indeed give up themselves to God, that come up to Covenant Terms. That God will own, and aclowledge them for his people indeed, and will carry it towards them as such, will remember them with the Favour that he beareth to his People.  
His Professing people, who have given up their Names, but do not give up their hearts to him, yet have some privileges above others, that are not called by his Name, much more that his willing, and Obedient people are privileged. The Lord knoweth them that are his,( 2 Tim. 2.19.) and will own them. And  
1. This speaketh their freedom from other Lords. Those cruel Task-masters, and Tyrants; Sin, the World, and Satan. Gods owning them for his, will cut off others claims; Sin, the World, and Satan, can no more lay claim to you, if ye be the Lords.  
As that eminent Saint, and Servant of God, Mr. Joseph Allein,( in his Life, p. 92.) did thus repel Satan in his last Conflict: Trouble me not( says he) for I am none of thine, I am the Lords: His by Covenant, I have sworn myself to be the Lords, and his I will be, therefore be gone. So if the Lord saith of thee, such a soul is mine, his Title( no doubt) will hold good against Satan, and all the World.  
O what a comfortable thing it is, if indeed you are the Lords, then you are Redeemed unto him from among men. You are no longer Satans captives, no longer slaves to Sin, and the World; as it is Isa. 62.12. They shall call them the holy people, the redeemed of the Lord. And Isa. 43.1. Fear not, for I have redeemed thee,— thou are mine. You are his, as Redeemed by him; you are the Portion which he took out of the hand of Satan, with his Sword, and with his Bow, Deut. 4.34. Hath God assayed to go and take him a Nation from the midst of another Nation, by Temptations, by Signs, and Wonders, by a mighty Hand and stretched-out Arm, and by great terrors, according to all that the Lord your God did for you in Egypt? O the exceeding Greatness of his Power to us-ward that Believe; delivering us from the power of Darkness, and Translating us into the Kingdom of his Dear Son.  
2. This putteth an Honour, an Excellency upon any. Since thou wast precious in mine Eyes, thou hast been honourable: What a great Honour is it unto any, for the Great God to own them, as in near Relation unto Him? What she said of Solomons servants, is much more true of Gods servants, 1 Kings 10.8. Happy are thy men, happy are these thy servants, which stand continually before thee. As there is no God like him, so no People in the World like his People, 1 Chron. 17.20, 21. Deut. 32.9. The Lords portion is his People. Exod. 19.5. A peculiar Treasure unto him, Mal. 3.17. His Jewels. Does not this commend them indeed, as the Excellent ones in the Earth, that God accounts so highly of them? Psal. 4.3. Know that the Lord hath set apart, him that is Godly for himself. Set apart, or, as some Translate it, Mirificavit; or Insignem vel eximium fecit. The difference God putteth betwixt his People, and others, the Godly and the Ungodly, is Notable and Wonderful, The wicked he will put away like Dross, but the Godly he esteemeth as his Jewels; these he accounteth his peculiar Treasure: He sets great store by them.  
3. Gods peculiar People have his special Favour: And what happiness in this? The Psalmist desired no more, but that the Lord would remember him with the Favour that he beareth to his People, Psal. 106.4. The Lord taketh pleasure in his people, Psal. 149.4. These only have his Complacential Love. Those whom he calleth his People, at other times he calleth his Chosen, his Sons and Daughters, his Beloved; yea, the Apple of his Eye: Relation and Propriety is a potent Exciter of Love. The world that is full of Malice, yet loveth its own. And shall not God love his own? Yea, he loveth them with an everlasting Love.  
4. For God to say of any, they are mine, it speaks Safety. He will have a care of his own. His Inheritance is Hedged, Fenced about with his special Providence. His People shall have his protection. A dangerous thing it is for men to meddle with them. What mean ye that ye beat my people to pieces, Isa. 3.15. Do ye know what ye do, Isa. 52.5, 6. What is here to do, That my people is taken away for nought. God will Judge and pled for his People, Deut. 32.36. Isa. 51.22. Joel 3.2, 4. You would not see your Children wronged. And will not God avenge his own Elect? He is very tender of the Apple of his Eye: And the Beloved of the Lord shall dwell in safety by him, yea, the Foundation of God standeth sure; the Lord knoweth them that are his. And the very Gates of Hell shall not prevail against them.  
5. His People are sure to be well provided for. Doth God take care for Oxen? Does he give the Beasts their Food, and will he not much more provide for them of his own household? His Blessing is upon his People, Psal. 3.8. My people shall be satisfied with my Goodness, saith the Lord, Jer. 31.14. Yea, others must not see the Good he will do for them, they have Meat to eat that the World knows not of.  
6. His People shall have his special presence, Ezek. 37.27. My Tabernacle shall be with them: Yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people. So in other places, where the Lord promiseth to own any as his People; he doth further promise to dwell among them, and walk among them, Lev. 26.12. 2 Cor. 6.16. &c. Where should God dwell, but in the Lot of his own Inheritance?  
7. When you hear of Gods Tabernacle being with them; you must not understand it, so, as if he were Flitting, or Removing from them again. No, The Lord will not cast off his people, neither will he forsake his Inheritance, Psal. 94.14. God hath not cast away his people whom he fore-knew, Rom. 11.2. He will not cast any of them away. He will not lose one of his Jewels. None shall pluck them out of his Hand. He will keep them safe, till he set them in a Crown of Glory.  
And so lastly, They that are his indeed, it doth not yet appear what they shall be; but this is certain, they shall at ●●t appear with him in Glory. Yea, the Lord will be for ever glorified in them, as a Bridegroom adorneth himself with Ornaments, and as a Bride decketh her self with her Jewels. And what Glory that is, to be like the Angels of Light as to our souls; and to have our vile bodies made like unto Christs glorious Body, no Tongue can express. Solomon in all his glory, not like one of these. When Christ was Transfigured in the Mount his very Raiment was shining, exceeding white as snow: So as no Fuller on Earth can white them, Mark 9.8. His very Raiment received Light and Lustre from his Body. His Face shone as the Sun, Mat. 17.2. And if the appearance of Christ was so Glorious in that Mount, which was but a landscape of Heaven; What a glorious Body hath he now in Heaven? Well? The bodies of the Saints are to be Fashioned like his glorious Body, never to change that Fashion more. O the Lustre that God will put upon his People, when the Righteous shall shine forth as the Sun, in the Kingdom of their Father, Mat. 13.43. And if the Body the earthly part of them, shall be so full of splendour, How Glorious within, think we? Will not God polish the Jewel, when the Ring where it is set, is so enameled, when the Cabinet hath so rich work bestowed on it?  
And now my Friends, consider of what hath been said, and show yourselves men. You have heard what the Lord requireth of you in the Covenant of Grace; nothing but what is your Indispensible Duty; nothing that you can deny, or be backward to, if you be not enemies to God, and your own souls, which should prevail with you, though there were nothing more to be said. But further you have also heard, what the Lord hath freely and graciously promised here, even all that you can desire to your salvation and endless Happiness; yea, even more than you can conceive of. Now what say ye? Will ye be the Lords? Will you now from this day forward give up yourselves to God in Christ, to be Ruled by him, and saved by him in his own Way? O that there were such an heart in you all! Sirs, what say you? Though I be the unworthiest of Gods Messengers, yet I come in his Name, and the Lord expects your answer. Ah, Sirs, Have you not Delayed, and Dallied with God too long already? Whosoever thou art that shall deny to consent to Gods Terms this day, for ought thou knowest, this is the last time of asking: The Lord may never offer thee so fair again: That if this day thou dost not harken to his Voice, the things that belong unto thy peace, may be for ever hide from thine eyes. If now you will be the Lords, then he will be your God, and own you for his People indeed, Jer. 30.21, 22. But if otherwise, do not say, but you have been fairly offered: And how will you for ever repent it, and Rue your folly, that you did not take Gods offer? O madness indeed, that you should like it to have the Bramble reign over you, rather than come under the shadow of the Almighty! Do you not choose sin, and the world, to your own Confusion? This know, God hath no need of you, he can be happy without you; though without him you are miserable to all Eternity.   

Sect. 14.  
PROP. XIV. The Coventut of Grace is one and the same for Substance in all Ages. Though it may seem to have Varied, yet the Difference is but in Circumstances, and manner of Administration.  
THe Covenant made with the Jews( of which is the greatest Doubt, or Question) was a Covenant of Grace,( the same for substance with that we are under) with a Covenant of Peculiarity, or a Political Covenant added to it.  
Quest. When did the Covenant of Grace first take Date?  
Answ. Immediately after the Fall. In that threatening to the Serpent, Gen. 3.15. was a Promise of Salvation to man. That as we red, Gal. 3.8. the Gospel was Preached before unto Abraham( which was enough to the Purpose, and Business, the Apostle had there in hand.) So it was Preached before that to Adam. For this cause as the Learned meed supposeth, it is called The everlasting Gospel, Rev. 14.6. {αβγδ}, not so much in respect of the Future Time, as the Time past. That which was promised {αβγδ}, a Seculo, or from the Beginning of the World, the ancient Gospel. That promise,[ That the Seed of the Woman, should break the Serpents head.] Was the first draft, or Epitome of the Gospel. Here God promised the destruction of Satans Kingdom, and Salvation of Fallen man, by Jesus Christ, the Seed of the Woman. That all the true Seed of the Woman, the Faithful,( opposed to the seed of the Serpent,) should overcome through him, who is the Seed of the Woman eminently, and in a more famous sense, and peculiar respect. Thus Cain and Abel were directed to offer Sacrifices, agreeable to that Dispensation of the Covenant before Christs coming. And God speaks to Cain, Gen. 4.7. If thou dost well, shalt thou not be accepted: Which certainly cannot but refer to the Covenant of Grace, q. d. If thou didst serve me with the like sincerity, as thy Brother doth, shouldst not thou be accepted, as well as he? Now how could sinners look to find acceptance, whose best services are imperfect, and therefore deserve to be rejected, unless God reveal himself in a gracious promise, or Covenant to that purpose. By Faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent Sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was Righteous, Heb. 11.4. This is evident, that Remission of sin, Justification, and Salvation( the great benefits promised in the Covenant of Grace) were granted out to some, before the Covenant made with Abraham. So Abel was righteous before God: So Enoch, who walked with God on Earth, and was Translated, and taken up to God, Gen. 5.24. So Noah was Heir of the Righteousness which is by Faith, Heb. 11.7. The Kingdom of Heaven was prepared for the Faithful, from the Foundation of the World, Mat. 25.34. Witness Enochs translation thither. By the way take notice, they that were acquainted with the History of Enoch, could not be ignorant of an happiness to be enjoyed of the Saints after this life: Yea, Eternal Life was promised from the beginning of the world, 
{αβγδ}.  or before ancient times, as that Text, Tit. 1.2. should be red. Thus God had a Seed to serve him, from the beginning of the world, and was a God in Covenant with them, was their God in Christ. So some understand, Rev. 13.8. as referring to the grand ancient promise, Gen. 3.15. The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. How slain? Not only Figurative, in Type, and Representation( as Dr. Lightfoot) The first thing that died in the world was a Sacrifice, or Christ in a Figure. Now only Dispositive, in Decree and Intention: Secundum dispositionem totius Trinitatis, as Luther,( see 1 Pet. 1.19, 20.) But also Virtualiter, the Virtue and Efficacy of his Death extending backward, to Times past, as well as forward,( Rom. 3.24, 25. Heb. 9.15. and 10.4. and 13.8.) Or if we should red these words [ From the Foundation of the World,] Rev. 13.8. as having Relation to the Writing of the Names in the Book of Life, not to the slaying of the Lamb; as there is a parallel place in the same Book, Rev. 17.8. It makes as well for my present purpose holding forth the writing of the Names of some in the Lambs Book of Life, from the beginning of the world. Or it is a Periphrasis of them that are saved. None are saved, but such as are written in the Lambs Book of Life, such as are given to him. And if none ever were, or shall be saved, but such whose Names are written in the Lambs book of Life, then none ever were, or shall be saved but by Christ, and according to the Covenant of Grace.  
And Mr. Ball would have the Apostle to refer to that ancient famous promise of Victory to the seed of the Woman over Satan, and all spiritual Enemies, both in 2 Tim. 1.9. Who hath saved us, and called us, with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus, {αβγδ}( not before the world began, as we have it Translated there, and in Tit. 1.2. but) before ancient times. And 2 Thes. 2.13. God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the Truth. From the beginning {αβγδ}, which phrase, as he saith, never imports from Eternity in Scripture. 
Of the Covenant, p. 41. 42.   
And certainly, these were ever necessary to salvation from the beginning[ Sanctification, and belief of the Truth.] As we red of Abels Faith, and that his works were Righteous,( a proof of his sanctification.) We red of Enochs Faith, and of his constant care, to walk with God, and to please God. We red of Noahs Faith, and that he was a just man, and upright in his Generations, walking with God. Neither were any of the Fathers saved without such a real, practical, living, operative Faith.  
Though we have much revealed to us in the Gospel, which was hide from them,( Ephes. 3.9. Col. 1.26.) yet they hearty assento Gods Truth, and complied with his will; as the Lord was pleased then to reveal it. 
Though as Camero says Si ante certum tempus praestitutum a Deo, mysterium salu●●s uost●ae, seu regnum caelorum svit obscurius revelatum, omnino consequens est ut fides adhibita revel●tioni fuerit confusa. praelect. p. 76. col. 1.  That methinks it is plain, they were saved the same way even as we. Though to whom much is given, of them more is required; yet they had the same spirit of Faith. And had they been under the same Circumstances with us Christians, had they lived in Gospel-times, they would have been Gospelbelievers. As Christ saith, John 7.17. If any man doth his will, he shall know of the Doctrine; whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself. As such whose hearts were right, and sound, the Gospel being revealed to them with such clear Evidence, and proof, that it was of God, they could not but embrace it. As that Faith by which Abraham obeied Gods call to leave his Country, and Kindred, and Fathers House, to go he knew not whither; would have enabled him to leave Father and Mother, House and Land, for Christs sake, and the Gospels. That same Faith, which made him so ready to offer up Isaac at Gods command, would have made him as willing to take up the across and follow Christ, as the Apostles and Primitive Christians did, had he lived in their dayes. The like may be said of the Fathers before him, who obtained a good report through Faith. Thus it appeareth, that there is no real difference, betwixt the Faith of those jubilees, who lived in former Ages, to whom God spake {αβγδ} at divers times, and in divers manners, and the Faith of Christians, to whom God hath spoken by his Son.  
Now though I have jumbled things together something confusedly in this Discourse: Yet ye may observe these two things cleared sufficiently, that the same substantial Benefits, which the Gospel promiseth, were held forth to the Fathers; and the same kind of Faith, Holiness, and Obedience required of them, and therefore they must needs have been under the same Covenant for substance.  
And is not this a Crediting of the Gospel? And should it not confirm our Faith in the Gospel? This is the good old Way indeed, many are greatly addicted to Antiquity. You make great account of your old Deeds and Evidences. Let me tell you, you do not conceive aright of the Gospel, nor of Gods Grace, if you confine it to the Time of the New Testament, as if it was under 1700. years old. Even the Covenant of God made with Abraham was 430. years before the Mosaical Law( as the Apostle urgeth against those, who were ready to adhere to the Law in opposition to the Gospel.) And though that was sufficient for his purpose there, yet the Covenant of Grace was long before Abraham, even from the beginning. This way God had set forth soon after Man was placed upon the Earth, immediately upon his fall. And it is questioned, whether Adam stood one day, whether he lodged one night in that Honour, to which he was Created.  
O how should we reverence the Gospel! how should this advance the Grace of God in our thoughts! It is the ancient Gospel, the everlasting Gospel, like the everlasting Hills; even from the beginning, God set forth this way of Salvation. The Gospel delivered by Christ, and his Apostles, what is it, but that good old Charter, granted to Man upon the Fall, graciously renewed? When almost the whole Race of Mankind had forfeited, and lost their Charter, Christ comes, and renews, and Confirms it.  
But here another Question falleth in.  
Whether the Covenant of Grace was made with all in Adam?  
Answ. I think we must yield to this, Perpetua est foederis Dei ratio, quod filii in parentibus comprehendanter& censeanter: That this is the perpetual way and manner of Gods Covenant, to include and reckon the Children with their parents. Thus the Covenant of Grace was made with Adam, and his Seed, such as were to Descend from him, till such time as any of them Degenerated into the seed of the Serpent, and by their wilful apostasy from God, and his ways, they did cut off themselves, and theirs from the Covenant. As afterwards the Covenant was made with Abraham and his Seed; and as now, under the Gospel the Covenant is made with the Faithful and their Seed: So was it at first with Adam and his Seed. But as now if any that are taken into Covenant upon the account of their Parents, being in Covenant with God, if when they shall grow up, they shall wilfully reject Grace offered, and manifestly renounce their Covenant with God; they should thereby break off themselves from their former Covenant-relation to God: So this hath been the case of the far greater part of Adams Posterity.  
Though whether the Law of Grace may not extend further, even to such as are not in Covenant, in the fullest sense, as it implieth a mutual consent; that is another Question.  
But so much of the Covenant, or Law of Grace, as it was given to Adam.  
That God might reveal more concerning it to the Fathers even before the Flood, I know no ground to deny. We red of Enochs prophesy, judas 5.14.15. That God was manifesting himself to some of his Servants in those times extraordinarily.  
But the next Edition of the Covenant, that we find extant, was that made to Abraham. And this latter Edition of the Covenant of Grace was larger, and clearer than the former. That Channel of Freegrace, which first broke forth in Paradise immediately upon Mans Fall, ran down to Abraham in a broader stream. Here Christ is spoken of, as the seed of Abraham, who was spoken of more generally before, as the Seed of the Woman. And blessedness is promised in and by him, Gen. 22.18. In thy Seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be blessed. Which blessedness before was more obscurely hinted in that phrase of breaking the Serpents head.  
And here is express mention of Gods Covenanting with Abraham, Gen, 17.2, 4, 7, 9, 10. Whereas Gods Covenanting with Adam, and others of the Faithful before, is not plainly laid down, but only to be gathered, and deduced from Scripture by way of Inference. Though methinks, it is plain enough to all, that are not minded to Cavil, that there was a Covenant betwixt God and Adam, &c. they being mutually engaged. God engaged to Adam by promise, and Adam engaged to believe God, and worship God, according as he did reveal himself. But whereas the Covenant was more tacitly and darkly held forth, betwixt God and Adam, it is most expressly delared betwixt God and Abraham, so that there is no room for any Cavil.  
Now that the Covenant made with Abraham was the Covenant of Grace, the same for Substance with that we are under, is evident.  
1. The Gospel was preached to Abraham in that Covenant, which is proved by the Apostles express Testimony, Gal. 3.8.  
2. The Covenant with Abraham was confirmed in Christ, Gal. 3.17. Therefore a Covenant of Grace.  
3. The Covenant with Abraham has not yet been disannulled, as the Apostle there shows; and thence proveth, the blessing of Abraham is come upon the Gentiles according to the tenor of that Covenant.  
4. Abraham was justified by Faith in that promise, confirmed or renewed in the Covenant, Gen. 17.4. That he should be a Father of many Nations, see Gen. 15.5, 6. Now hence it will follow, either that the Promise, and Covenant made to Abraham was a Covenant of Grace, or that Abraham was not justified by a Covenant of Grace, but some other way. Either the Promise, and Covenant made to him, was the same for substance with that we are under, or he was justified and saved in a quiter different way from us.  
5. And then why should he be called the Father of the Faithful, Rom. 14.11, 16, 17. Or why should Gospel Believers be called the Children of Abraham, Gal. 3.7. He is not the Father of such, in respect of Natural Generation, or Spiritual Regeneration, does not beget or produce Faith in them; but only by similitude and proportion, as a famous Pattern and eminent Example; as look what way Abraham found acceptance with God, and was justified before God, and we may expect the Favour of God, and free Justification in the same way. But certainly you take away the Foundation of the agreement, and Relation betwixt Abraham, and the Faithful. Now, if you deny that to be the Covenant of Grace, which was made with Abraham: Can they be of the same Faith, who are not under the same Covenant?  
6. Do we not red, Gal. 3.14. That the blessing, which is come upon the Gentiles through Jesus Christ, was first the blessing of Abraham. It was first the blessing of Abraham, and from him, and through him,( as a prime subject, though not as a cause) it descends upon us. The Gospel, or the glad Tidings of Christ, and blessedness in him was first preached to Abraham,[ In thy Seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be blessed.] And thus by Faith in the Promise he saw the day of Christ, the messiah coming, though it was at a great distance; yet he believed it would come, and be a happy day indeed, the fore-thoughts whereof made him glad at heart, John 8.56.  
Object. 1. But some tell us the Covenant made with Abraham, was not the Covenant of Grace; for that is one and the same to all the Faithful: But in this Covenant with Abraham are special promises, agreeing only to him and his Family, or Natural Off-spring, as that the Messiah should come of his Seed, Even He, in whom all Nations should be blessed; and that God would give the Land of Canaan to his Seed.  
Answ. We must distinguish betwixt the Essentials of the Covenant of Grace, and the accidentals. As the Covenant of Grace holds forth the way of Salvation for Fallen Mankind of Gods Freegrace in Christ; so it is the same Covenant, that Abraham was under, and the Faithful now are under. And as to the now-mentioned Differences, they were but Circumstantial, and accidental. This Distinction must be granted, or else we must hold the Tribe of Judah, and House of David were interested in one Covenant, and the other Tribes, with all the Jewish Proselytes in another Covenant; whereas the Scripture Involves and Comprehends them in one and the same Covenant.  
Object. 2. Others say, God made a two-fold Covenant with Abraham, in Gen. 17. Scil. A Covenant of Grace, in the beginning of the Chapter, and a Covenant of Circumcision, ver. 9, 10. &c. which they make a Covenant of Works.  
Answ. But this is a mistake sure, for so it would follow, 1. That whereas Abraham is acknowledged to be taken into a Covenant of Grace before, he had the privilege after this, to be taken into the Covenant of Works; which is no privilege. 2. They must say, that Abraham was at the same time both under a Covenant of Grace, and a Covenant of Works. But these same persons at other times deny, that one can be under both Covenants together. 3. The Apostle is express, Rom. 4.11. That Abraham received the sign of Circumcision, a seal of the Righteousness of Faith. So that if the Covenant to which Circumcision did belong, was a Covenant of Works( as Mr. P. would have it:) the Righteousness of Faith should belong to the Covenant of Works. 4. Gen. 17. Doth not speakof a twofold Covenant made with Abraham, but sets forth both parts of the Covenant, scil. What the Lord promised to Abraham, and what he required of Abraham. He promised to be a God unto him, and to his Seed after him, ver. 7. And required Abraham to walk before him in Integrity, ver. 1. And to submit to the Ordinance of Circumcision, v. 10. Which at that time he appointed to be the sign of the Covenant: He calleth it[ My Covenant.] But methinks it is strange, that any Protestant should stumble at the Expression. It is a Sacramental phrase, like that 1 Cor. 10.4. That Rock was Christ. And 1 Cor. 11.24. This is my Body.  
Again, look at the Spiritual meaning of Circumcision, as it was a bloody Sacrament, intimating the purging away of sin by the Blood of the Covenant, and pointing at the inward Circumcision of the heart; what can be more plain, than that it must refer to the Covenant of Grace? But I may have occasion to speak more of this by and by.  
Lastly, That there was but one Covenant established with Abraham, this appears( as Mr. Whiston noteth p. 36.) From the constant phrase of Scripture, always( where speaking of the Covenant made with Abraham) speaking in the singular number, the Covenant, and not in the plural, Covenants.  
Now I might go on to show how God repeated his Covenant with Abraham, as it were Commenting upon it, in which respect it may be called the Promises, Gal. 3.16. so Gen. 12.1, 2, 3. and 15.1.5. and 17. and 22.17, 18. And I have heard a Learned man observe from Gods commanding Abraham to offer up his son Isaac, that on Gods part it was a further Exhibition of the Messiah to Abraham. Isaac must be the blessed Seed, or the Progenitor of it, because of that Promise, Gen. 21.12. In Isaac shall thy Seed be called. Now Isaac's usage( being appointed to be offered up a Sacrifice) holds forth to Abraham, that the messiah should be offered up a Sacrifice for sin. 
Dr. W. ( So that here was more of Goodness in God to Abraham, than of Obedience in Abraham to God.) Again, there was a determinate place where Isaac, should be offered, Mount Moriah, on which place afterwards the Temple, the place of sacrifices, was built. Again, Isaac was laid on the wood, and Abrahams hand stretched out, to slay him: Yet Abrahams hand was stayed, Isaac was not Sacrificed, but God provided a Ram for a Sacrifice; this teacheth Abraham that the time of Messiahs coming was not yet: But in the mean time God would be content with Sacrifices, as Pledges of the Messiah, which should Supponere locum Messiae, should be Typical, Significative, and Representative of him. Here I have given you anothers thoughts of that Mysterious passage, of Gods commanding Abraham to offer his son Isaac. But whether indeed Abraham had a distinct apprehension of these things, as we may have, since they have been cleared, and illustrated in the Antitype, I do not determine; but leave to others Judgments.  
I come next to speak of the Covenant made with the Children of Israel. Here some distinguish of the Covenant made with them under Moses, till their return from the Babylonish Captivity, and the Covenant made with them after the Captivity. But that I may not run out too far, I shall only speak of the mosaic Covenant: as indeed of that Covenant is all the Question, whether it was a Covenant of Grace, the same for substance with that, which Christians are under. Now I shall endeavour to clear this, That the Covenant of God made by Moses with the people of the Jews, was a Covenant of Grace, the same for substance with the Gospel-Covenant: The way of Life and Salvation held forth in it.  
It is granted, or if any should deny or question it, we have seen it proved before, that the Covenant made with Abraham, was a Covenant of grace; But the Covenant made with Abraham, took in the Jews, as his seed, Gen. 17.7. And the Covenant made with the Jews, was a carrying on and establishing of the same Covenant;( though with a new modus, some things peculiar to the Jewish Church and Common-wealth, being added to it,) Deut. 8.18. Thou shalt remember the Lord thy God, that he may establish his Covenant, which he swore unto thy Fathers. And Deut. 7.12. If ye harken to these Judgments, and keep and do them, the Lord thy God shall keep unto thee the Covenant and Mercy, which he swore unto thy Fathers.  
2. That Covenant which was Sealed with the sign of Circumcision, and had a promise of Heart-Circumcision, was a Covenant of Grace. But the Covenant made with the Jews, was sealed with the sign of Circumcision; and further, had a promise of Heart-circumcision.  
What did the outward sign of Circumcision signify? That we learn, Deut. 10.16. Circumcise therefore the Fore-skin of your heart, which hath its accomplishment in Christ: Veteres Hebraei in eâ fuerunt sententiâ, quod tempore Messiae Circumcisio Spiritualiter, non Carnaliter amplius fieri debeat. Fag. apud M. Pool. in Synops. Col. 2.11, 12. In whom ye are Circumcised with the Circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the Circumcision of Christ, butted with him in Baptism. Where methinks the Apostle intimates thus much, that Moses's Circumcision, the outward circumcision made with hands, did point to Christs Circumcision, the inward Circumcision not made with hands,[ The Circumcision of Christ.] i. e. That which he effected by his Spirit. And this further we may take notice of, that he seemeth to compare Circumcision, and Baptism, as signifying the same thing,[ butted with him in Baptism.]  
Here let me Recite a Passage out of a Late Writer. 
Disc. of the two Covenants. p. 37.  [ It is not unlikely( says he) but that as Heart-circumcision under the Figure of Literal-circumcision, was, together with Faith, made the condition of the Covenant then:( Gen. 17.10. with Deut. 10.16.) So Spiritual Baptism, which is a death unto sin, and a living unto God, is under the Figure of Water-baptism, joined with believing; as the condition of the promise of Salvation now. Mar. 16.16. He that believeth and is Baptized, shall be saved. According to which, the Apostle Peter having spoken of Noahs Ark, saith, The like Figure whereunto Baptism now saveth us; not the putting away of the filth of the Flesh, but the answer of a good Conscience towards God, 1 Pet, 3.21.] But this is one thing considerable, if Circumcision signified the same thing that Baptism doth, scil. The Mortification of sin, and laid an Engagement on them to put away Filthiness of the Flesh and Spirit both; it must be the same Covenant for substance, to which both those Sacraments referred.  
Hereunto add, That the Jews had a promise of Heart-circumcision, Deut. 30.6. The Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God. This is an evident promise of Grace, where the Lord undertakes to work, what else-where he requires, as Deut. 10.16. Jer. 4.4. Object. But then why is the House of Israel said to have been Uncircumcised in heart? Answ. They were so generally, This Promise( like those Jer. 31.33. Ezek. 36.26, 27.) was fulfilled only in some of them, not in all,( its true) and yet laid down in so general Terms as might have encouraged any of them to apply themselves to God, for the bestowing of that Grace upon them.  
But there is an Objection against this Argument from Circumcision, from Gal. 5.3. Every man that is circumcised, is a Debtor to do the whole Law. And consequently, circumcision should rather have reference to a Covenant of Works.  
Answ. It is a mistake, to confounded the Law( of which the Apostle there speaketh) with the Covenant of Works, or covenant made with man in Innocency. The Law to which Circumcision bound men, was the written Law of Moses, which though it is sometimes called the Law of Works, yet is really distinct from the Law of Innocency, or Covenant of works made with man at first. Indeed the Mosaical Jewish Law, taken in the Political sense, as it was the Instrument, or Rule of Government of the Jews Common-wealth( as one notes) promising Temporal benefits to the strict observation thereof, 
Discourse of the two Covenants. p. 75.  and threatening Temporal penalties to the Transgression and Violation of the same; So far it was a Law of Works. A Law of Works {αβγδ}. As the Apostle saith, Gal. 3.12. The Law is not of Faith: But the man that Doth them, shall live in them,( as Lev. 18.5.) Which as it had reference to the Law in the Political sense, is to be understood of a long and prosperous life upon Earth.  
Further, as the false Apostles and carnal Jews expected Justification, and Salvation, upon the External Observation of the Law, as if Circumcision, and other works of the Law were highly Meritorious( Rom. 9, 32. and 10.3.) Thus it was to them a supposed Law, or Covenant of Works. Not that God did so intend it, but they did so misapprehend it. Not that Circumcision did indeed bind men to the strict Terms of the proper Covenant of Works.  
But the Apostle there speaks of Circumcision, in the sense of the false Apostles, and as they abused it. They urged it as necessary to Justification, as a work of the Law, setting Moses against Christ: And would have it still practised, when by Christ it was abolished. Against these, the Apostle argues, if you will keep up circumcision still, by the same reason, you must keep up all jewish Ceremonies, and observe the whole Mosaical Law, to which Circumcision did oblige them.  
But observe it, the use of Circumcision as instituted by God, was not to bind them to Legally perfect, and sinless Obedience; nor did Abraham, or any faithful Jew so understand it. So indeed it would have been no privilege at all; 
Rom. 3.1.  so it would have been no happiness or advantage, but a misery; and terror for them to have been taken into Covenant with God by Circumcision. But though compared with the more easy Institutions of the Gospel, circumcision was a Yoke, binding them to that more burdensome way of Service, which God at that time had appointed; yet comparing their estate then, with that of the Heathen, circumcision was an Honourable Badge of them, whom God owned as his peculiar people. And though as Circumcision had relation to their political Law, it bound them to the strict Observation of those Statutes, Judgments and Ordinances, which God had given them in special: Yet as it had relation to the covenant made with Abraham, and his Seed, which was still on foot, it only bound them to serve and obey God in sincerity and truth, in what he then revealed to be his Will; and so much is( no doubt) required of every one in the Covenant of Grace. Again,  
3. That covenant which holds forth Salvation to Fallen man, cannot be the covenant of works, but the covenant of Grace. But the covenant made with the Jews, held forth Salvation to them, John 4.22. Salvation is of the Jews: So it was while they were in covenant. And upon this account the Land of Judah might be called Emphatically, The Land of the Living. Theirs was the Land of the Living, and the Valley of Vision: Whereas other People sat in Darkness, and in the Region and shadow of Death, Psal. 132.16. I will cloth her Priests with Salvation: Ministerium eorum reddam salutare populo meo: Id quod eis erit honorificum, non secus ac elegans Vestis. 
Piscat.  By their Ministration( standing in his council) they might both save themselves, and others, Jer. 23.22. And they that were aliens from the Common-wealth of Israel, and strangers from the Covenant of Promise, are set forth as having no hope, and without God in the world, Ep. 2.12. Implying, 1. That the Gentiles had no grounded hope of future Happiness. 2. The Jews had or might have had such hope. 3. What grounded hope they had of future Happiness, it depended, or was built and bottomed on the Covenant, then on foot. Called Covenants, being divers times renewed, though otherwise for substance, it was but one. So again, Rom. 9.4. Una fuit promissio, si remipsam spectes, 
Beza.  said saepius sancita. It was at several times renewed, and though the Matter and substance of it was the same, yet it was delivered in sundry forms in various Expressions. Or if by[ Covenants] we understand, Et foedus gratiae communis,& faedus peculiaritatis: Both the general covenant which God maketh with all his People, chiefly about their Eternal Happiness; and that special covenant made with the People of the Jews, about their prosperity in Canaan, the Land of Promise; the latter was but an Appendix, not a thing opposite to the former.  
Now if Salvation was of the Jews( as is already proved) it undeniably follows, that the Covenant of Grace was made with the Jews, as well as with us Christians. Surely, none that consider what they say, will dare to affirm that they might have Salvation, though under a Covenant of Works, and not of Grace. And as the way of Salvation was always one and the same, to wit, through a mediator; so the covenant of Grace in all Ages for substance, was one and the same. Jesus Christ, the same yesterday and to day, and for ever, Heb. 13.8.  
Here( by the way) observe, how grossly they are mistaken, that hold, the Jews had only Temporal promises. A bold-fac'd Assertion, contrary to plain Scripture. If the Jews had no promises, but only of Temporal things, what shall we make of that Text, John 5.39. Search the Scriptures,( where certainly our Saviour speaketh of the Scriptures of the Old Testament, the Scriptures of the New Testament( not being then Extant) Search the Scriptures( says he) for in them ye think ye have Eternal Life; and they are they that testify of me. And what would they make of that Promise, [ I will be their God!] The Psalmist speaketh of it as a far greater Matter to have the Lord for our God, than to have and enjoy the world, Psal. 144.15. And the Apostle seemeth to say, that God would have been ashamed, to be called, Their God in so low a sense; as including merely some outward Temporal privileges, and Enjoyments, and no more, Heb. 11.16. This would have been little for his Honour: This would not have been to promise, or give like himself, like a God. Those words spoken to Moses[ I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob,] prove them not only in being still, but in a state of happiness. And so the Import of the Phrase, Rev. 21.7. He that overcometh shall Inherit all things, and I will be his God. And certainly, the blessings of an earthly Canaan were not all, that God promised under the Old Testament; but Canaan itself was to them a Type of a better country, that is an Heavenly. And if the Doctrine of future Happiness after this Life, was not sufficiently Revealed unto, and commonly apprehended, and known among the Jews, one would wonder how such an one, as that Thief on the across, should be acquainted with it, who prayed, Lord, remember me, when thou comest into thy Kingdom.  
4. That Covenant, which had the Spirit and Grace of God attending the Administration of it, was undoubtedly a Covenant of Grace. But the covenant made with the Jews, had the Spirit and Grace of God so attending it. The Spirit was promised, and Exhibited then, though not in so large a measure, as under the Gospel, Hag. 2.5. According to the word that I covenanted with you, when ye came out of Egypt, so my Spirit remaineth among you, Mich. 2.7. Is the Spirit of the Lord straightened? Are these his doings? Do not my words do good to him that walketh uprightly? Those high Encomia given to the Law, Psal. 19.7, 8, 9. The Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: The Statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: The commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes, agree to it only, as the Spirit doth accompany it.  
There was the same Spirit of Faith given out under the Old Testament, though not the same measure of Faith. And it was a Prayer, which a Saint under the Old Testament put up, Psal. 143.10. Teach me to do thy will, for thou art my God, thy Spirit is good: led me( i.e. by thy Spirit) into the Land of Uprightness. And there was the same Love to God, to his Word and Worship, to his Saints and Servants in the faithful of Old, as is in Believers, under the Gospel. And they obeied from the same gracious Principle, as is evident from Heb. 11.  
5. The Jewish Sacraments did represent and signify the same thing, as Gospel-Sacraments do; from whence it would seem to follow, that the Covenant made with them is for substance, the same with that which Christians are under. Methinks it is plain, that the Apostle makes Circumcision and Baptism, the same in signification, Col. 2.11, 12. and 1 Cor. 10.3, 4. They did all eat the same spiritual Meat, and they did all drink the same spiritual Drink: For they drank of that spiritual Rock, that followed them, and that Rock was Christ. Would any one imagine, that Christ should be held forth Represented, or Typified, in Sacraments relating to the Covenant of Works? That their Sacraments did typify Christ to come, and ours do set him forth as already come; will not prove two Covenants Essentially different, but only two different Administrations of the Covenant. As it will not prove two Christs, one that was then to come, and another that is since come. Surely, there is but one Christ, though thus variously set forth and discovered.  
6. That Covenant which was capable of being renewed, after it was broken, must needs be a Covenant of Grace, and not of Works. But the covenant made with the Israelites, was capable of renewing. The covenant of Works being once broken, is irreparably broken, because it requireth absolute, perfect Obedience. But the People of Israel were oft called to renew their covenant with God, which sheweth it was a Covenant of Grace. Moses, Nehemiah, &c. who truly feared God, and full well knew their own and others weakness, and utter inability to perform sinless Obedience, would never have been so forward to engage themselves, and others in a covenant of Works; which was impossible for them to keep, whereby they could expect nothing but a curse.  
The covenant of Works admitteth not of Repentance, promiseth not Remission thereupon: But there was place for Repentance, and a promise of Pardon and Forgiveness in that covenant made with the Israelites, Lev. 26.40, 42. Deut. 4.30, 31.  
There was a way appointed under the Old Testament for the Expiation of sin. The Sacrifices under the Law were Types of Christ, and to signify our obtaining Remission by his Blood. Doth the covenant of works admit of Sacrifices for sin? What a veil is over their eyes, in reading the Old Testament, that make it a covenant of works, when the great thing pointed at by its Types and Ceremonies, is Christ, and Redemption by him! Will any say, the covenant of works, was Typical of the covenant of Grace?  
7. That Covenant which had the same condition with the Gospel-covenant, viz. Sincere Obedience to Gods Commands; is for substance the same covenant, that is, a Covenant of Grace. But the covenant made with the Jews. had this same condition. The covenant of works would not take up with Sincere Obedience, but strictly requireth, and exacteth Perfect Obedience.  
But as God in his Covenant with Abraham, required his walking uprightly. So this was the thing required of Israel, Deut. 10.12. And now Israel, what doth the Lord thy God require of thee, but to fear the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul? Where the phrase[ To serve him with all the heart, and with all the soul] is to be understood, by comparing it with other Texts, where the like phrase is used. As Deut. 30, 6. Where God promiseth to circumcise their heart, to love him with all their heart, and with all their soul And 1 Kings 14.8. Where it is said of David, that he followed the Lord with all his heart. And the like of Josiah, 2 Kings 23.25. Not that they did all that God in his Law required of them: But God in the Covenant made with them, did accept of their sincere and hearty Service, and Obedience, though it was Imperfect; which the Covenant of Works would not admit of.  
Phrasis illa[ ex toto cord] in multis locis Scripturae apponitur hypocrisi, 
Chemnit. Loc. come. de Lege Dei. p. 9. Col. 2.  & externi simulationi, manifestum est[ toto cord] seu perfecto cord, opponi duplici cordi. This of loving God with all the heart, and soul, and strength, 
Truman against same prevailing Opinions. p. 92.93, 94.  must be considered either strictly,— and so it requires the utmost of a mans Natural ability; so that if he fails in the least degree of this, he fails so much of love due to God by the Law, and is under its Curse. In this strict sense, no mere man in this Life; not Josiah himself, ever loved God with his whole heart, so highly as he ought. 2. These words may be considered as the condition of the Remedying-Law, as taken with Gospel-lenity, as if they love God with the prevailing bent of their souls, or above all things, &c.  
So that when you red, Lev. 18.5. Ye shall keep my Statutes, and my Judgments, which if a man do, he shall live in them.( As in Neh. 9.29. and Ezek, 20.11.) You are not therefore to conclude, that this was a covenant of Works. Though it run in such a form, and though it is true; the carnal Jews with their Pharisaical Teachers, turned it into a covenant of Works. [ Do this and live,] if you understand it, speaking of a Legal exactness, a perfect fulfilling of the Law; if you take it as a promise of Life, only upon condition of perfect unsinning Obedience. So( its true) it is the plain Voice of the Covenant of Works. But as the Lord spake thus to the People of Israel, whom of his mere Grace, and Favour he had taken into Covenant with him; the words are rather to be taken in a Gospel-sence, as requiring sincere Obedience, and promising Life thereupon. And so the Faithful understood them, Psal. 51.6. Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts, ver. 16, 17. Thou desirest not Sacrifice, the Sacrifices of God are a broken spirit. Psal. 40.8. I delight to do thy will, O my God: Yea, thy Law is within my heart. Psal. 44.17, 18. We have not dealt falsely in thy Covenant, our heart is not turned back, &c. Yea, it is most plain, that such a keeping of Gods Commands was meant, as had a promise of Gods Keeping-mercy unto them, Deut. 7.12. and of his Shewing-mercy, Exod. 20.6. Where there is need of Shewing-mercy, that plainly shows, the Obedience performed not to be exactly Legal, every way perfect. Shewing-mercy here, seemeth to intend, at least it concludeth, Pardoning-mercy. As it standeth in opposition to Gods visiting Iniquity, ver. 5. But supposing Obedience every way perfect, there is no room for, no need of such Mercy. Sincere Obedience was no less accepted under the Old Testament, than under the New,( Mal. 3.17.) As it is no less required under the New Testament, than under the Old, Mat. 7.21. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, but he that doth the will of my Father which is in Heaven. Rom. 2.7. To them who by patient continuance in well-doing, seek for Glory, Honour, and Immortality, Eternal life, ver. 13. For not the Hearers of the Law are just before God, but the Doers of the Law shall be justified, and James, 1.25.  
And so the Harmony betwixt the Old Testament, and the New; betwixt Moses, the Prophet, and the Apostle Paul, Deut. 30.11, 12, 13, 14. with Rom. 10.6, 7, 8. The Obedience of Faith required by both,( vid. Truman against some prevailing Opinions, pag. 35, 36.) As Mr. Ball, 
Of the Covenant. p. 114.  What word was that which Moses saith was near, even in their hearts, But the Law which the Lord gave upon Mount Sanai, and promised to writ in the hearts of his People under the Covenant of Grace. It should be under the New Covenant of Grace.  
And though some may be ready to Object that of the Apostles, Rom. 10.5. For Moses describes the Righteousness which is of the Law, that the man which doth those things, shall live by them; which would seem to make Lev. 18.5. and other the like Texts, a Covenant of works, of a contrary tenor to the Gospel-covenant. Yet the difficulty is solved, if we attend to what another hath observed. 
Truman against some prevailing Opinion. p. 36.  It is apparent( says he) that the Law of Moses, though it was given designedly( as to the end of the Revelation of it) as a Covenant of Grace, and Pardon, even for the Salvation of sinners; yet it was given( subserviently still to the same end of Salvation) also to Reveal the Law, in its utmost exacting Rigour.  
And else-where Paraphrasing upon the place,[ for Moses describeth the Righteousness of the Law.] That is, 
Append. to great Propitiation. p. 59.  these words of Moses taken in the strict Law-sence, as a Law, and in the sense you understand them, set forth the way you stick too for Justification. For it is apparent, that those very words( Lev. 18.5.) and the whole body of the Mosaical Law, were a Covenant of Grace, as they were given from God by Moses, and understood( or intended by God) and ought to have been understood by the People: The meaning was, if you endeavour to do all these sincerely, and lament your falling short, you shall live and be blessed. Though he would not deny, but freely grant, that the same Mosaical Law, that is, Materially the same, was also given to Rule them, as a Common-wealth; according to the Observance, or Transgression whereof, they might look to prosper, or to be punished in this World.  
8. That Covenant whereby the People of Israel came to have a special Interest in God, and special privileges above other People, could not be a Covenant of works, but of Grace. They could have had no Special privilege by a Covenant of works, wherein naturally all are equally concerned, and which lays sinners under the Curse, under an intolerable burden. It's impossible that sinners should come to have an Interest in God by the Covenant of works. Yet this was the Jews privilege: The Lord was their God, Gen. 17.8. and Psal. 144.15. and 33.12. To them pertain the Adoption, Rom. 9.4. And they have God nigh to them, Deut. 4.7, 8. And had the advantage clear of all others, that were strangers to the Covenant, Rom. 3.1, 2. Had it been a Covenant of works, they should only have had God against them, not with them, or for them, what is spoken to them, Exod. 19.5, 6. is applied to Believers under the New Testament, 1 Pet. 2.9.  
What I have added here, {αβγδ} to show, that the Covenant made with the Jews, was not a Covenant of works, is to show some, how grossly Mr. Patient is mistaken; whose loose Discourse deserves not a large Refutation. Yet as weak as it is, it hath taken with some Friends of mine, whom I cannot but pity. But, Lay all these things together, and I wonder if you can have any doubt, whether the Covenant made with them, was a Covenant of Grace, the same for substance with the Gospel-covenant.  
Yet because this is the {αβγδ} of the Anabaptists, the grand Mistake, which they lye under, and which leadeth them further out of the way; for the further clearing of the Truth, I shall answer all that I can think of, which may be Objected.  
Object. 1. That the Covenant made with the Jews, was but a Subservient-Covenant. Not the Covenant of Grace, but subservient to it.  
Answ. 1. It could not be Subservient to the first bringing in of the Covenant of Grace, which was in the world before this. The Covenant of Grace was made with Adam, immediately upon the Fall, and renewed with Abraham. And how could the Covenant made with the Jews, be subservient to the being of that, which was long before it? 2. Granting it was subservient to the Gospel-dispensation of the Covenant of Grace, and preparatory to it,( as it is Gods usual Method in the works both of Nature, and Grace, to proceed from that which is less perfect, to that which is more perfect) yet this will not prove it no Covenant of Grace, but only that it was not so clear a Dispensation of the Covenant of Grace, as the Gospel-covenant. 3. It certainly tended to the same end, which the Gospel aimeth at; to wit, the Salvation of souls, and had the same effect, attained this end in the Faithful among the Jews, and therefore certainly was a Covenant of Grace, the same for substance with the Gospel covenant, and not merely subservient to it.  
Object. 2. It was a mixed Covenant.  
Answ. Though one hath raised a great dust, about the Covenant made with Abraham, and his Seed, calling it a Mixt-covenant: Of what Principles was it mixed? Was it a Mixture of the Covenant of works, and the Covenant of Grace? A compound of both these? But at other times, they will say these two are Incompassibilia, things that will not mix, and consist together; you may as soon mingle Heaven and Earth together. If Justification and Salvation be of works, then of Debt, and consequently not of Grace: So one of these plainly excludes, and overthrows the other. That either they must bring it to a Covenant of works, and not of Grace, or 'vice versâ, to a Covenant of Grace and not of Works. Or was it a mixed Covenant because it contained Temporal promises, as well as Spiritual; yet observe, this could not hinder its being a Covenant of Grace. For, 1. Those Temporal good things promised were Typical of higher, and better, even of Spiritual things. An earthly Canaan was a Type of Heaven. And long Life promised to the Obedient, was promised as an earnest to Eternal Life, And whatever some say and think, this consideration would commend, and set off those outward Temporal blessings promised to the Faithful; that they were Types and Pledges of Spiritual and Heavenly things. That they might say, as David, 2 Sam. 7.19. And this was yet a small thing in thy sight, O Lord God, but thou hast also spoken of thy servants for a great while to come; hast spoken what thou wilt do for us hereafter, in another world. How great is thy Goodness which thou hast laid up for them, that fear thee, besides all that Goodness of thine laid out upon them here.  
2. The Gospel itself contains promises of Outward, Temporal-blessings, as well as Spiritual. Christ hath promised, Mat. 6, 33. All these things shall be added, to them that seek the Kingdom of Heaven first. And still that holds good to the Faithful,[ I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee, Heb, 13.5, 6. Godliness not only heretofore had, but still hath the promise of the Life that now is, as well as of that which is to come, 1 Tim. 4.8. Now shall we therefore say, The Gospel is a mixed Covenant, and not a Covenant of Grace.  
If it be replied, that in the Covenant made with Abraham, and his Seed, the Land of Canaan was promised, which is no where promised to Believers in the Gospel.  
Answ. If upon this account it must be held, a mixed Covenant, in Opposition to its being a Covenant of Grace; then that which made it a mixed Covenant, must be either that this was a Temporal promise, or that it was a promise peculiarly belonging to Abraham and his seed; but neither of these could make it such a mixed Covenant. Not the former. For by this Reason, the Gospel, which promiseth, that the meek shall Inherit the Earth, Mat. 5. should be a mixed Covenant. That the promise of an Earthly Canaan should make such a mixed Covenant, and no other promise of the Earth, or Earthly blessings do it; is such a groundless Fancy, as will never be proved while the Earth stands.  
Nor the latter. For so the Gospel should be a mixed Covenant too. As the Land of Canaan was promised in special to Abraham, and his seed; and as it was promised, that the Messiah should come of his seed: So in the beginning of the Gospel, there was a special promise of Miracles, to credit, and encourage the Faith of those, who first believed in Christ, Mark 16.17, 18. These signs shall follow them that believe. In my Name they shall cast out Devils, they shall speak with new Tongues, they shall take up Serpents, &c. Which promise belongeth not to us, as those signs are not to be expected now: Must we therefore say, that was a mixed Covenant made with those Primitive believers, different from the Covenant of Grace we are under? Surely it is called the Covenant of Grace, from the main essential promises of Grace, and Salvation: I say, it hath its Denomination from those Grand promises, which God made to his Church and People in all Ages; and which make it the same Covenant for substance, notwithstanding a difference, and change in certain accessions and circumstantials.  
So if it alleged, that the Old Testament doth more abound with Temporal promises.  
The Answer is ready, Magis& Minus non variant Speciem. More and Less show different Degrees, not different Kinds. Though the Jews had more of the Earth promised, and Christians more of the Spirit, this will only prove Christians under a better dispensation of the Covenant; it will not disprove the Jews being under a Covenant of Grace, since besides their temporal, they had also spiritual Promises.  
Obj. 3. Had the Covenant made with the Jews been a covenant of Grace, the same for substance with the Gospel covenant, then Christ should have been the Mediator of it; but Moses was the Mediator of that Covenant.  
Ans. 1. Inasmuch as that Covenant made with the Jews, did admit of a Mediator, this sheweth it was not a covenant of works. The covenant of works hath no Mediator.  
2. Moses as he was Mediator was a type of Christ, therefore Christ was the true Mediator, even then as well as now, Heb. 13.8. Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. Indeed Christ is called the Mediator of a better Covenant, Heb. 8.6. Not wholly to exclude him from having to do in the former covenant, but because as the Law came by Moses, and he was made use of to report it from God to the Israelites, Acts 7.38.( in which respect he is called a Mediator, Gal. 3.19.) So the better covenant was delivered, the better dispensation of the covenant was set forth by Christ himself,( as Heb. 1.2.) as it was fit he should have the Honour of it. But as Remission of sin, and Reconciliation unto God was attainable under the first covenant, so Christ was the Mediator then, and not Moses. Indeed, in all Ages Christ was both Prophet, Priest, and King to his Church; though he was not so clearly revealed in these his Offices before, as he is to his People under the Gospel.  
Obj. 4. The Old Testament was dedicated with the blood of Beasts, not of Christ, Heb. 9.18, 19.  
Answ. The virtue of Christs blood did certainly extend to the times of the Old Testament. And was not that Blood, wherewith the first Testament was Dedicated, Typical of the blood of Christ? Now how absurd is it to talk of a Covenant of works typical of a Covenant of Grace,( as Mr. Patient, holds it is, who makes this Objection.) How strange were it, if a Covenant of works should be so Dedicated, as to represent Christ and his Benefits; which is the soul and substance of the Covenant of Grace. Indeed, as a Modern writer notes: 
Mr. Truman endeavours to rectify some prevailing Opinions. p. 151.  In the sense wherein it did typify things to come, it was neither the strict Law of work, nor the Law of Grace, or Gospel promising pardon as to Conscience and future Happiness upon Repentance, and sincere Obedience, but the Jewish Political Law.  
But the Book of the Law in the Temporal sense, 
Ib. p. 27. Margin. And the like again, in the Margin, p. 83. ( as it was the Instrument of the Jewish policy,) being sprinkled with blood, was a pattern of the Law in the Eternal sense, sprinkled with a better Sacrifice.  
Object. But the Covenant which God made with the Jews, and the Covenant made with Believers under the Gospel, are spoken of as two Covenants; one called the First, and the old Covenant; the other the New; and the second Covenant one said to have been faulty, the other called a better Covenant, Heb. 8.6, 7.  
Answ. 1. The terms Old, and New, First, and Second, will not prove them essentially Different, or different Kinds of Covenants;( nor were they, unless we restrain the Covenant made with the Jews, to that part of it, which was merely political) but only various Dispensations of one and the same Covenant. In Deut. 29.1. We red of a Covenant made with the Israelites, besides the Covenant made with them in Horeb; not that these were two Covenants specifically different( as some have very groundlessly supposed) but the same Covenant renewed.  
The Gospel-covenant is called a new Covenant; not but that the Covenant made with the Jews of old, was the same for substance, as otherwise Salvation had not been of the Jews: But because though these were the same for substance, yet they were divers in respect of Administration. 
Foedus novum non substantiâ, said formâ.  So a man is said to take a new Lease, or to enter into a new Bond, when the Former and the Latter are the same for substance. The same Law of Love is called both an Old and a New Commandment. That which is called the new Covenant, 
Spark. mist. of Godliness. p. 64.  is not( as one says) a Covenant upon new conditions, but a New condition of the old Covenant. Or as another, that which the Scripture expressly calls the Old Testament, 
Statham Reviler rebuked. p. 91.  or Covenant, Heb. 8.20. was but the old Administration of the Covenant of Grace, the old Copy of Christs will: That which it calls the new Covenant, is the old for substance, though new for the Administration, the new Copy of Christs will.  
2. When the first Covenant is supposed by the ensuing Alteration, not to have been faultless; the plain meaning seems to be, that it was a less perfect Dispensation, than that in Gospel-times, not so clear, not so powerful, &c. The Old Testament-dispensation was but as a first draft. We have the lively Representation of those things in the Gospel, which were more darkly shadowed out before, Heb. 10.1. The Old Testament was as a preface, or Introduction to the New.  
Or else the Apostle calleth that the first Covenant, which the Jews then took to be the Covenant; to wit, the mere External part of it under the former Dispensation, which was but as the Shell or Husk; which yet the carnal Jews were most taken with, rejecting the Kernel.  
3. The Gospel-covenant is called a better Covenant, established upon better promises; because a better Dispensation of the Covenant, where there are clearer promises of Spiritual blessings, and which is fuller of such promises. Spiritual promises were more sparing set down in the old Covenant. As was hinted before, it was most congruous, that Christ the Mediator of the Covenant, should have the honour of bringing in the best dispensation of it. That the best Dispensation of the Covenant was deferred, till the Mediators coming in Person.  
Or else the Gospel-covenant is called a better Covenant, comparing it with the covenant made with the Jews, onely so far as it was political, and a peculiar dispensation given to them, which the far greater part of them sinfully fevered and divided from the Covenant of Grace, and stuck to, in opposition to the Gospel; which was an higher, and a better Dispensation of the Covenant of Grace.  
Object. 6. One whom I mentioned a little before, Objecteth, Ezek. 16.59, 60, 61, 62. where God opposeth, Their Covenant to His Covenant. Thy Covenant, ver. 61. and My Covenant, ver. 62. Who would hence draw this wide and wild conclusion, that the Covenant made with the Jews, which God there calleth thy Covenant, was a Covenant of Works, quiter opposite to that which He calleth [ My Covenant] that is, the Covenant of Grace.  
Answ. But may we not think, that they are put to their shifts, that are forced to such Allegations, as have nothing like a Proof, or Argument. And take Notice of ver. 60. there you may see, how well this place agrees to their purpose, Nevertheless, I will remember my Covenant( made) with thee in the days of thy youth, &c.] The Covenant made with the Jews, God calleth, My Covenant,( as Jer. 31.32.) And promiseth to remember it. 
Dixerat Paulò antè,[ memor ero foederis mei,] jam dicit,[ Non ex foedere tuo.] Conciliat igitur quae contraria videbantur, ostendit foedus illud irritum& abolitum esse ex parte populi, firmum autem ex parte Dei, qui eorum superavit malitiam,& foedus suum erga ipsos iterum erexit. Calo. in pol. Synops.  And was it a Covenant of works, that he would remember? Surely, such a Covenant would have made nothing for them, but against them.  
Rather as Oecolompadius notes, Habes hic locum memorabilem de duplici foedere, &c. Here you have a memorable place concerning a two-fold Covenant; one with Israel alone, the other with all Nations. And there is this difference betwixt the New and Old Testament; that one was more obscure, and communicated but to a few, the other is more clear, and spread abroad, Propagated in the whole world. So he, or else, as Dr. Lightfoot somewhere, 
Fall of Jerusalem( in Har. on the New Test.) p. 154. the 12.  God made a two-fold Covenant with their Fathers, viz. The Covenant of Grace, and the Covenant of Peculiarity. And the latter( N. B.) was but a manner of the Administration of the former. The covenant of Grace was made with Adam, and belongs to all the Seed of Christ, before the Law, under it, and after it, Jews and Gentiles. Now the economy of Moses was such an Administration of this covenant of Grace. as made Israel a peculiar People.  
And may not this teach us how to understand ver. 61.[ I will give them unto thee for Daughters, but not by thy Covenant.] That [ thy Covenant] here, should rather be explained by this covenant of Peculiarity, a certain Mode of the covenant of Grace, as at that time dispensed; than by the covenant of Works.  
Object. 7. It is further Objected from Jer. 31.31, 32, 33, 34. If that new Covenant which God there promiseth to make with them, be a covenant of Grace, then the former Covenant was not. And so they must needs differ in Kind and Substance.  
Answ. 
black vind. Foed. p. 216.  As a Learned man observes, that Text hath been very much vexed, and wrested, several Parties would writhe it to their several Opinions, and press it to serve several purposes. As the Antinomian would hence prove the covenant of Grace, to be absolute without condition, God promising to put his Law in their hearts. The Familists hence cry down the Ministry, and Gospel-Ordinances; because it is said, they shall Teach no more, every man his Neighbour, and every man his Brother.( But these plainly contradict themselves; and while they insist on the bare Letter of the Text, which if it be against Teaching by Man, it is more against Brother teaching Brother, and Neighbour teaching Neighbour;( which is a thing they allow& practise) than against the Teaching of men in Office; of which the Text saith nothing.) Others again urge this Text to prove, that only the regenerate are in covenant, and have a right to church-privileges, and Ordinances. To all which I may add one sort more: The Anabaptists, that hence conclude, the Covenant made with the Jews, was not a covenant of Grace, and of Salvation; but a Covenant of Outward and Temporal privileges, or as the more Ignorant sort of them, a covenant of Works. And so Mr. Patient will have it. But, 1. If that Covenant made formerly with the Jews was a covenant of Works, not of Grace, then God was Married unto them by a covenant of Works: As ver. 32. he saith, He was an Husband unto them. But it is not to be imagined, that God should be Married unto sinners, by a covenant of Works. 2. That which is here called a New covenant, meaneth only a New dispensation of the Covenant, which should be at the Messiahs coming in Gospel-times. Called New, for the great change there should be for the better in manner of Administration, in which respect it might seem to be a New covenant indeed. 3. The truth of this second particular will appear, if we consider what this New covenant is:[ I will put my Law in their inward parts: &c.] which is spoken comparate, non absolute. Not as if God had not done this for them before in some measure; but that he would do it in a further measure:[ I will put my Law in their inwards parts.] This God had done for some of them before, as he had promised this before, Deut. 30.6. There was some among them that could say as the Psalmist, Psal. 40.8. I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, thy Law is within my heart. But that Grace which was more rare under the Old Testament, is promised to be extended to more, more plentifully, diffused under the New. And this is the meaning of[ I will make a New covenant— not according to the Covenant that I made with their Fathers.]  
Object. 8. That Covenant made with the Israelites, they are said to have broken, Jer. 31.32. Ezek. 16.59. But it is impossible, that the New covenant lying wholly on Gods part, should be broken.  
Answ. This supposeth what is not to be supposed, that the Covenant of Grace lieth wholly on Gods part, and nothing is required of man therein. But I have undeniably proved before, that the Covenant of Grace hath Conditions, conditions not required of God, but of men: As 'tis not required of God, but of man to Believe, Repent, Obey, sincerely. And if any of us do not come up to these Terms, and Duties, whereunto we stand bound, we are guilty of breach of covenant. If God and Man be not mutually engaged; if all lieth wholly on Gods part, and Man is to do nothing, then it is an absolute Promise, not a Covenant.  
Dr. Preston indeed speaks of a double Covenant, which cannot be broken, 
Of Attrib. 2● part. p. 87.  where God engageth to work the condition in some, but that is restrained to the Elect. Others reduce it to that which is called the Covenant of Redemption, betwixt God and Christ. But the Covenant properly with Man, that covenant, according to the terms and tenor whereof, we are to look for Remission and Salvation, is conditional; and in the tenders of it, common both to Elect and Reprobate. And as for all those that profess to own, and embrace the covenant, and yet come not up to the terms of it, they are guilty of breach of Covenant with God; and continuing such, shall be judged and condemned as covenant-breakers. Where the condition of the covenant ought to be performed, and is not, there( it is manifest) the covenant is broken.  
Yea, I do not question but Believers themselves are generally to be humbled for this sin, that they have broken covenant with God. They may have been guilty of breaking covenant with him for a time, who yet do not finally break covenant with him.  
Further, I would ask one that is of Mr. P's persuasion here( whether Anabaptist, or other) whether all in their societies be not persons entred into Covenant? And next, whether there be no Hypocrites in their societies? And then, whether any Hypocrite, while an hypocrite, keepeth Covenant.  
Certainly the Covenant that Christian Churches are taken into, which is sealed in Baptism, may be broken, and is broken by some, if there are any Hypocrites within the visible Church, that is, if the visible and invisible Church be not all one. It is as little to be doubted, that there are persons in covenant, who yet break it, and shall be judged as Violators of it; as that there are branches in Christ that bear not Fruit, and therefore shall be cut off, and taken away, Joh. 15.2.  
Therefore they must search out some other meaning of these words, Jer. 31.32. Which my Covenant they broke. And not make this a Note of Difference betwixt the Covenant made with the Jews, and the Gospel-Covenant, that the former might be broken, not the latter. As to the Elect it is true, they do not totally and finally break Covenant; and that Grace enabling to keep the Covenant, is given out to a far greater Number than before; but we cannot say simply and absolutely, that the Gospel-covenant is never broken.  
Obj. 9. The Covenant of Grace never ceaseth, it is the everlasting Covenant, but the Covenant made with the Jews is vanished, Heb. 8.13. Now what is vanished away, cannot be the same with that which is to remain.  
Ans. 1. As Tena, Novum Testamentum non tam abolitio, quàm impletio prioris. The New Testament is not so much an abolishing, as a fulfilling of the Old. 2. Where the Apostle speaks of the Old Covenant, as that which was to vanish away, we are to understand it of that part of the covenant which was peculiar and proper to that Dispensation. The Ceremonial-Law given to the Jews, is vanished. Circumcision is vanished, yet the Covenant of Grace, made with Abraham,( to which Circumcision then did appertain,) remaineth still the same for substance, which Believers are taken into. The Judicial Law which was given to the Jews, is vanished, so far as it did peculiarly respect their Common-wealth: but not the Moral Law, I hope, which the Lord hath promised to writ in the hearts of his People. Do we make void the Law through Faith? God forbid( says the Apostle) yea, we establish the Law, Rom. 6.31. Neither are all Old Testament Promises vanished, 2 Cor. 7.1. Having therefore these Promises,( dearly beloved) let's cleanse ourselves— These Promises: what Promises? why, those before mentioned, chap. 6.16. which you will find, Lev. 26.12. I will walk among you, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people.  
Obj. 10. If the covenant made with the Israelites, and the Gospel covenant, be one and the same for substance, how comes it to pass, that the Apostle so oft opposeth these two Covenants, as Gal. 4.24. &c. why does he make the Law and Gospel, and works of the Law and Faith Opposites?  
Ans. That late writer, whom I had occasion to make use of before,( in the Answer to the Fourth Objection) distinguisheth of the Law given by Moses, thus( though not in these very words, yet to this sense) to wit, 
Mr. T. Endeavour to rectify, &c. p. 23. to 37.  That it is to be considered, either as respecting the Jewish Common-wealth, or as respecting Conscience; either in a Political or in a Spiritual sense. 1. As respecting the Jews common-wealth, so this was the Law of the Land, by which they were all to be governed, as a Common-wealth. And this Law was two-fold, to wit, 1. The strict Original Law, exacting Obedience to all Gods commands, whether Moral, Judicial, or Ceremonial, upon pain of death; so a violent temporal Death was due to every one that failed in observing any external Precept of the Law. 2. The Remedying Law answering to it, which appointed a Sacrifice to be offered in most cases, upon which the Offendor and Transgressor was discharged from the aforesaid temporal Death threatened.  
2. The same Law( that is, materially the same) is also to be considered, as respecting conscience. And here we are to take notice likewise, 1. The Original Law here was so wonderfully strict, and dreadfully severe, that it threatened an eternal curse, everlasting death, to any the least transgression whatsoever. As it had to do with Conscience, it threatened Death Eternal to every Sin, even to inward secret sins, in heart or thought; such things as it did not take notice of, or threaten with a violent temporal Death, as it was their Common-wealth Law. 2. The Remedying Law answering to it, and given with it, which was to this purpose, that notwithstanding they were, all of them, many ways guilty of the breach of Gods most holy Law, and so obnoxious to the curse; yet such was his Grace, that upon their sincere Repentance, and real and hearty Endeavours to obey God in all things, their sins should be pardonned, and their Souls saved.  
Now taking the Law in this last sense, as it held forth pardon and salvation to sinners upon their hearty return to God, and sincere Obedience, so there is no Opposition betwixt this Remedying Law, and the Gospel. The Apostle speaking of it, calleth it the word of Faith, the same which we preach, Rom. 10.8. So it was the Salvation of the Jews, Joh. 4.22. the means of salvation to those that were saved.  
As it was their common-wealth Law, it typified higher things. First, in that it threatened every transgression with Death, it shewed the wonderful strictness of Gods Law, as in an higher sense, threatening eternal Death to every sin. Again, as there was a Remedying Law, given with it, appointing in most cases, a Beast to be slain, to prevent the Death of the Offender, it was a typical Gospel, shadowing out the Reconciliation of sinners by a more excellent Sacrifice.  
Again, there is another distinction I would have you take notice of, to wit, that we must distinguish betwixt the Law, as it was given by God, and as it was mistaken and perverted by many of the Jews.  
Now as the Law was given by God, we may be sure, as Mr. Allen hath well noted, It was not to across, or confront the Promise, or Gods design in it, 
Discourse of the two Covenants, p. 55.  but to be subservient to it. Gal. 3.21. Is the Law then against the Promises? God forbid. For it is not to be thought that God would prevaricate in his Design. So that when he had once made a new Law of Grace, for the saving of Fallen man, he would yet afterwards give any Law, but what should one way or other subserve to the same end, if men do not deprive themselves of the intended Benefit, by perverting it. And therefore to be sure, God did not intend to revive the Old covenant of works made with Adam in Paradise.  
Now to apply these things to our present purpose, when the Apostle makes an opposition betwixt the Old Testament and the New; the Law and the Gospel; the works of the Law, and Faith; we are either to understand him, as speaking of the Law, so far as it was political, concerning the Jews Common-wealth: Thus indeed it made nothing perfect, it was but a shadow, and was to give place and vanish, the Substance being come: Or else he speaks of the Law in a strict sense, abstracted from those gracious Promises that were given with it to the Jews. And thus it was a copy of the Law of works, requiring absolute perfect Obedience.  
Thus it was opposite to the Gospel, as the Jews severed it from, and set it up against the Doctrine of Gods Grace; and so it gendered to bondage, Gal. 4.24. and was the Ministration of Death and condemnation, 2 Cor. 3.6, 7, 9. So there was no being justified by the Law; or if men could have been justified by it, they had not been justified by Grace, there had been nothing of Pardon in it.  
But otherwise the Apostle makes the Doctrine of the Old Testament all one with the Doctrine he preached, as we heard before.  
And if at any other time he useth any derogating expressions, when he is speaking of it, we must understand them as spoken comparatively, that is, comparing that darker and more burdensome administration, with this clearer and more comfortable dispensation of the Covenant of Grace under the Gospel.  
Quest. If you ask, how could the Law given to the Jews be considered both as a Law of works, requiring perfect Obedience, and also as a Remedying Law, taking up with sincere Obedience?  
Ans. Had the strict Original Law been given to them intentionally to bind them up to it, to expect Life and Happiness, onely upon those high terms of doing all things therein contained, and obeying perfectly; then had it been plainly exclusive of a remedying Law: But it was not given thus, but the very intention of publishing the strictness and severity of the Law of works( which all men naturally are under) was to commend and set forth the Graciousness of the Remedying Law, to make it more welcome and acceptable. How gladly and thankfully ought they to have submitted to that Law of Grace, which held forth pardon and acceptation with God, upon their believing in him, and obeying sincerely, of whom God might ( in Justice) have required nothing less than perfect, sinless Obedience.  
And therefore it was a most horrible perverting of the Law, when the Pharisees, and other self-justiciaries, expected Righteousness, and Life from the Law, in their sense, and in opposition to the Gospel, For, 1. As it was the Law of the Land, as it respected their Common-wealth, so( it is true) it was possible for them to keep the Law, Phil. 3.6. They might not be guilty of any such external breach of the Law, as legally deserved a violent temporal death, and such as could not be expiated by Sacrifice, but all this could not justify them before God. As it was their Common-wealth Law, it was never given for that end; but to keep them in order, and to shadow out greater and higher things.  
2. As it held forth the strict Law of works, requiring perfect sinless Obedience, so they could not possibly keep it, to be justified by it; but were all transgressors of the Law, and so condemned by it; which should have moved them to embrace, and submit to it in a Gospel-sence. And in keeping the Law sincerely, hearty bewailing the sinful defects in their Obedience, and having recourse to the free grace and mercy of God for pardon, they might have found acceptance, and an exceeding great reward.  
Obj. 11. If the old Covenant was a Covenant of Grace, then why are the Jews said to have been in bondage under it? why is the Spirit of Adoption restrained to the time of the New Testament, if the former was the same Covenant of Grace,( for substance) with the latter.  
Ans. 1. One way how the former Covenant gendered unto bondage, was hinted before; to wit, carnal Jews,( men of base, servile Spirits) did misinterpret, and misapply it. 2. The faithful under that dispensation might in another respect be said to be in bondage, Gal. 4.1, 2, 3. As they were under a more burdensome way of Worship, than Believers under the Gospel. As they had not so much liberty, nor so much of a Spirit of Adoption, as the faithful have under the Gospel. As some, The Church at that time was as an Heir in its minority. 
Ball of the Covenant, p. 27.  As an heir it was free, 
Statham, Reviler rebuked. p. 93.  but as an Infant, or in its minority, it was but as a Servant, under Tutors, and Governours. 
Ball, p. 35.  As Heirs, the faithful then had the Spirit of Adoption and Liberty, but mixed and tempered with this Spirit of Servitude, as they were Infants, or children under the yoke.  
Obj. 12. You will not deny but the Covenant made with the Israelites, may be considered as Political, and why might it not be only or merely political?  
Ans. The highest, most noble, and primary end of the Law given to Israel, and the Covenant made with them, seems to be to direct, and engage them in the way to Life and Happiness. That it was but a secondary, and less principal use, or end of it, to govern them, as a Theocracy, or holy Commonwealth.  
1. As the Covenants, and giving of the Law are set down among the Jews privileges, Rom. 9.4. Psal. 147.19, 20. yet the giving of the Law was nothing near so great a privilege, taken in the temporal sense,( respecting their Common-wealth; as it was in that higher Notion, and consideration,) as it was to convert the Soul, and to direct in the way to true and eternal Happiness.  
2. I should think, that the Israelites covenanting with God, did oblige them to keep his Law, not only as it was the Common-wealth Law, and for fear of temporal punishment, and in hope of a present temporal Reward, but from a filial fear, and love of God, in sincerity and truth, the thing required in the Covenant of Grace, sc. Deut. 5.29. and 10, 12, 13. Heart-obedience was required in that Covenant made with the Jews.  
3. That Covenant made with the Israelites contained Spiritual, as well as Temporal Promises. Compare Exod. 19, 5, 6. with 1 Pet. 2.9. and Lev. 26.3, 11, 12. with 2 Cor. 6.16. So also Deut. 29.12, 13. Jer. 11.4. But this was proved before, that the Covenant made with the Israelites was a Covenant of Grace, the same for substance with the Gospel-covenant; therefore not merely political.  
Now this point having been sufficiently cleared, That the Covenant of Grace is one and the same for substance, under the Old and New Testament; it may be of good use.  
Use 1. This shows us how the Church is One. There is one catholic Church, consisting of divers parts, Cant. 6.9. My Dove, my Undefiled is but one. There is one Body, as one Spirit, one hope of our calling, one Lord, one Faith, one baptism, Eph. 4.4, 5. One Church-catholick, constituted by one Grand Charter, or Covenant of Grace,( though it's true, the Church of the Jews had a special clause in their Grant and Charter concerning them as a Common-wealth, which is not in the Christians charter.) So the Ordinances and privileges of the Church are given and granted by this Charter, to the whole Church primarily, and to particular Churches consequently and secondarily, as parts of it.  
And methinks it is very rational, what some have offered, that it is occasional, and accidental to the Universal Church, 
Dr. Stillingfleet. Mr. Hudson.  that there are particular distinct Congregations, in regard of the multitude and distance of Church-members; for could we conceive, that all the Members of the whole Church could meet together, to partake of the same Numerical Ordinances orderly and to Edification, then the reason for their meeting in several places should cease. David would praise God in the great Congregation, among much People. And the more public the Assembly is ( Caeteris paribus) other things being alike, the more solemn the Worship is, the more for Gods Glory, and his Peoples benefits, quickening, and comfort.( Though it is true, sometimes Gods People have not had the Liberty to meet openly, when the Church was to be sought: 
hilary.  Non in tectis,& exteriori pompâ, said potius in carceribus,& speluncis.  
Some good men I know will not admit there is such a thing, as an Universal visible Church, for fear of bringing in the Pope, or an Universal visible Head of the Church, though this no way follows upon the other. But however Good men may dissent in such Points here; yet when they meet at last in that General Assembly, spoken of, Heb. 12.23. There shall be no Dissenters then among them. In the mean time I would ask, What Church that was to which so many Souls were added, even Three Thousand in one day? Acts 2.41, 47. See also Chap. 4.4. and 5. and 14. Could it be a particular Congregation?  
And what Church that was, wherein God set Apostles, Prophets, &c. 1 Cor. 12.28. Were the Apostles set in particular Churches? Or were they not general Officers unto, and over the whole Church?  
And what Church does Baptism declare, and signify ones admission into? Is it only a sign of Admission into a particular Church? Suppose a Minister cast among a company of Heathen, and one, or more converted by him, should not such be Baptized upon the Profession of the Faith of Christ, though there was no particular Church constituted there, into whose Fellowship they might be taken?  
2. This may serve as an Antidote, against the Error of the Anabaptists, who to out the children of professing Parents of their Interest in the Covenant, would fain persuade men, that the Covenant made with the Jews( wherein children were comprehended with their Parents) was not the same for substance; but quiter of another kind. Now since we have proved the Old and New Covenant, the same Covenant of Grace for substance; their Foundation is shaken, and so what they would build upon it, not like to stand. If children were capable of being in covenant with God, with their Parents heretofore, why not now? Either they must say, our children are more incapable of a covenant Interest in God, than the children of the Jews; or that God is less Merciful, bears less respect to the children of his People now, than he did to the children of the Jews: Both which are loaded with absurdity. But more of this afterwards.  
3. This may help to keep up in us a reverend, and high esteem of the Scriptures of the Old Testament; Wise men would not throw away their old Evidences. What you have heard, may let you see an Harmony betwixt the Old and New Testament: Yea, Christians though they are not to keep up Jewish ceremonies; yet they may make better use of the Ceremonial Law, than the Jews ordinarily did, who restend in the Letter of the Law, and were taken up with the outward shadows, not looking to the end of that which is Abolished. We may see the End, and Scope of the Ceremonial Law more clearly, than the Jews themselves did, having so fair and plain a Comment upon it in the Gospel: As Prophecies are best interpnted by their accomplishment; so Types by the coming of the Antitype, and comparing them together.  
There are some that slight, and reject the Scriptures of the Old Testament. This they never learnt of Christ, or his Apostles. We find Christ Expounding Moses and the Prophets to his Disciples even after his Resurrection, Luke 24.27. And are those Scriptures unworthy of a Christians perusal, which Christ thought not unworthy of his Expositions? The Apostle Paul tells us, Whatsoever things were written aforetime, were written for our Learning, Rom. 15.4. And all Scripture given by Inspiration of God, is profitable, 2 Tim. 3.16. He Vindicates his Doctrine, and confirms it from the Scriptures of the Old Testament, Acts 26.22, 23. And we find the Bereans commended for their searching those Scriptures, and trying Doctrines by them, Acts 17.11. The Doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets,( as we learn, Ephes. 2.20.) are one Foundation of Faith. Christians are there said to be built upon the Foundation( not Foundations) of the Apostles and Prophets. That to take away the Scriptures of the Old Testament, is to take away part of the Foundation. We have a more sure word of prophesy,( says the Apostle Peter) whereunto ye do well, that ye take heed, 2 Pet. 1.19.  
4. This may further confirm us in the belief of the Gospel. That it is no new Doctrine, but the Substance of it was held forth of old by Moses, and the Prophets; upon which account there is less Occasion to suspect the truth of it. The main Doctrine of the Gospel is non other, than what God hath Owned, and Delivered to his Church of old, Acts 26.22. Antiquity is a thing which many would pretend to follow. Well, this is the ancient gospel: And it is proved to be of God; as by the Miracles wrought to confirm it, with other Arguments; so by the writings of Moses and the Prophets, John 5.46. Acts 3.24. It hath double confirmation. We have old Evidences to show for it, to make it good. As God spake by the Mouth of his holy Prophets, which have been since the world began, Luke 1.70.  
5. Hence we may see cause to admire Gods gracious dealing with us, under the Gospel-Dispensation of the Covenant. The Jews were highly Favoured, in being taken into that Covenant God made with them; though it was a darker Dispensation of the Covenant of Grace. Now God hath done more for us, than he did for that his antiently-beloved People, taking us into the same Covenant for substance,( it is true, but) in a clearer, a better Dispensation of it. Many Kings and Prophets, and Righteous men among them, desired to see the things which we see, yet did not see them. The Jews heretofore were privileged above any Nation in the world; yet we are privileged above them: we that live in Gospel-times, we have the Covenant of Grace, in the last and best Edition of it.  
6. This shows what ground Christians have to apply Old Testament Promises, such as are of a common concern: as the Apostle Peter tells them, they should be no losers by submitting to the Gospel, Acts 2.38, 39. Repent and be Baptized.— For the Promise is to you, and to your children; and ( not only to you Jews, by Birth or Profession, but) to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. What ever promises are included in that [ I will be their God;] and belong unto it, to make it good, the Covenant being the same for substance in both Testaments; such promises, though found in the Old Testament do also belong to the Faithful under the New. See an Instance, Heb. 13.5. Be content with such as you have: For he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee. Where hath he said this? See Josh. 1.5. or Deut. 31.8. So the like Instance you have, Heb. 13.6. So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my Helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me. Upon what ground may we say thus? Why in as much as the Psalmist could say thus, Psal. 118.6. We who have an Interest in God, as well as he, may say the like.   

Sect. 15.  
PROP. XV. There is a two-fold manner of being in Covenant with God, viz. A being only Externally in Covenant, and a being also Internally in Covenant with him.  
I Gnorance of, or not attending to this Distinction, is a cause of very gross Mistakes; as may be seen in that Pitiful, Loose Discourse of Mr. Patients, and others.  
Some Distinguish betwixt an Outward, and an Inward Covenant; but that seemeth to be attended with great Inconveniencies. Neither may we think, that God hath made with Men a Covenant, which containeth only outward privileges, upon the condition of an outward visible Profession; that he hath made any such Covenant, distinct from that which is called the Inward Covenant, that holds forth Pardon, Justification, and Salvation, upon Souls return to God, and hearty acceptance of Jesus Christ. One that sometime useth this distinction, 
Blakes Covenant sealed. p. 125.  yet expresseth his meaning thus. The Covenant is but one and the same, but all are not in the Covenant after one and the same manner. Some are only in it by outward Profession, to the present participation of outward privileges; but some by cordial acceptance, to the enjoyment of saving Benefits. Therefore it is much safer and clearer, to distinguish of the manner of mens being in Covenant, which is different; as some are only outwardly in Covenant, others also inwardly. Then to distinguish of the Covenant as either outward, or inward. As Mr. Ball, 
Of the Covenant, p. 24. where you may see more to this purpose. As also, p. 202, 203.  Externally this Covenant is made with every Member of the Church,— but Savingly, Effectually, and Special manner it is made only with them, who are partakers of the Benefits promised.  
They that are only Externally in Covenant, barely enter into Covenant, and do not stand to, or continue in it, Heb. 8.9. They continued not in my Covenant, and I regarded them not. Which yet( by the way) implieth, that the Covenant before made with the Jews, was a Covenant of Grace; which if they had observed according to the true tenor of it, God would then have accepted them, and would have had a Gracious regard to them. They that are Inwardly in Covenant, are such as hearty close with Gods Terms, and have his Laws written in their hearts, and have a right to the Inward, Spiritual, Saving Benefits; and Blessings of the Covenant.  
That there are these two ways of being in Covenant with God, is a thing so plain, as methinks I need not spend many words to prove it.  
1. There is a Two-fold manner of being in Christ, and therefore a twofold manner of being in Covenant. For all that are in Christ, are in Covenant. Now some are in Christ only Externally, such as are to be taken away: Others also Internally, such as shall for ever abide in him. There are Fruitless branches, and there are Fruit-bearing branches, John 15.2.6.  
2. All that are called, are within the Church, and within the Covenant. Now some are called only Externally, others are also called Effectually: Many more are called Externally than are chosen ones, called Internally and Effectually, Mat. 20.16. and 22.14.  
3. They that are Sanctified by the Blood of the Covenant, must needs be supposed in some sense within the Covenant. Now the Apostle supposeth of some, who were Sanctified by the Blood of the Covenant, that they may be guilty of treading under foot the Son of God, and doing despite to the Spirit of Grace, Heb. 10.29. Now such as he there speaks of, were never real Saints, never Internally in Covenant. They were Sanctified: How? Not Internally, but Externally, in being separated from the world of Heathens, visible Saints; called out of the World, and devoted to God, and his Service.  
4. All that are within the Visible Church, are in Covenant, as Ephes. 2.12. Aliens from the Common-wealth of Israel, and strangers to the Covenant of Promise, were all one; so 'vice versâ, within the Church, and within the Covenant. But all within the Visible Church are not Internally in Covenant. Otherwise you must hold, there are no Hypocrites, no Graceless, Unconverted persons within the Church. Certainly, we have no ground to think, that all within the Church of Corinth, or other Churches, we red of in the New Testament, were true Believers, real Saints. No doubt, with many of them, as of the Israelites of Old, God was not well pleased. They would be in Heaven before the time, that look for a Church consisting of none but real Saints. I wonder how or when that Scripture was, or will be fulfilled,[ Isa. 19.25. Blessed be Egypt my People, and Assyria the work of my Hands, and Israel mine Inheritance.] If there are not some outwardly in Covenant, and the People of God by an outward Profession, who yet are not Gods People by a real and hearty Resignation of of themselves to him. If the Church admit not of some, who are Christians only outwardly, and the People of God by External profession, then Egypt, Assyria, Israel; yea, all the Kingdoms of the World at some time or other, have been, or shall be, all true Believers, and real Saints, see Rev. 11.15. For the Scripture cannot be broken, John 10.35. The Word of God cannot fail.  
Object. Rom. 9.6, 7, 8. They are not all Israel, which are of Israel.— These which are the children of Flesh, these are not the Children of God: But the Children of the Promise are counted for the Seed.  
Answ. 1. Some urge this against the Children of professing Christians, being in the Covenant. Hence they conclude, that the Natural Seed, as such, hath no privilege under the Gospel.  
But, 2. If it determines against the Children of Believers being in Covenant, it determines against any being within the Covenant, but such as are the Children of God by Faith; the Children of the Promise.  
3. But indeed, both these are quiter besides the scope of the place, which is this: The Apostle being to speak of the Rejection of the Jews, for their open Rejection of Christ and the Gospel, shows how such a thing might stand with Gods truth. Though he had promised to be the God of Abraham, and of his Seed; yet his Seed were either his Natural seed, or his Spiritual seed, or Seed by Analogy. Such as were merely his Natural seed, might be cast off: They continued not in my Covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord, Heb. 8.9. This we see verified in Ishmael, and Esau: But as for such as were also his Spiritual seed, Children of the Promise, not only in that larger sense, Acts 3.25. But in a stricter sense, as here, Rom. 8.9. Gods Covenant stood fast with them. And that Grace which others had offered to them, but wickedly rejected, these willingly embraced, and were blessed in. Besides that common Election of the Jewish Nation, whereby they were chosen and separated from among other Nations; there was also a Special Election of some of them from among the rest. And these God did not cast away, Rom. 11.1, 2, 5. These obtained that Grace and Mercy, which the rest missed of. So the Apostle sheweth, that while the generality of the Jewish Nation for their Infidelity, were to be Rejected, God would yet continue his Covenant with the Elect among them; and with the believing Gentiles, the Children of Abraham by Analogy, who were to be graffed into the like Covenant-state from whence the other were broken off, Rom. 11.17, 19. So the Apostles intent is to deny to the Natural seed of Abraham, that which was the privilege of the Spiritual seed only,( not to deny to the Spiritual seed such privilege as was even common to the Natural seed,) so likewise in Rom. 2.28, 29. the Question the Apostle speaks to here, is not whether only true Believers are in Covenant, or whether the Parents being in Covenant, their Children are not in Covenant with them; but rather, whether they that are only Externally in Covenant, may not be broken off.  
Now to show the Use of this Distinction of a being Externally in Covenant, and of a being also Internally in Covenant:  
1. Hold to this Distinction, and you will easily Answer what some urge with great Vehemence, and Confidence against the Jews, having been under a Covenant of Grace. Because it is said, Deut. 29.4. The Lord had not given them an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear. But this was necessary only to their being Internally in Covenant, not to their being Externally in Covenant. Whereas some suppose it a strange absurdity, to say, God entered into a Covenant of Grace with them, to whom he had not given an heart to perceive, &c. It is no more than to say, All who are Externally in Covenant, have not an heart to believe, an heart to Repent, do not come up to Covenant-terms. It is no more than to say, that all who are called Externally, are not called Inwardly and Effectually. No more than to say, that there Saints now by an External separation, and Visible profession, who are not Saints by a Spiritual Renovation And as heretofore there was a Seed, after the Flesh, and a Seed after the Spirit, even so now.  
Again, whereas the same Persons tell us, that if the Children of Believers be in the same Covenant with Believers, then they must all certainly be Saved, as he that believeth, shall be Saved. This will not follow. Though indeed I see no reason, or ground to doubt of the Salvation of the Children of Believers; such as die in their Infancy, while they are pure Appendices of their Parents, when actual Faith and Repentance, is not required of them, while they have no will of their own; the Parents will and act, stands for their will and act. It would seem that in what sense God hath promised to be the God of believers, he hath also promised to be the God of their Seed, while they are to be looked on purely as their Seed; for so they are Interested in the Covenant upon the Parents account, without any thing more required of them. But now the Covenant made with believers and their seed, hath such and such Conditions, required of all that are of Age, and not naturally uncapable of performing the same. Now supposing a true believer to fall from the condition, i.e. That he ceaseth to be a believer; it would certainly follow, that the Covenant of Grace would cease to justify him, that he should not be saved. So the Children of believers, if as they grow up, they do not come up to Covenant-Terms; that Covenant that would have justified them, dying Infants, requiring no more of them at that Age, than what might have been pleaded for them; yet that same Covenant will condemn them as Violaters of it. And if when they are of capacity, they do not perform the condition which is then required of them in their own persons, with profane Esau, they Sell their birth-right, and cut off all claim to the special benefits and blessings of the Covenant, by their own Act and dead.  
If I have been mistaken in what is here said of the salvation of believers Children, that die in their Infancy; yet I can say, I desire to Learn, and am willing to see my mistakes. But though I know not, that the Scripture, which affirmeth, Ephes. 3.2. That we are all Children of wrath by Nature, doth any where hold forth the Salvation of all that die in Infancy; which to assert, would seem to imply, that Gods destroying the old World, and Sodom, &c. were eminent Acts of Mercy, rather than of Justice, where in such multitudes of souls were sent to Heaven together; who if they had lived, had probably( at least, for the greatest part of them) gone to Hell. And how it may be Reconciled with that Reason, God giveth the angry Prophet, for his sparing Nineveh, Jon. 4.11. That there were more than Sixscore Thousand persons that could not discern betwixt the Right hand and the Left, I am not able to discern; if these( supposing Ninevehs Destruction, and their Fall in the ruin of it) had all then been certainly saved, and not one of many of them( probably) saved, their Lives( with the rest of the City) being spared. Yet methinks it should be granted, that there is more hope of the Salvation of the Infants of believers, than of Pagans. Now that there is so, it must be because of their Interest in the Covenant, There were no more hope of the Salvation of the one, than of the other, if they were both alike Interested in it.  
2. That there is a being only Externally in Covenant, as well as a being Internally: This would teach us not to expect a Church upon Earth, wholly Constituted, or consisting only of Real Saints. Certainly, all whom the Apostles themselves Baptized, and admitted into Christian Fellowship, and Communion, were not true Converts, or real Saints. And when Three Thousand were admitted, all in one day( as in Acts 2.) how was it probable, or indeed possible, to take a particular account of each one, touching a work of Grace, and to inquire after the soundness of their Conversion. The Visible Church is a Field that hath Tares, as well as Wheat. It's not to be expected, that all the Tares, should be gathered out, till the end of the World. Then it is, that the Son of man should sand forth his Angels, and they shall gather out of his Kingdom all things that offend, and them which do Iniquity, Mat. 13.40, 41. That such are said to be gathered out of his Kingdom then, it implieth there are, and will be such in his Kingdom till then. Again, ver. 47. The Kingdom of Heaven is compared to a Draw-net, which here encloseth Fish, both good and bad; and I would fain know, what Church we may find in all the New Testament, that was constituted by the Apostles themselves, all whose Members were to have been accounted real Saints, such as had true saving Grace.  
3. That there are some only Externally in Covenant with God, and not Internally; this should teach and warn us, not to rest in the former. As John Baptist said to them. Mat. 3.9. Think not within yourselves, we have Abraham to our Father: So, think it not enough, to have been born of believing Parents, or that you have been Baptized, or that you are Gods People by External profession; but walk in the steps of the Faithful, and as you have given up your Names, so give up yourselves to Christ. As I may allude to that of the Apostle, Rom. 2.28, 29. He is not a Christian, who is so only outwardly, neither is that Baptism, which is only an outward washing of the Flesh: But he is a Christian indeed, who is so inwardly, and that is Baptism indeed, where the heart is cleansed, and where there is the answer of a good Conscience towards God. And the Covenant of Grace may well be compared to Noahs Ark; as it was not hanging on the outside of the Ark, that would have saved any of the Old World, but getting within the Ark, as Noah did. So our being Externally in Covenant with God will not avail to our Salvation, unless we are also Internally in Covenant, coming up to Covenant-Terms. There are Children of the Kingdom, that shall be cast out.   
Rom. 3.1, 2. 
What Advantage then hath the Jew? Much every way: Chiefly, because that unto them were Committed the Oracles of God.  
Sect. 16.  
PROP. XVI. They that are only Externally in Covenant, yet are privileged far above those who are strangers as to the Covenant.  
COvenant-Priviledges are not like the Common benefits of the Sun and Rain; but are Special and Distinguishing Favours. As was said of Israel of Old, Deut. 4.7. What Nation so great, who hath God so nigh unto them? It must needs be a great Dignity and privilege to be a People near unto the Lord. A great privilege for People to have the Tabernacle of God with them. The Ark, where were the Tables of the Covenant, was Israels glory. The Apostle makes this, the chief privilege of the Jews, that unto them were committed the Oracles of God. The Word is a Treasure to be chosen before thousands of Gold and Silver: This is a Treasure highly to be valued, though brought to us in earthen Vessels. The Word and Ordinances are choice privileges, belonging to those who are in Covenant, Rom. 9.4. It's a greater mercy to have thy spiritual Manna, than to have the greatest abundance of Corn and Wine. Better is the Fatness of Gods House than the precious Fruits of the Earth. How much better are the Rivers of pleasure that run there, than Rivers of oil? Yea, the gleanings of Gods holy Hill, is better than the Earths Vintage. As the Soul is of more worth than the Body, so are means of Grace to be prized above Means of outward Subsistence.  
As Gods Oracles and Ordinances belong to those that are in Covenant, so that choice part of the Word, The Promises. Children of the Covenant, are Children of the Promises, Rom. 9.4. To all within the Covenant the Promise of Salvation is offered, though but conditionally, yet sincerely. And if we fall short, the fault is onely in ourselves.  
But the greatness of these Covenant-priviledges will appear in the sad and deplorable Estate of those that want, or are deprived of them. See what it is for men to be strangers to the Covenant, Eph. 2.12. Such are said to be without Christ, without hope, and without God in the World. How doleful is their condition, who can never hear the joyful sound. To want the ordinary Means of Salvation, is a want indeed: Ordinarily, Extra Ecclesiam non est salus, Acts 2.47. Where no Vision is, there the people perish. Such sit in Darkness, and in the Region and shadow of Death.  
How miserable was the state of the Jews, when they were unchurched, when God called them Lo-ammi, would no longer own them as a people in Covenant with him. Then wrath is said to have come upon them to the uttermost. It made the Apostle sad at heart to think of it, Rom. 9.1, 2, 3, 4.  
Now what is said of the privileges of those who are but so much as externally in Covenant with God, should quicken us to Duty, not breed, or nourish security. The greater our Mercies, the greater our Engagements. The higher our privileges, the greater Gods Expectations. Isa. 5.4. What could have been done more to my Vineyard, that I have not done in it? Wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth Grapes, brought it forth wild Grapes? To be lifted up to Heaven( with Capernaum) and not into Heaven, will occasion our greater down-fall, and sink us deeper into Hell.   
Acts 2.39. 
The Promise is unto you, and to your Children.  
Sect. 17.  
PROP. XVII. Besides those personal Benefits and Advantages accrueing to men in Covenant, there is this comfortable privilege also concerning their Seed, that they are involved and taken into Covenant together with the Parents. As this is the tenor of the Covenant, I will be thy God, and the God of thy Seed.  
NOw to clear this, observe,  
1. This hath been Gods Way and Manner all along, when he hath taken Parents into Covenant, to take in their seed with them. You shall not find, that ever heretofore God entred into Covenant with those that were Parents, singly by themselves, excluding their seed.  
The Covenant of Works was made with Adam for himself and his Posterity, I suppose that will be readily granted. And when the Covenant of works was broken on mans part, that there was no possibility of attaining Happiness that way, God made another Covenant with our first Parents, promising Salvation by the Seed of the Woman, that is, Jesus Christ, who was to be born of a Virgin, which was the first Edition of the Covenant of Grace, as I shewed before.  
And here the seed of Adam were not excluded, but included; till such time as any of them cut off themselves from Gods Covenant by their own Act and dead. Who are we to understand by the Sons of God, spoken of Gen. 6.2. but the seed of godly Parents, such as were descended from Seth, Enoch, &c. who are called the Sons of God, not merely as they were his Creatures? for so they should not have been opposed to the Daughters of men, as there they are. Have not all one Father? Hath not one God created us? Mal. 2.10. Nor are they called the Sons of God, as being regenerated, and made new Creatures: For no such thing appears in the Context, but rather the contrary. But they are called the Sons of God as the Israelites are called the children of the Lord their God, Deut. 14.1. being within the Church, and in Covenant-relation to God. 
Vid Aynsworth.  As by the Daughters of men there, are understood such as were of wicked Cains cursed posterity, such as were without the Church.  
Again, when God took Abraham into Covenant, his Seed were taken in with him.  
This is evident, Gen. 17.7. so God owneth the Children of the Jews for his Children, his Sons and Daughters, Deut. 32.19. with Ezek. 16.20. Yea, observe, the Church in Abrahams Family consisted most of strangers, yet their children must all be circumcised, even such as( in the opinion of our Opposites) were to have no Lot or part in the Land of Canaan, Gen. 17.12, 13. So the children of Proselytes, that joined themselves to the Church of the Jews, were taken into Covenant with their Parents.  
Thus it was from the Beginning, that Children were taken into Covenant with their Parents. And why should it seem strange to any, that they should be taken in now?  
( 1) I would know of any man, if Children were capable of being taken into the Covenant of works with Adam, what makes them uncapable of being taken into a Covenant of Grace with their Parents now? And if children are capable of deriving Original corruption from their Parents, together with those manifold miseries that attend it, why are they uncapable of Covenant-priviledges, to be conveyed from Parents, taken into a Covenant of Grace? May we think, God's Justice is more conspicuous in the Covenant of Works, than his Grace is in the Covenant of Grace.  
( 2) If the Covenant made with Abraham, and the Covenant made with the people of Israel, was the same for substance with the Gospel-Covenant, and the seed then was taken in with their Parents, what should exclude the seed of Believers now?  
( 3) Why should it seem strange, that God accepteth the Act of the Parent to enter his child into Covenant, for the Act of the child, so long as the child is at its Parents dispose, and the Parent cannot truly and hearty devote himself to God, and his service, without being willing to devote all that is his to Gods service? Why should it seem strange, that here God accepteth the will of the Parent for the will of the child, till it comes by its own will to across and revoke what the Parent had done for it?  
And here methinks, no Anabaptist, but if he be serious, instead of opposing our Doctrine of childrens Interest in the Covenant with Parents, so hotly and earnestly as they are wont, should so far incline to it, as to wish it true, and be willing to hear all that may be brought to prove it, and desire to see it cleared, both for their own comfort, and their childrens benefit. What a strange thing it were, if a godly man should not desire, and account it a great privilege, to have his children in Covenant-relation to God? and that one who hath truly devoted himself to God, should not desire by all means possible to engage his to God too?  
Now what is already said, maketh it at least probable, that children are taken into Covenant with their Parents still; they were taken in of Old, and the Covenants are the same for substance, and childrens capacity the same, that except God bear less respect to his People and their seed now, than heretofore, they have the same privilege of being in Covenant together with their Parents, as heretofore.  
Indeed what was noted before of Proselytes and their seed being taken within the Covenant, proves it was not any specialty, peculiarly belonging to Abrahams Natural seed. Yea, was it not a figure of, or a Praeludium unto the calling of the Gentiles. A fore-runner of that which is foretold, Isa. 49.22. I will lift mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the People, and they shall bring thy Sons in their Arms, and their Daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders.  
2. Whereas our Opposites cannot deny, but children were in Covenant together with their Parents under the former dispensation, they can never prove Children excluded from the Covenant now under the Gospel. And as Dr. Stillingfleet well noteth, If it had been Christs intention to exclude Infants, 
Account of the Grounds of the Protestant Religion, p. 108.  there had been far greater reason for an express prohibition, than of an express command, if his intention were to admit them; because this was suitable to the general Grounds of Gods dispensation among them before. And so Mr. Baxter: 
In one of his Epistles to his Book for Infant Baptism.  If Christ had revoked Infants, Churchmembership,( and Interest in the Covenant together with their Parents) whether is it possible, that no word in Scripture should once mention it? nor one Apostle either question or discover it? or that the Jews, 1. Who were in present possession of it, 2. And were so heinously offended at the Non-circumcising of their Infants, Acts 21.21. would not once open their mouths to object against the total unchurching of them, which were an hundred times more? that neither the believing Jews should once scruple it, nor the unbelieving charge it on Christ, nor the Council, Act. 15. reveal it, even when those that taught Circumcision, did take it for granted, that Infants were Church-members, or else they could not have said they must be circumcised. Is there a possibility of all this, if the Scripture be perfect?  
The Anabaptists use to demand of us express Scripture for the Right of Infants; but we have more reason to demand of them plain Scripture, excluding them from the Covenant, and denying their ancient privilege of Church-membership. And had Children been cut off from that their ancient privilege, it must needs have been one of the grand Questions in the Apostles dayes, and so would have been as clearly decided, as that Question about Circumcision, Acts 15. But observe this, when it is plain and undeniable, that Infants were taken into Covenant, and Church-members, if their Parents were in Covenant; they that would deny Infants this privilege now, ought to bring as plain proof of Gods rescinding and revoking this privilege of theirs, as we can bring of his granting it: which they have never yet done. Before any dare to affirm, God hath rescinded this ancient privilege, they ought seriously to consider, how they can prove it, that they be not found false witnesses of God, as the Apostle speaks in another case.  
3. We are able sufficiently to prove that the Gospel still supposeth Children to be in Covenant together with their Parents. What say you? will you be satisfied, if we can produce as clear Scripture-proof for Infants being still in Covenant, as Christ himself produced for the Resurrection? Matth. 22.32. Then I doubt not but you shall be satisfied.  
( 1.) That Text, Act. 2.39. if there were no more, should satisfy you, [ For the Promise is unto you and to your Children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.] These words are brought in by the Apostle, as a motive to persuade his hearers to repent of their great sin in crucifying Christ, to own him as the promised Messiah, and to submit to the Gospelway, showing that neither they nor theirs should be losers by it. That whereas they had imprecated Gods Curse on themselves and their children, Matth. 27.25. and were now in danger to be cast off, yet coming in upon the Gospel-call, they should have the Promise still continued to them and theirs. That is, as with respect to Christ, God had promised to be the God of Abraham, and of his seed, and that in Christ, who was to come of Abraham's seed, all the Families of the Earth should be blessed,( Acts 3.25.) this ancient and famous promise should yet hold good to them, as it was now also to be extended to the gentle Nations with them.  
Some would have [ The Promise to you and to your Children] to refer unto that, Gen. 17.7. where God promised to be a God unto Abraham, and to his seed. Others understand that Promise, Gen. 12.3.& 22. v. 18. mentioned Act. 3.25. In thy seed shall all the Kindreds, or Families of the Earth be blessed. But indeed both these come to one. It was in that seed( in whom the Nations, Kindreds and Families of the Earth were to be blessed) that is, in Christ, and with respect unto Christ, that God promised to be a God unto Abraham, and to his seed. So the Covenant with Abraham 9as the Apostle saith, Gal. 3.17.) was confirmed of God in Christ.  
Again, the blessing of the Nations, Kindreds, and Families of the Earth in Abrahams seed, that is, in Christ, was taking them into Covenant,( that God was their God, and the God of their seed) the same Covenant for substance with that made with Abraham. As the blessing of Abraham came upon the Gentiles through Jesus Christ, Gal. 3.14. That God is our God, and the God of our seed, as he before promised unto Abraham.  
So that this is the plain meaning of the Apostle, The Promise is to you and your Children, if you do not cut off yourselves by standing out against Christ, and not to you Jews only, but to the Gentiles, to all that are afar off, as many of them as the Lord shall call, to them, and their Children. And taking the words thus, you may see the harmony of the Scriptures, and how the Families of the Earth are blessed in Christ; how Believers under the Gospel are blessed with faithful Abraham; how the blessing promised to Abraham,[ I will be a God to thee and to thy seed,] is come upon the Gentiles; and how Abraham was made the Father of many Nations. He was the Father of many Nations, in that sense relating to the Covenant, wherein he was the Father of the Jewish Nation: That as all the Natural seed of Abraham, his seed by propagation, till they wilfully forsook and rejected the Covenant, were included in it, they and their Children; so the spiritual seed of Abraham, his seed by proportion, the called Gentiles, were privileged, as his natural seed, being taken into the Covenant, they and their Children.  
Exception 1. It is not said, The Promise is to you, and to your Infants, but to you, and to your Children, which might be of grown years.  
Answ. When God promised to Abraham, I will be a God to thee and to thy seed, this took in Infants, though they were not name: So, The Promise is to you, and to your Children, must comprise Infants. None will deny, but Infants are Children; though all Children be not Infants.  
Exception 2. Some by the Promise here, understand that, Joel 2.28. recited in this Chapter, Act. 2.17. And to strengthen this Interpretation, they urge the foregoing words, v. 38. Repent and be baptized— and ye shall receive the Holy Ghost. For the promise is to you, and to your children—  
Answ. 1. This Interpretation is quiter overthrown by the following words,[ For the Promise is to you, and to your Children, and to all that are afar off, even to as many as the Lord our God shall call.] Now that Promise in Joel 2. is not made to all that are called. Have all the Spirit of prophesy? Have all the gift of Tongues?  
2. Neither hath Baptism reference to the conferring of extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghost, though these followed the Baptism of some in the Primitive times, for a special reason: but it hath relation to the Covenant made with all that are called, as the Seal of it.  
Except. 3. Some turn the words thus, The promise is to you, and to your Children, that is, such of them as the Lord shall call.  
Answ. 1. Then these words [ and to your children] are plainly superfluous. Unless they grant Children to be called in their Parents call, there should be no more promised to their children here, than to all the men that were, or should be in the world.  
2. We cannot think, the Apostle would speak, fallaciously, with a mind to delude his Hearers. Now these his Hearers knew, that their Children ever till now, at least, were accounted Children of the Promises, and within the Covenant. And when the Apostle affirmeth the Promise to be made to them, and to their children, how should they understand him otherwise, than as asserting their ancient privilege in reference to their seed?  
3. Taking the words otherwise, instead of being a motive, they would rather have been a dissuasive; a Discouragement, instead of being an Encouragement to their submitting to the Gospeldispensation. It had been a better Argument to have kept them in the Synagogue, than to have called them to the Christian Church, 
Of Baptism, p. 49.  as Dr. Jer. tailor. What could have been more likely to prejudice the Jews against the Gospel, than to rank and put their Children into the state with the Children of Heathens and Idolaters.  
4. {αβγδ}, as many as the Lord our God shall call] cannot refer to Children, {αβγδ}. They are not of the same gender. This is ad homines, as they will not allow {αβγδ} them, to refer to the word {αβγδ}, Nations, Matth. 28.19. because they differ in gender. Though indeed we can produce clear instances in Scripture of the same construction. See Rev. 2.26, 27.& 19.15.& Act. 26.17.  
( 2) Childrens Interest in the Covenant and Church-membership, may be proved by a series of Texts, Rom. 11. v. 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24.  
Methinks these things are very plain,  
1. That the Apostle speaks there of a breaking off from, and of being graffed into the visible Church. For, 1. There is no breaking from the invisible Church. If a member of the invisible Church may be broken off, then a true Believer may fall away from Grace. 2. The breaking off here mentioned, was from that Church, of which the unbelieving Jews were natural branches, v. 24. Now they were natural branches of the Visible, not of the Invisible Church. 3. That Church into which the Community of the Gentile-professors were graffed( in the the room of the Jews that were broken off,) was the Visible Church; for many of them were not members of the Invisible Church. They that were most apt to boast against the natural branches, and were in danger of being cut off, as well as the natural branches, v. 18, 21. were no better than Formalists, and out-side Christians, who had onely a standing in the Visible Church.  
2. Not all, but some of the Jews onely were broken off, v. 17. And if but some of the Jews were broken off, then some of them remained branches of the Olive still.  
3. They that were broken off, were broken off, they and their seed, from the Church, and from the Covenant: They that were not broken off, continued, they and their seed, within the Church, within the Covenant. For,  
4. None were broken off, but because of Unbelief, v. 20. scil. their own, or their Parents. Therefore the Infants of the believing Jews were not broken off. They could not be broken off because of their Parents unbelief, when their Parents were Believers; nor for their own unbelief, when they were not capable of rejecting Christ and the Gospel, in their own persons. How could those Children which were within the Church, and Covenant, before their Parents embraced the Gospel, be cast out, and cut off before they came actually to reject Christ and the Gospel. If the Children of the believing Jews were not continued in the Olivetree with their Parents, to partake of the root and fatness thereof, then it will follow, that they were in the same state with those broken off. Now how strange is it, that they who were once in Covenant, and within the Church, received for their Fathers sakes, should be cast out again, without any fault of their own, or their Parents? would God revoke such a privilege granted his people for their seed, unprovoked?  
5. That Unbelief which broke off many of the Jews, was not barely the privation of true, saving, justifying Faith; but a positive, open, wilful rejection of Christ and the Gospel. Which is plain thus, viz. Because divers who were not broken off were unbelievers in that first sense.  
6. What State and privileges the unbelieving Jews were broken off from, unto that state, and to those privileges, the main body of that People were again to be restored, v. 23, 24, 25, 26. The Apostle teacheth, they were to be graffed again into their own Olive-tree. Now if their Children were not to be taken in with them, it would not be their own Olive, they were graffed in; but a Church of a quiter different constitution, from what it was before the breaking off.  
7. If the Children of the Jews that kept their place in the Church, and of them that were afterwards to be taken in, must be looked on, as in an opposite state to that of the off-broken branches; we must say the same of the children of the Gentile-professors. The believing Gentiles are graffed into that state from whence the unbelieving Jews were broken, ver. 17.24. And there is now no Partition-wall; but Jew and Greek, are all one in Christ Jesus, Gal. 3.28. The Jews have no privilege now above the Gentiles. And besides, this was not the sole privilege of the Jews before, but of any of the Gentiles as well, that became Proselytes, if they were Proselytes of the Covenant; their Children were taken into the Church, and into the Covenant.  
Object. 1. If the believing Gentiles were graffed into the same Visible Church with the Jews, then they were to be Circumcised, as the Jews.  
Answ. It follows not. 1. As one says, The House may be the same it was, though there be a new Door, or Porch to it. We must distinguish betwixt the Essentials, and the Accidentals of the Church.  
Abrahams Family was a Church before Circumcision, and Circumcision did not change the Species of it.  
2. If there was any strength in this Objection, it would follow, that the Jews could not be graffed into their own Olive-tree again, but they must be Circumcised. See here, who they are, that would bring in judaisme.  
Object. 2. The Gentiles are said to be graffed in a way contrary to Nature, into the Olive-tree, ver. 24. But your way would make them as the Natural branches.  
Answ. They were wild before their engraffing, not after; but being engrafted, then they come to have the privilege of the Natural branches. What the Apostle saith,[ If thou wert cut out of the Olive-tree, which is wild by Nature; and wert graffed contrary to Nature, into a good Olive-tree.] Is to be understood of those Gentiles, who were called out of Paganism, Heathenism, whose immediate Parents were without the Church, strangers to the Covenant. But these being graffed into the good Olive-tree, their Children are buds, or Sprouts of the same Olive; as well as the Children of the Jews, the Natural branches, were. And yet we aclowledge it a great Favour of God towards such Children, that they are descended of Parents, that are within Gods Covenant, and so comprehended in the Covenant with their Parents.  
3. Another Text plain, and full for my present purpose, is that, 1 Cor. 7.14. Else were your children unclean; but now they are holy. This is a third Scripture I produce for Childrens Interest in the Covenant with the Parents: In the mouth of two or three witnesses, the truth of what I last laid down, shall be established. These words are brought to remove a Scruple, which it seems troubled the minds of some of the believing Corinthians, scil. whereas some of them had unbelieving Yoke-follows, the doubt was, whether living with such were not a defiling of Conscience, a thing unlawful; whether the Infidel Husband should not be deserted; and the wife remaining a Pagan, or Infidel, should not be put away? Which the Apostle resolveth in the Negative, that they should not refuse Cohabitation, and Society with their unbelieving Yoke-fellows, ver. 12, 13. For the unbelieving Husband is sanctified by, in, or to the believing Wife: Else were your children unclean, but now they are holy, ver. 14. Here note, 1. That by the Wife, by, in, or to whom the unbelieving Husband is sanctified, we are to understand the believing Wife; and by the Husband, by whom, or in, or to whom, the unbelieving wise is sanctified; we are to understand the believing Husband. For, 1. It is such a Wife as is opposed to an unbelieving Husband. And otherwise it had been enough to say, Only the Husband is sanctified by, or in the wife, and the wife is sanctified by, or in the Husband. And the Term, or epithet [ Unbelieving] would be superfluous in both places. But it is too great boldness for any to say, the Apostle adds this word Superfluously. 2. The same parties are called, a Brother, a Sister, ver. 15. Again, 3. When the Apostle says, ver. 16. What knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy Husband? Or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife? It is only the believing wife, or Husband, that he would put in some hopes of gaining their unbelieving Yoke-fellows. 4. The Apostle would not say, that the unbelieving Husband is sanctified by, or to the believing wife, or by, or to the wife, though an unbeliever. He affirmeth the contrary, Tit. 1.15. To the unbelieving nothing is pure, or sanctified. If nothing be sanctified to them, then no Relation is sanctified.  
2. That when he speaks of their Children being holy, he speaks of Believers Children, as such. To call the Children of Pagans, and Infidels, holy, is a strange, uncouth speech; and such as the Scripture is not acquainted with. But that the Children of Gods People are an holy Seed, this the Scripture owneth, Ezr. 9.2.  
3. Therefore when he calleth their Children holy, he must necessary mean more than Legitimate.  
For, 1. The Children of Infidels, if begotten in lawful wedlock were Legitimate, as well as theirs. But what the Apostle says here, he saith only of a believers Children, not of the Children of Pagans, and Infidels. Here the Apostle supposeth, or granteth, that if one of the Parents had not been a believer, and so the other Parent sanctified( by virtue of the Covenant) in, or to him, then the Children indeed had been unclean, not holy.  
2. They that take [ holy] for Legitimate, must take the word [ sanctified] for made lawful; in the foregoing clauses. But they will never find the word [ sanctified] used only for that which is lawful. Besides, so the Apostle should argue weakly, that it is lawful for the believer to live with the unbelieving Yoke-fellow, because it is lawful. Again, this of the unbelieving Husband being sanctified by, or to the believing Wife; they that are not minded to wrangle, may see plainly is made an Effect, or consequent of her being a believer; but that which was not lawful before, cannot be made lawful by ones believing: Or if it was lawful before, then it is not ones believing that made it so.  
3. Taking[ holy] for Legitimate, the Apostle should go about to prove Ignotum per ignotius: To clear one thing doubted of, he should bring in another; which might possbly be more doubted of: Which is going about indeed. Might not one of these believers have less doubt, whether such an Infidel was his wife, than whether the Children were indeed his children? The Apostle argues here as from an acknowledged Principle, that they were well satisfied of; that their Children were not to be accounted unclean, but holy. Now would any man think the Apostle so weak, to go about to prove, that such a Couple were lawful man and wife, because their Children were Legitimate. Or that the Corinthians were so senseless, as to doubt whether they lived not in Fornication, while they lived with their unbelieving Yoke-fellows; and yet to have no doubt, but that the Issue they had by them was Legitimate.  
4. We shall never find the word [ holy] used for Legitimate. Then is not that likely to be a private Interpretation, that takes it so here? And is it to be imagined, that when the Apostle is writing to satisfy scrupulous Consciences, he would use a word in that sense, they were none of them likely to understand; as being never used, and taken in such a sense before, and that without any thing to explain it?  
5. Taking the word [ Holy] for Legitimate, it would follow, that the Apostle is besides the Question, and does not speak to the Corinthians scruple. Have not they a strong fancy, who can conceit such a thing, that divers of the Corinthians, because their Yoke-fellows remained Infidels, were afraid, if they Lived with them still, they should be guilty of the sin of Fornication, and defile their bodies? But we have no ground to think this troubled them, as if they feared, this were to be dishonest: No, Marriage is honourable among all, Heb. 13.4. And yet though Marrirge be lawful in itself, they might scruple notwithstanding, whether to live in society with such as were Idolaters, and open Enemies to God, and Jesus Christ; might not be Irreligious, and a defiling of their Consciences. Now this being their scruple, not the other, What satisfaction could it be, to tell them, that their Marriage was lawful on a civil account, so that their Children were Legitimate, not Bastards? Notwithstanding that, they might fear Spiritual defilement in it.  
Lay all these particulars together, and I hope, when the Apostle says of these believers Children, that they were holy, you will be satisfied; he must mean something more, than that they were not Bastards.  
4. And therefore how can we understand it, but that they are holy in relation to God, holy as separated to God. Holy, by virtue of his Covenant with the believer, I will be thy God, and the God of thy Seed. So if but one of the Parents be within the Covenant, it takes in the Seed with him: Till the opposite party can find out some other sense, and make it out to be the sense, this must stand.  
All must grant, that the general use of the word [ holy] is for a thing or person separated to God. Which Mr. Baxter, 
Of Infant Bapt. p. 81.  clearly and fully distinguisheth thus: 1. A Thing or Person may be Holy, or separated to God, either in state and standing Relation, or only for some particular Act, or Use. Infants, while Infants, are not capable of any such work for God: Therefore it is an Holiness of state, which is ascribed to them.  
2. Those that are holy thus in state, are either Holy by mere Separation and Relation; or else they are also qualified with Endowments suitable to the state.  
3. There is a Sanctifying, or Separating to God, either Directly and Immediately: So every believer, and so their Children are sanctified. and there is a Separating, or Sanctifying to God remotely and secondarily. Thus the unbelieving Husband, or Wife, is sanctified to the Believer; both as being separated to one who is separated to God, and as an Husband, or Wife, they make up that Conjugal state which is more directly for God: And if they beget an holy seed, it is one of the Uses, that they were sanctified to.  
4. Sometimes Persons, or Things, are sanctified Actively,— and sometimes Passively.—  
And as he notes, All these Distinctions are but from several ends and degrees of separation. The common Nature of Holiness, is one and the same in all; that is, a separation to God.  
Now the word [ Holy} constantly denoting a Thing, or Person separated to God, either in State, or to some particular Act, or Use; and Children being called holy, who are not capable, while Infants, of the latter way of separation to God, but were known to have been separated to God the former way, to stand in the same Covenant-relation with their Parents, and called an holy Seed; as when the People of the Jews are oft called an holy People,( Deut. 14.2. and 26.19. Dan. 8.24.) We are to understand not only the Adult, but the Children; the Infants among them, were a part of that holy People: These things considered, we have no ground to understand what the Apostle says here of a believers Children being holy, otherwise, than that they are in Covenant-relation to God, as the Seed of his People formerly were; holy in state, separated to God. I say, we have no ground to understand the Apostle here otherwise, nor were the Corinthians likely to understand him otherwise, unless he had otherwise explained himself; or some evident Reason could be brought, that the word [ holy} cannot be so taken here.  
Surely that sense of the word which fully agrees with the Use of the word in other Scriptures, and best suits with the Scope of this place; that ought to be acknowledged the sense here. But to take the word holy, as we do, fully agreeth with the use of the word in other Scriptures( as they, the Opposite party cannot but aclowledge) and best suits with the Scope of this place.  
Now that it best suits with the scope of this place, appears thus; that here the Apostle would satisfy, and remove a scruple of some of the Corinthians, whether to live with their Yoke-fellows, who remained Infidels, were not Irreligious; and that that would defile their Consciences? Now for the Apostle to tell them, that their Children were Legitimate( which is the sense the Opposite party must stick to, and the best sense they have, to bring in opposition to that we lay down) this would not come up to the Corinthians scruple, as I have shewed; but ours does, proving that it was not Irreligious for believers to continue with their Unbelieving Yoke-fellows, since they were sanctified to, or by them, and their Children holy, or separated to God.  
Object. 1. Would not this prove it lawful for a believer, supposing him guilty of Fornication, to Live with the Fornicatrix, if the Child so begotten be holy, and within the Covenant?  
Answ. This Objection is so commonly taken off by almost every one of ours that urge this Text, that I might pass it by, without mentioning. Mr. Baxter, hath spoken to it fully, 
Of Infant Bapt.  and cleared this Text so, that( as Learned Rutherford, says,) The Dispute now is at an end. Indeed, I should be of his mind, if men were not Prejudiced, Conceited, or minded to Cavil. Though the Child of a Believer, as it is his Child, may be taken into Covenant( though it was gotten in Fornication;) Yet is not that a larger Measure of Charity, than the Word allows of, to suppose that one may live in Fornication, and be a Believer, or be so Reputed? We think such an one ought to be cast out of the Church; and consequently, his Children, as such, should have no right to any church-privileges, nor be reputed holy. That if such Children be admitted, it should be upon the account of some other, who hath not Forfeited his Covenant-right, and hath the Child at his dispose.  
But more directly, to the Objection: It is no better Reasoning, than the Devil used, to persuade our Saviour to cast himself down from the pinnacle of the Temple; saying, [ It is written, He shall give his Angels charge concerning thee.] Leaving out the condition, [ To keep thee in all thy ways,] see Mat. 4.6. with Psal. 91.11. The Apostle teacheth this indeed, that they that were lawful Man and Wife, might Live together as Man and Wife, though the one was a Believer, and the other an Infidel, without crossing the Rules of Religion; which he cleareth thus, Gods Law or Covenant, which availed to the putting of the Issue of such Parents into an Holy, or Church-state, as Children separated to God; would as well avail to the sanctifying of the unbelieving Yoke-fellow, to the believers use in a Conjugal-state. And that if they held it a profane thing, to Live still with such as were Infidels, they had as much reason to account the Children they had by such, unclean; and in no better state, than other Children; where both the Parents were Pagans and Idolaters. Now what the Apostle says here, to prove that a believer may without Impiety, Live still with his Yoke-fellow, upon this account; that such a Yoke-fellow is sanctified to his lawful use in Marriage, cannot be stretched to the case of Fornicators, who are not sanctified one to the others use; nor lawful Man and Wife, as the other are presupposed to be. What is not lawful, cannot be sanctified. A state of Incest, or Fornication, cannot be sanctified, because sinful. 
Of Infant Bapt. p. 98.  And as Mr. Baxter says," God sanctifieth not sin in, or to any( though he may bring good out of it.)  
Object. 2. What is said of the Children here, the like is said of the unbelieving Parent. As the Children are said to be holy, so the unbelieving Parents are said to be sanctified?  
Answ. {αβγδ}, and {αβγδ} are not alike. Many things are sanctified in, or to a believer, that are not therefore holy. Afflictions are sanctified, Food is sanctified, 1 Tim. 4.4, 5. yet not holy. When the Apostle speaks of the unbelieving Husband being sanctified, he is careful to limit it, and shows in what respect, to whose use he is sanctified; that is, to the believer: But there is no such Restriction, or Limitation, when he speaks of the Children being holy; If they are holy, they are holy to God: If not Inherently, yet at least Foederally, and Relatively. So the Children of a Proselyte before, stood in Covenant-relation to God, as an holy seed, though it might so happen, that the other Parent would not come in, as a Proselyte.  
2. If sanctified, and holy here are all one, and mean only a civil Holiness,( as some would have it) or lawful to use, it was lawful to the unbeliever to use his Child, as his Child, as well as to the believer; and yet to the unbelieving nothing is sanctified.  
3. Or if Children are called holy; In respect of an holy, sanctified use to be made of them, it would follow, that the Apostle had no Special reason to bring in their Children here, but that they come in somewhat oddly; when it had been as much to his purpose to have name any thing else. And so he might as well have said, your Acquaintance, Kindred, Neighbours, are holy; that is, you may make an holy use of them, your Callings are holy, And what not?  
4. If by sanctified, and holy, in this place the Apostle only intends a Matrimonial, and civil Holiness; opposed to Fornication, Uncleanness, and Bastardy( as some tell us;) then they must hold, that the Apostle alloweth us to say, That all lawfully Married persons, keeping to their own Husbands, or Wives, are sanctified; and that he allows us to call all that are not Bastards, or Illegitimate, Holy, or Saints.  
Here now I cast mine eye upon what one of note, and much cried up among the opposite party, hath lately written. 
H. D. p. 191.  There is no such holiness in the New Testament, as a federal holiness belonging to children.  
( 1) Because it contradicts the Gospel-dispensation, as before.  
Answ. By federal holiness of Children, we mean their standing together with Parents in Covenant-relation to God. That this is agreeable to the Gospel-dispensation, I have proved before. It is Abrahams Covenant, that the believing Gentiles are taken into. In which Covenant God promiseth to be a God to his people, and to their seed, Act. 2.39. And if the Root be holy, so are the Branches.  
( 2) Because such Apprehensions entail Grace to Nature, Regeneration to Generation, in contradiction to that of our Saviour, Joh. 3. That which is born of the flesh is flesh. And that we are all children of wrath by nature, Eph. 2.  
Answ. 1. How many Anabaptists, that plainly contradict these Scriptures, denying that Infants have any sin, who thence conclude, that they have no need of baptism?  
2. The Children of Believers under the Old Testament were flesh, conceived in sin, and brought forth in iniquity, children of wrath by Nature, yet were they in the Covenant.  
3. Therefore, to be Children of wrath by Nature, considered as the corrupt Off-spring of fallen Adam, and to be children of the Covenant by privilege, and Grace, as they descend from believing Parents, to whom God hath promised, I will be your God, and the God of your seed; these two are not contradictory to one another.  
( 3) Because it contradicts all the Experience, both of former and later times, wherein godly men have had wicked children, &c.  
Answ. 1. Observe again, this Reason would overthrow the Covenant-holiness of the children of the Jews under the former dispensation; wherein he contradicts himself, and the whole current of the Old Testament.  
2. Here he grossly mistakes, and confounds federal, relative holiness, with real, personal, inherent holiness. Many of those who are called the holy seed, Ezr. 9.2. in regard of Gods Covenant made with them, and their relations to God upon that account, were yet in another respect unholy.  
( 4) Because it necessitates an owning the Doctrine of Falling from Grace. 
Ib. p 192.   
Answ. 1. How many Anabaptists that are not afraid to own that Doctrine? I have sometimes lived amongst many of that way, where were more Arminian-Anabaptists, than Antinomian-Anabaptists; and scarce one that I could hear of among them, a mere Anabaptist, that held that error alone.  
2. As for the Children of Believers that growing up, do not stand to the Covenant, we cannot say they fell from Grace, which they never had. Though many do suppose the Infants of Believers that die in Infancy, renewed, and sanctified, to fit them for glory; yet as for those that live till they come to be of capacity, there is more required of them in the Covenant, as the Parents are bound by their Covenant to train them up for God, so the Children are bound to receive Instruction, and to comply with other Gods Means, in order to a sanctifying, saving work. As a learned Writer noteth, Infants are in Covenant with the holy Ghost conditionally as their Parents are, 
Christ. Directory. p. 821. sect. 9. — The holy Ghost is promised in Baptism to give the Child Grace in his Parents and his own faithful use of the appointed means.  
3. The unbelieving Jews before their breaking off, were foederally holy. And if their breaking off will not necessitate an owning the Doctrine of Falling away from Grace, neither doth what we hold infer it.  
The same Author goes on to prove that The Text intends a Civil or Matrimonial Holiness( as he calls it) in opposition to Fornication, 
P. 192.  Uncleanness, Bastardy.  
This he saith, is proved, 1. From the scope of the place. Implying, that the Question propounded by the believing Corinthians, which the Apostle here resolves, was, Whether they could continue Marriage-society with their unbelieving Yoke-fellows, without being guilty of Fornication? Yet as he lays it down, no such thing appears, but it is well, he had  told us his meaning before. Now he would have the Apostle here to argue ab Absurdo. 
P. 193.  Inasmuch as they had no question of their childrens Legitimacy, neither had they any cause to scruple the other, that is, that they were lawfully married.  
Answ. This would make these Corinthians as absurd men as were ever heard of, to doubt whether their Marriage was lawful, in opposition to Fornication, and yet to have no doubt, but their Children were legitimate. For it is impossible to know the children are legitimate, without knowing first, that the Parents were lawful Man and Wife. And they that doubt whether they are lawful Man and Wife, cannot but doubt, whether their children are legitimate. And they that have no doubt of the Legitimacy of their Children, take it for granted, or necessary suppose, they are lawful Man and Wife.  
He goes on, The Believer had least ground to doubt hereof, because to him all lawful things are clean— which is all the Holiness I conceive can be meant in the Text, agreeable to the Holiness, 1 Thess. 4.3, 4.& Mal. 2.15. The Bastard being among the unclean, Deut. 32.2.  
Answ. Then in his Opinion, to the Believer all lawful things are only lawful. When we red they are pure, and sanctified to the Believer, is the meaning only this, they are lawful? Are they not lawful to others too? When the Apostle says, To the unbelieving nothing is pure, can his meaning be, that nothing is lawful? Then we must persuade them never to mary, nor eat, nor drink, nor work, nor sleep. For it is not lawful for them to do any of these.  
2. That Text, 1 Thess. 4.3, 4. This is the will of God, even your sanctification,] is not to be restrained to a Civil, or Matrimonial Holiness, in that Authors sense, but intends all holy Conversation, And Purity of Life, to which Fornication, and Uncleanness is greatly opposite. But no sound Expositor will say, that the Heathen, who lived chastened, came up to that, which the Apostle here exhorteth unto. Certainly, there is a great difference betwixt the Chastity of a moralised Heathen, and Christian purity, which is required here.  
3. To that Text, Mal. 2.15. A godly seed, or seed of God. It is not the same with holy seed. Further, I see not, why it should mean no more than legitimate. Did he only seek a legitimate seed? Rather,( as Grotius) Hoc unicè agebat, ut liberos haberet qui Deum colerent: vos autem eas praefertis matres quae filios ad idola deducant; He sought to have Children, who might be true Worshippers of God; whereas the persons there reproved affencted strangers, and such women as drew their children to Idolatry.  
4. To Deut. 23.2. If Bastards were held unclean, as being so legally, and typically, yet there is no reason to think, that the Apostle would call them unclean, when that Law was abrogated, which made them so.  
His second Argument is just the same with the second Objection answered a little before. 
P. 194.   
His third Argument that Children are not to be taken for Infants only, 
P. 195.  is of as little force. As Dr. Lightfoot notes, when the Apostle saith thus of the Children of a believer, But now they are holy, he speaketh in the common phrase of his own Nation. As the seed of Proselytes were said to be born in Holiness, that is, within the Religion, not in Heathenism. Yet it was possible that some of their Children, who were grown up, might not accept of Gods Covenant, and so not be proselyted with their Parents: Now he may as well say, that I will be a God to thee and to thy seed, did not hold good to Proselytes, because some of their seed might still remain Heathens.  
His fourth Argument is a strange one, it hath many feet, and halts on them all. This cannot be a New-Covenant Holiness, 
P. 195.  that must qualify and entitle to baptism;( 1) Because that cannot be known; for if the Parent professing Faith be an Hypocrite, and not in Covenant himself, then may you baptize a wrong Subject as well as a right one.  
Answ. 1. When he views over this again, who knows, but he will be of the mind, that none are to be Baptized? because that Holiness, which Entitleth to Baptism, cannot be known.  
2. An Hypocrite may be in Covenant Externally, as I have shewed before.  
3. This maketh full as much against their Baptizing of grown persons, unless they have such a Spirit of Discerning as to Discover, and Reject any Hypocrite, that offers himself.  
( 2.) Such an absurdity would follow, that no Unbelievers Child is in Covenant or Elect; which is notoriously false.  
Answ. 1. It is a gross mistake to hold, that none are in the baptismal Covenant, but the Elect. It seems they baptize none but the Elect. That if you would make your Election sure, you must go over to them to be baptized.  
2. He wandereth pitifully, when he Instanceth ●n Abijah, Ahaz, and Amon( who were Kings of Judah) as persons out of Covenant. Doubtless, they were not out of Covenant, not as the Uncircumcised; though it was their great sin, that they ●orsook the Lord God of their Fathers, did not keep Covenant, see 1 Kings 15.4. 2 Chron. 28.5.  
3. The Conditional-Covenant, which was Sealed heretofore in Circumcision, and is Sealed since in baptism, running to Gods People and their Seed; such as are neither visibly believers, nor the Seed of such, cannot be adjudged by us to be within the Covenant. Though some of Gods Elect may be among the Heathen, and Idolaters, yet they are not within the Covenant, merely because they are within the decree of Election. They are not in Covenant, till renouncing their Paganism, they come to know, and worship the true God.  
( 3.) From the concurrent Testimony, and Confession of many Learned Commentators, and Parties themselves.  
Answ. We must grant a concurrence here among Popish Expositors, taking holy for legitimate, and we know it is to serve a turn. For taking the word holy here to import their Covenant-relation unto God, as they are the Children of Believers; it does not favour their tenant of the absolute Necessity of Baptism to salvation: and further gives a sad shake to their Limbus Infantum. But he can never show a concurrence of Protestant Writers in his sense. It is true, he nameth two or three; and no doubt it were easy to add many more, if he deal but with them as he doth with Beza, 
P. 201.  whom he feigneth to say, what he plainly confuteth, as any one may see, that readeth his Notes upon the place.  
Further I desire you to weigh this Argument, to prove Children in Covenant together with their Parents: Either the children of Believers are taken into Covenant together with their Parents still, or it is worse with the faithful, in respect of their seed, now since the coming of Christ, than it was before. But it is no worse now with the faithful in respect of their seed, than it was before. For that would make the Church a great loser by Christs coming, whereas she is a gainer. Then Christi adventu factum fuerit ut obscurior& minus testata sit nobis Dei gratia quàm antè Judaeis erat,( as Calv.) Num post Christum, factam esse deteriorem parvulorum sortem existimemus? Whitaker. It is manifest, that those Jews, who embraced the Faith of Christ, if they onely had the Promise, that God would be their God, so that their children were left out, that God promised no longer to be the God of their Seed, then they could not but see themselves in a worse Condition, in respect of their children, than they were before. And how unreasonable is it to think, that when the Scripture makes cutting off from the Covenant so sad a Judgement, and the fruit of Unbelief, Rom. 11. that the children of the believing Jews, which were in Covenant once, should be cut off upon their Parents believing ( i.e.) cut off for no fault? And would not this be dishonourable unto Christ, whose coming certainly was not to lessen, but enlarge his peoples privileges? and according to this Doctrine, it should have been a greater privilege to be born under the Law, than to be born under the Gospel. And how derogatory to the Grace of God, which he would have to shine forth more gloriously in the Gospel-dispensation?  
Whereas one says, This is no more to be esteemed the loss of a privilege, than our not enjoying literally a Holy Land, City, Temple, a succession of an High-priest, and a Priesthood by Generation, or Lineal descent.] We can tell them, we have greater mercies and privileges in the room of these. But it is a wonderful strange thing, that any Christian Parent should account it no privilege, for God to be the God of his seed. As heretofore he promised his people, to be the God of their seed. If the children of Gods people now are out of Covenant, I wonder what privilege they can have, in lieu of that, which is denied to them.  
And whereas some tell us, The state of the Christian Church is more spiritual, than to admit of Infants; they may as well exclude all Infants out of Heaven. Doubtless, the state of the Church Triumphant is as spiritual, as the state of the Church Militant on Earth. If Infants may be Members of the Church Triumphant, what reason can be given, but Infants may be also members of the Church Militant on Earth? Indeed, if they are not of the Church, if they be not in Covenant, then are they in the same Estate with the Heathen, and the Jews that are broken off; that for the present we should be without hope concerning them.  
Again, methinks, there is something of weight in this, to prove that our Children are in Covenant with God, as well as the children of the Jews were heretofore; because it is as much our Duty to train them up for God, as ever it was the Duty of the Jews. What God required of the Jews, Deut. 6.7. Thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, &c. The like is required of us Christians, Eph. 6.4. we must bring up our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Now how strange were it, if God should require us to train up our children for him, and yet not own them for his? Then we should not have so much Encouragement to our Duty here, as the people of the Jews had before. Then the Jews had more help, more to hearten them to their Duty, than we. Can this be so, and yet we be under a better, a more gracious dispensation of the Covenant, than they? Surely, in this respect, we should come short of them. It will not enter into my thoughts, that where the Duty is the same to us, and to the Jews of old, we should not have equal privilege with them at least, and equal Encouragement to what they had.  
Lastly, I would ask those that would race our childrens Names out of the Covenant, What is become of all those gracious Promises of Old made to the seed of Gods people? That Promise, I will circumcise thy heart, and the heart of thy seed. May not Believers pled this Promise still, as well as heretofore the People of God might have done? And yet how can they do it, if their seed now are left out of Covenant? Does God make that Promise to any out of Covenant? So the Lord promiseth, Isa. 44.3. I will pour out my Spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine off-spring. And Isa. 59.21. As for me, this is my Covenant with them, saith the Lord, My Spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seeds seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever. So we red, Psal. 37.26. The seed of the Righteous is blessed. And Isa. 61.9. They are the seed which the Lord hath blessed. And Isa. 65.23. They are the seed of the Blessed of the Lord, and their Off-spring with them. What shall we say? That the people of God might have pleaded these Promises heretofore; but they do not concern us under the Gospel? Then Believers now have no ground to pled them with God, or to hang their Off-spring and issue upon him, as his people had heretofore. And so there was more grace extended to the Jews under the former Dispensation of the Covenant. If such Promises do as well concern us Christians, as they did the Jews; if we may pled these Promises with God on the behalf of our children, certainly they are Covenant-Promises. And if these Promises belong to our seed, the Covenant must as well belong to them. Remember that, God promiseth such things to none that are out of Covenant. If it be objected, These things are not made good to all the seed of the Jews: Yet I suppose it will not be denied, but these were some of those Promises which the Apostle reckoneth among the great privileges of the Jews, Rom. 9.4. And the Question is, Whether ever God faileth of performing these Promises, but where there was some gross failure on the Parents part, or on the Childes, or on both, their not doing their part towards the accomplishment of them.  
I hope enough hath been said to evince it, that where the Parents are in Covenant, their children are in Covenant too.  
Now by way of Corollary and Inference, Note the Warrantableness of christian. The Infants of Christians being in Covenant together with their Parents, and Baptism being the initiating Sign and Seal of the Covenant; they that are in Covenant, must needs have right to the initiating Seal of the Covenant. They that are known to be in Covenant, may be declared to be so by Baptism,( the Sign of entrance into Covenant,) that being an end of Baptism, to distinguish those that are entred into Covenant with God, from those who are not in Covenant. Certainly, to be in Covenant with God, is a greater matter than to have the outward Sign: And there can be no reason to deny the outward sign of entrance into the Covenant, to those that we can prove entered into the Covenant, as children are together with their Parents.  
And there was no other ground imaginable( I think) upon which such strangers as dwelled not under the Jews, as their Servants, nor among them, as Sojourners, but in another country, such as the Eunuch, Act. 8.27. were circumcised, and so admitted, and joined to the Church of the Jews. There was no express command for the circunctsing of such Proselytes as were neither Servants nor Sojourners among them, yet were they circumcised upon that general ground of their entering into Covenant with the God of Israel, taking him for their God; as if they had not been circumcised, they had been debarred from joining in Temple-worship.( See Act. 21.28.) The Covenant, [ I will be a God to thee, and to thy seed,] was the ground of the Command, Thou shalt keep my covenant, therefore thou and thy seed, particularly, every malechild among you shall be circumcised, in token of the Covenant. See Gen. 17.7, 9, 10.  
But against what I have laid down, that the Infants of Christians being in Covenant, they must needs have right to the initiatory Seal of the Covant, it is objected:  
Objection 1. That all the faithful, from Adam to Abraham received no such Seal. 
H.D. p. 205.   
Answ. Now what a pitiful Evasion is this? Because persons in Covenant did not receive any initiatory Seal( that we know of) in that state of the Church, when there was no such seal( that we know of) appointed by God; therefore persons within the Covenant, have no right to the initiatory Seal of the Covenant, when such a Seal is instituted.  
Objection 2. Neither did any Believers out of Abrahams Family, 
H.D. p. 206.  as Lot, Melchisedek, receive any such Seal, that we red of.  
Answ. 1. A particular Exception or two will not overthrow a General Rule. If Lot, and Melchizedek were not circumcised, there might be something extraordinary in their case: As Gods not intending to settle and continue a Church in their Families, as he did in Abrahams Family, therefore he might give and appoint Circumcision to Abraham, and not to them. 2. It is false, that none out of Abrahams Family were to be circumcised. The Proselytes of the Covenant could not be so, without Circumcision. And such an one was the Eunuch, Act. 8. though not of Abrahams Family.  
Object. 3. Some to whom the Covenant did not belong, received that, called the initiating Seal of Circumcision. As Ishmael, &c.  
Answ. Ishmael was externally, visibly in Covenant, at that time when he was circumcised, though he was afterwards by Gods Sentence cast out of the Church, and dis-covenanted. The strangers in Abraham's house, or bought with Money in Israel, that were Circumcised, were no doubt, some of them Internally, and all of them Externally in Covenant, and of the Visible Church.  
As for that Circumcision which some Gentile-Nations took up from the Jews, 
De repub. Heb. l. 3. c. 5.  which Cunaeus, and others, take notice of; it was not the Ordinance, and Sacrament of Circumcision used among them, but an Apish imitation.  
Object. 4. But some will go further and Object, That if all within the Covenant have thereupon a Right to the Seal of Admission, then it will follow, that the whole body of the Jews should have been Baptized, had a right to Babtism, being within the Covenant.  
Answ. I have  told you before, that though the Covenant of Grace be one and the same for substance in all Ages; yet there have been various dispensations of it. And as the Dispensations have differed, God has appointed different seals of Admission. And as God hath revealed himself more plainly and fully in the Letter, than he had done in the former Dispensation; so proportionably more hath been required to mens being taken into Covenant in this Dispensation. From Adam to Abraham, the Promise of Christ was more Dark and Indeterminate. To Abraham he was promised to come out of his Loins, and that in his Seed all Nations should be blessed. And under his Dispensation, God required not only the belief of that general promise given to Adam, that the Seed of the woman should break the Serpents head; but also that the promised Messiah was to be of Abraham Seed. After this gracious Revelation to Abraham, this new Article of Faith was to be received, owned, and professed in the Church, into which Circumcision was a sign and Seal of Entrance, and admission. And when afterwards God delivered his Law by Moses to the people of the Jews, the Seed of Abraham, then they that would join themselves to the Church, must not only profess to believe the promised Messiah, but that he was willing to be Governed by those Laws. And a Proselyte of the Gate, as he was called, that had liberty to Dwell, or sojourned among the Jews, only observing the seven Precepts given to the Sons of Noah,( as they were called) was not owned as a Member of the Jewish Church, but distinguished from the Proselyte of the Covenant, that was Circumcised, and received the Law of Moses. Again, when Christ was come in the Flesh, then was the clearest Dispensation of the Covenant of Grace. And then this became a new article of Faith to believe; that this was he. And when he appointed Baptism a Sign and Seal of Admission into the Covenant, and Church under the Gospel, the Faith of a Jew, to believe a messiah to come; was not enough, where the Faith of a Christian was necessary required, scil. To believe that this was he indeed, who was to come, and no other to be looked for. Now the Jews notwithstanding they were in Covenant before, yet since this new Dispensation, if they will stick to the former Dispensation, and not admit of it in that further Declaration, God is pleased to make, they can have no right to the Initiating Seal: But plainly cast themselves out of Covenant. I hope this is plain, and satisfactory.  
But to strengthen what we laid down before, I shall prove by Scripture, that Children, Infants, being in Covenant together with their Parents, they have a right to Baptism, the Initiating Seal of the Covenant.  
And, 1. So much is implied in the Commission, Mat. 28.19. Go ye therefore, and Teach( or, as the word is {αβγδ}, Disciple) all Nations, Baptizing them. {αβγδ} answereth to {αβγδ}, as the Learned Note, and both sides commonly agree. Now suppose the Commission had run thus[ Go, Disciple the Nation of the Jews, Baptizing them.] How could the Apostles once have thought, but they must have Baptized their Children with their Parents; as Children were a part of the Nation, and were constantly taken into the Church, and Covenant with their Parents before? Unless Children had been plainly Excepted in the Commission here, as they are not, the Apostles must needs take their Commission to reach unto Children with their Parents still, that all the Children of Parents Discipled, were to be baptized, as well as their Parents. Or suppose Circumcision had been continued, as the Initiating Seal, or Sacrament of Admission under the Gospel, that the Commission had run thus: Go, Proselyte, or Disciple all Nations, circunctsing them: Or suppose the like Commission had been granted to the Prophets of old. Go, Proselyte all Nations, circunctsing them; and Teaching them to observe the Law of Moses, and all the Statutes, and Ordinances, which he commanded you: Must not Children have been taken in here together with the Parents, except the contrary had been declared by the same Authority?  
And this is undeniable, that Children are a considerable part of any Nation: and if Children are not capable of being Difcipled, and Baptized, then a Nation properly is not capable of being Discipled, and Baptized? And so Christ set his Apostles here upon a Task impossible to be performed.  
And methinks, it is very considerable, that [ all Nations] here: 
examine. p. 130.  As Mr. tombs himself does not gain-say. Stand in Opposition to [ one Nation] under the former Dispensation, the Church, and Covenant was confined to that one Nation of the Jews: But as God had promised of Old, that all Nations should be blessed in Abrahams seed; so in pursuance of that promise, Christ Commissioned his Apostles, and Ministers that were to succeed them, To go, and Disciple all Nations. All the Kingdoms of the world now under the Gospel-dispensation, were sooner or later to become the Kingdoms of the Lord, and of his Christ. And if Children are part of those, that were to be blessed in Christ, there can be no reason, when Christ says, [ Go, Disciple all Nation:, Baptizing them.] to exclude them from being comprehended here.  
And further, That the Apostles had reason to take in Children, to Baptize Infants with their Parents,( unless Christ had expressly excepted) appears from hence also, that the Baptizing of Infants was a thing well known, and commonly practised in the Jewish Church before, when their Parents were Proselyted. A Proselyte was made with three things, 
Drus. d. tribus Sect. l. 2. p. 89, 90. ( as Learned Drusius, and others observe,) viz. With Circumcision( a fign of the Covenant unto which he was received;) with Baptism( which was required for cleansing all Gentiles, being held unclean;) and with offering Sacrifice( for Expiation of sin, to make atonement for him.) And this is out of Dispute, that Children were Proselyted with their Parents. Yea, Magmony goes further, saying, that When an Israelite takes a little Heathen child, and Baptized him for a Proselyte, behold he is a Proselyte. This Right of Baptizing Proselytes, it seems, the Jews retain to this day. 
Hist. of the present Jews. part 5. c. 2. p. 223.  Though Drusius questioneth it, yet lo Mondena,( a Rabble) expressly affirmeth it.  
And as yet, I see not any reason to be of Mr. George Galaspy's mind, who would have this of Baptizing Proselytes, a corrupt Invention, or Tradition of the later Jews. Methinks, it might very well be supposed, that the Heathen, who wanted the Rule to teach them to put a difference betwixt the Clean, and Unclean,( as Lev. 11.) were Legally unclean; in which case Washing was prescribed by the Law. And without Cleansing, they were not to come to the Temple, or to join in Gods Worship there. Before God gave the Law at Mount Sinai, The Lord said to Moses, Go unto the People, and sanctify them to Day, and to Morrow, and let them wash their clothes, Exod 19.10. From this precept( says Ainsworth) the Hebrew Doctors gather their Doctrine and practise of baptizing all whom they admit to their Church and Covenant. But if they had reason to suppose the Heathen Legally unclean, as considering how many ways that might come about, and how they had Lived before while Heathen, without any care to keep themselves clean that way; it was an hundred to one, that any Proselyte that came and offered himself, had some uncleanness on him: and considering that the unclean were unclean for ever( and in many cases also defiled other things and persons) till they were cleansed; if there was one Law for them of the Congregation of Israel, and for any stranger, that should join himself to them,( as Numb. 15.15.) there would seem to have been sufficient Warrant for this practise of their Washing, or Baptizing Proselytes. Not like the practise of the Pharisees, Mark 7.3. &c. who added unto Gods Command for washing in case of Uncleanness, and placed Religion in their oft Washing, though they had no Legal uncleanness on them. But what I have offered here concerning the warrantableness of baptizing Proselytes at their Admission, as supposing them to have been some way Legally unclean, I submit to the censure of better Judgments.  
Indeed, I just now find in Doctor Hammond[ of the baptizing of Infants, pag. 473. this passage: And that this custom of washing new born Children, and not any other sort of Purification, was it; that this Baptism of Native Jews and Proselytes reserred to, may appear by that which in the Gemara, is said of the baptized Proselyte, that he was made[ as an Infant new born.] Which if it please our Opposites better, I shall not be displeased with it.  
But that the thing was in use before, Ainsworth on Gen. 17.12. 
See the like in Godwin.  doth not at all question, who says: Hereupon, Baptism was nothing strange unto the Jews, when John the Baptist began his ministry, Mat. 2.5, 6. They made question of his person( or his Authority) that did it, 
Moses and Aaron. l. 1. c. 3. towards the end.  but not of the thing itself, John 1.25.  
Observe now, as the outward Elements in that other Sacrament of the Lords Supper, were taken from the Jewish Passeover.( Bread and Wine being constant appendents to it, and one Cup used at the Pascal Supper, called, The Cup of blessing; which Expression the Apostle useth, 1 Cor. 10.16.) So concerning the Initiatory Sacrament of Baptism, what was a Jewish Rite before, Christ setteth his Royal stamp upon, and advanceth to a Gospel-Ordinance: That by his Institution, it becomes the Sacrament of admission into the Gospel-covenant,& into the Christian Church.  
And hence there was no such need for the express mentioning of Infants, supposing Christ would have them baptized, as for the express excepting of Infants, supposing Christ would not have them baptized; because as Doctor Lightfoot hath well noted: 
Harm. of New Test. sect. 9. p. 10.  The baptizing of Infants had been a thing ordinarily practised in the Church of the Jews before. It was enough to mention, that Christ established baptism, as an Ordinance under the Gospel; and then, who should be baptized, was well enough known by the use of it before. He further addeth, our Saviour would have given some special Prohibition, if he intended that they should have been excluded.  
Others I know there are, that would have Baptism refer to that washing of New-born Infants intimated, Ezek. 16.4. Or to that baptizing of the Israelites under the Cloud, and in the Sea, spoken of 1 Cor. 10.1, 2. Yet in neither of these respects are Infants to be excluded from Baptism, unless Christ had excepted them. Questionless there were Infants among the Israelites, baptized in the Cloud, and in the Sea.  
2. Another Text plainly proving what I last laid down, as Acts 2.38, 39. Be baptized every one of you. For the promise is to you, and to your Children. I made use of this Text before, to prove that Children are within the Covenant still. And now I make use of it, to prove that being within the Covenant, they have a right to Baptism, the Initiating Seal of the Covenant. Those to whom the Promise here spoken of belongeth, to them Baptism belongeth: But the Promise belongeth to Children, therefore Baptism belongeth to Children. What the Apostle saith here, is as much as if he had said, Be baptized you, and your Children: For the Promise is to you, and to your Children. If there be any force in this reason for the baptizing of the Parents, it argueth as strongly for the baptizing of their Children. And if any of this great company had Children with them, we have no reason to doubt, but they were baptized with them: Because he says, Be baptized every one of you; for the Promise is to you, and to your Children. If because the Promise was to the Parents, they were to be baptized for the same reason the Children are to be baptized, the Promise being also to them. Are not they sadly blinded with prejudice, that cannot see here, that such as have a right to the Promise, have a right to the Initiatory Seal of the Promise? And they that have right to the Promise, are not adult persons only, but Fathers, and Children.  
3. I may add Ex abundanti, that there wanteth not probable proof, and Testimony in Scripture, that Infants, or young Children were baptized: When we red of so many whole Housholds baptized, it is improbable that there should not be any young Child in any of them. And was it not likely to prove of dangerous consequence, to relate the baptizing of whole Families,( which does so clearly point at the former practise of Proselyting the whole Family, when the Head and governor of the Family came to be Proselyted,) if any part of the Family( as young Children ordinarily are a part) be uncapable of Baptism now. It is strange that we should be  told of Housholds baptized again and again; which according to the ordinary phrase and practise among the Jews, used to signify the Heads of the Family, and all under them, even little ones.( As is shewed before.) It is very strange I say, if it be an Error now to baptize Infants, that the Scripture should tell us oft of Families baptized, and not give one Instance of an household baptized, all but their little ones. When it was promised of old, that all the Families of the Earth should be blessed in Christ; and when Paul and Silas tell the Jaylor: Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy House,( Acts 16.31.) With which may be compared that speech of our Savour to Zacheus, Luke 19.9. This day is Salvation come to this House; forasmuch as he also is the Son of Abraham. And when further we find, that upon a persons receiving the Faith, having the Charge and Government of a Family; that person, and his, or her Family, were baptized together: What Impartial, Unprejudiced mind would not hence conclude, that the Covenant, and Initiating Seal, extended to Parents and Children still under the Gospel, as before. You red of Lydia's household baptized, Acts 16.15. and ver. 33. That the Jaylor was baptized, and all his, {αβγδ}, filii ejus,( as some) his Children. Or if {αβγδ} should not be restrained to Children only, yet it must necessary comprehend Children( if he had Children.) And 1 Cor. 1.16. The household of Stephanas was baptized. And Acts 18.8. When we red that Crispus, the chief Ruler of the Synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his House: And many of the Corinthians hearing, believed, and were baptized. Though I know some would allege this Text for the baptizing of such only as are actual believers; yet being narrowly looked into, it may be found to reach further. As when we red only that Crispus believed with all his House, in the former part of the verse; yet we are to understand that Crispus, with all his household, were baptized. We are to supply the word[ Baptized] used in the end of the verse. And when it is only said in the later part of the verse, that many of the Corinthians hearing, believed, and were baptized; yet we may very well think the word[ household] is to be supplied here from the former part of the verse. We have no reason to think, that the household of Crispus, was the only household baptized among these believing Corinthians. The full sense of this place. therefore seemeth to be this, that Crispus believed with all his household, and were baptized, with all his household: and many of the Corinthians hearing, believed and were baptized with their Housholds; so taking in their Children, even little ones: As it is no way probable, that there should be no little ones in any of their Families Herewith compare what the Apostle saith, 1 Cor. 7.14. Else were your Children unclean, but now they are Holy.  
Now methinks there is something in it, that the Scripture mentioneth divers housholds being baptized, without excepting the little ones in any one household baptized, and it is very strange, if none of those housholds had little ones in it.  
Though some will argue from Act. 16.32. They spake unto him the Word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. It may mean no more, than that they preached to all in the house, that were capable of hearing the Word taught. So when Jacob said to his household, and to all that were with him, Put away the strange Gods that are among you, and be clean, Gen. 35.2. This will not prove, that there were no little ones of his household with him. And yet further, they might be said to speak to all that were in the house in a sense, to which the Scripture is not a stranger, the Jailour being bound to teach those things to the least in his house, as soon as they should be of capacity to understand. Surely, there is as strange an expression, Hos. 12.4. He found him in Bethel, and there he[ spake with us.] And see Deut. 29.1, 2, 10, 11.& Deut. 31.1, 12. Again, it is further objected, that v. 34. it is said, the Jailour rejoiced, believing in God with all his house. As the like is said of those Corinthians, Act. 18.8. Many of the Corinthians hearing, believed, and were baptized.  
But methinks, 
Harm. of N. Test. p. 81.  what Dr. Lightfoot hath on another Text, may serve to take off this Objection. Act. 2.44. All that believed were together, and had all things common. The children of those that believed, must come in under the Title of Believers too, or they must famish( or be cast upon others.) If the community of goods reached them as well as their Parents, the title [ Believers,] must reach them too.  
Further as touching the Jailour, it is thus in the Original, {αβγδ}, which may as well be red, And he believing in God rejoiced in all his house, or he exulted, expressed his great joy in all his house, after that he had believed in God. And note, that when it is said of Crispus, Act. 18.8. that he believed on the Lord with all his house, it is not {αβγδ}, as here, but {αβγδ}.  
Thus I hope sufficient Scripture warrant hath been produced for Infant-baptism. Many things I have praetermitted, because I would cut this Discourse as short, as I well may. Yet before I pass from this point, I shall take notice of the chief Objections made against it, because it may tend to your further satisfaction.  
Object. 1. We have neither express Precept nor Example in Scripture for the baptizing of Infants.  
Answ. 1. A virtual Command there is in the Gospel for Baptizing of Infants. The Infants of discipled Nations ought to be baptized, as appears from what hath been said. It is implyed in the Commission, Matth. 28.19. Now a virtual Command is equivalent to an express command.  
And when Mr. Tombs( the most learned Advocate the Anabaptists have) grants Baptism in use, even before John Baptists time, in the admission of Proselytes, the New Testament mentioning whole housholds that were baptized( never excepting Infants, or little ones) we have reason to think, that as the Children of the Proselytes were baptized before, so the children of the Christians were baptized too.  
2. What express Precept or Example can the Objectors show for Christian Magistrates in the New Testament? And must all Christian Magistrates therefore be discarded? Again, what express Precept for the Christian Sabbath? Whereupon some Anabaptists have returned to the Jewish Saturday-Sabbath. Again, what express Precept for Womens receiving the Lords Supper? In 1 Cor. 11.28. it is, Let a Man examine himself? Where though the word {αβγδ} be of the common Gender, and used both for Man and Woman, yet {αβγδ}, the Word that follows, is of the Masculine gender, it is himself, not her self.  
Again, to speak ad hominem, let one that objects against us the want of express Precept and Example for Infant-Baptism, show us, where he finds any such Precept or Example for the se-Baptists, that persons unbaptised should baptize themselves, as they do in the first setting up of their way.  
Again, where do they find either Precept, or Example in all the New Testament for Christians deferring their childrens Baptism, till they come to an adult age? Thus the Objection falleth foul upon themselves.  
Certainly, there is a total silence in Scripture concerning the Children of those that were Christians, not one tittle there of any Christians child having his Baptism delayed, till it came also to make a personal profession. No doubt but many of those who were converted to the Christian Faith by the Apostles, had little ones, who either were baptized upon their Parents embracing the Faith, or it cannot be known at what age any of them were baptized, and consequently we cannot tell at what age the Children of Believers now are to be baptized.  
Now certainly, this is a weighty Case, and I wish that they who seem so desirous to keep close to Scripture-Rule, would seriously consider it. They that are only for the baptizing of adult persons cannot give a Scripture-Instance of one child born of believing Parents, whose baptism was deferred till it came to be adult. And besides, this would across another Rule, that all who are discipled, as soon as they are discipled, are to be baptized. It is true, that they and we differ concerning the Subject, who are discipled; we holding that the Infants of Christians are discipled,( belonging to the Church, the School of Christ, and the Parents being bound by the Covenant to train them up in the knowledge of Christ, and they bound to receive Instruction, as they come to be of any capacity;) but our Opposites holding none to be discipled, till they are instructed in the Principles of Christianity, and make a personal Profession. Now suppose that they were in the right here, that none were Discipled, and to be baptized but upon a personal Profession; yet since it is evident, both from Christs commission, Matth. 28. and from all those Examples of Persons baptized, upon Record in the New Testament, that as soon as any are discipled, they are presently to be baptized. I would fain know how they either do, or can follow Scripture-Rule in baptizing the Children of Christian Parents, many years( it may be) after they were Disciples in their own sense; that is, made a personal profession. We could give many Instances of little Children, who have been Religiously Educated, Children of Five or Six years age, 
See Mr. Whites little Book for little Children.  that have not only made a profession, but given great Signs and Evidences of Grace. And should not such be owned as Disciples? And then why not other Children of that age that can give as good an account, as may be expected from those Years? And did not Christ, and his Apostles admit all to Baptism, who made but the least visible profession? Where do we find any rejected? If now they will not admit persons upon making the least visible profession, but Demur them, till they have arrived a Degree higher; why may they not defer their baptism, till they are got one degree higher than that, and so in Infinitum? And how will they observe Scripture-rule, which is clearly for the baptizing of persons, as soon as they become Disciples? If I was of their Opinion, that the baptizing of the Infants of professed Christians, was against Rule, and a Nullity; I must seriously profess, I should be altogether at a loss, and not know when to baptize the Children of such. If they must be baptized so soon as they make a visible profession, I would fain be informed from Scripture, at what age they may make such a visible profession, which ought to be taken for their admission to baptism.  
And this further, whereas those whom they Rebaptize, were many of them Religiously Educated, and seemed to have a love to Religion from their Childhood, and were acquainting themselves with the principles of Religion; I would fain know, whether they will say they only began to make a profession, when they first owned Anabaptism? Or if they were professors of Christianity before, and so ought to have submitted to the Sign, and Sacrament of their Entrance, and admission amongst Christians, whether it was not a great sin against the Gospel-rule, that they did not submit to their baptism before? And then I ask, From what time, for how long they are to charge this sinful Omission upon themselves?  
Now compare their way, and ours, and Judge Impartially, which is most agreeable to Scripture-Rule. We are not for the baptizing of Heathens, or any without the Church, without their having the Gospel first Preached to them, and their professing to believe it. Now when they receive the Gospel, they receive it not only for themselves, but for their Children; and were bound to Instruct, and Educate their Children according to it. And so such Families were Discipled, and to be Baptized; and what Children they might have afterwards to be baptized, as all of them belonging to the Church, and School of Christ, to be Trained up in the Knowledge of Christ. And so all along God had put a Distinction betwixt the Seed of his professing People, and the Children of such as were without the Church: Not only the Natural seed of Abraham, but the Seed of the Proselytes, that joined themselves to the Lord, had the Sign of the Covenant. Thus the way is clear to us, whom, and when to baptize.  
Our Opposites are not for the baptizing of the Children of Christians, but upon their own personal profession. Now that baptism is not unnecessary to be deferred, after one comes to make profession, they must grant. But how soon, or how long before a Childs profession, is to be accounted such, as entitleth him to baptism; they cannot show from any Command, or Example in the Word. Here they have no Rule, as much as they seem to be for keeping close to Scripture-Rule.  
Now think of it seriously, whether it be at all Credible, that if God would not have the Children of Christians baptized, but upon their first making a visible profession, there should yet be no Rule, or Direction, when that might be. We can easily discern, when such as were Heathens come first to a profession of Christianity: but when a Child of Christian Parents that hath been Learning the Principles of Christianity from his very Infancy, I say, when such a Child shall be taken first to make a personal profession, is no easy matter to determine. Now when the most that they baptize, are such, as they cannot say, when they first came to make a personal profession, let any that are Impartial judge, how well they follow Scripture-Rule. Besides, since they must hold, that to baptize a Child before its making a personal profession, would make such baptism a Nullity; and to defer to baptize it, after it has come to make a personal profession, is a sinful neglect, and plain breach of Gospel-Rule, and Order; and one man may take that for a personal profession, which another would not admit to be so: Hereupon it must needs follow, that their way layeth a certain ground of Clashing and Confusion in the Church, and tends to led both Ministers and Christians into endless perplexities, touching the first admission of our Children.  
Thus you see in this first grand Objection, that we have neither express Precept, nor Example for Infant-baptism; they are like a man that rolleth a ston, which returneth upon him that rolleth it. The Objection returns, and falls heavily on themselves. There is no need of an express Precept, or Example for the baptizing of Infants born within the Covenant, this being suitable to the Scripture-way before,( as from the time that God had appointed an Initiating Seal of the Covenant, the Infants of Parents within the Covenant, were ever before admitted to the Initiating Seal with their Parents.) But there is need of express Direction, Rule, or Example, if such Children are not to be admitted now, but upon their personal profession, to show, when such profession hath been, or may be taken.  
Object. 2. But further they will Object, that they can show both Precept and Examples against Infant-baptism.  
1. Precept, Mat. 28.19. Go teach all Nations, baptizing them. They must be Taught before they are to be baptized: To which agrees, Mar. 16.16, He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved. A Rule for believers baptism. Infants are not capable of being Taught, are not Actual believers.  
Answ. 1. As Learning, and believing( according to that Dispensation) was required of adult persons at the first Institution of Circumcision. Abrahams servants that were to be Circumcised, as well as he, were such as he had Taught the way of the Lord, see Gen. 18.19. And afterwards none could be Proselytes of the Covenant, and taken into the Jewish Church, none that were of years, but they must first know, and aclowledge the God of Israel. Yet all this hindered not the circunctsing of their Infants. So in constituting the Gospel-Church, they that were of Years, must first know, and profess the Name of Christ, before they could be admitted as Members of the Church, or accounted Christians. But this hinders not, but that the Parents being Discipled, their Children were to be acknowledged, as belonging to the Church with their Parents. At the first Institution of Baptism, and first Constituting of the Gospel-Church; it was necessary indeed that the first Members of the Church, and first Subjects of Baptism, were taught and brought to profess the Faith, before they were baptized,( the Gentiles being generally strangers to the Covenant, and the Jews strangers to this new Dispensation of it, and none have right to Baptism, the Initiating Seal of the Gospel-Covenant, till they come within the Gospel-Covenant.) And therefore Infants could not be the first Subjects of Baptism, because it was necessary their Parents should be in Covenant, to bring them within the Covenant; so the Parents should be first Baptized, as their right to Baptism in order of Nature, preceded the right of the Children. But because the Parents were not admitted to Baptism, but upon their being Taught, and making a personal profession,( which was necessary to bring them within the Covenant) it will not follow that their Children must be first Taught, and make a personal profession before they may be baptized. These being now in Covenant together with their Parents, have also a right to the Initiating Seal of the Covenant, as well as their Parents. Thus the Baptism of such adult persons, and of their Infants is but one, and the Ground or Reason of baptizing both, is one and the same; to wit, their being taken into Covenant. Only the way of adult persons being taken into Covenant, is divers from that of their Infants. When persons come to make a profession of Faith in Christ, they are taken( at least, Externally) into Covenant, though they were not born of believing Parents; and such as are the Children of believing Parents are( at least Externally) in the Covenant, though they are not at present, capable of being Taught, or of making a personal profession. 
Thesi Salm. par. 3. p. 48. Sect. 9.  Nec ab adultis exigitur nascendi conditio, modo credant: Nec ab Infantibus exigitur ut credant, modó nati sint ex iis qui seize credere profitentur.  
2, From Mat. 28.19. [ Go, Disciple all Nations, baptizing them.] It will follow, that all who are Disciples, are to be baptized. As soon as any are Disciples,( though incomplete) Ministers, have Authority from Christ to baptize them. And our Opposites will not deny, but all Disciples are to be baptized. So that if it appear, that the Infants of Disciples are Disciples too; it will follow, that they are to be baptized.  
And as yet, I could never meet with a clear answer to that Argument Mr. 
Of Infant-baptism. p. 15. &c.  Baxter urgeth from Acts 15.10. They upon whose Necks the false Teachers would have put the Yoke of Circumcision, are there called Disciples. But the false Teachers would have put this Yoke, not only upon Christian Parents, but upon their Children and Infants. It plainly appears from ver. 1, 5, 24. that Circumcision was the Yoke there spoken of. And it is out of question, that there were more young Children than adult persons, upon whom those false Teachers would have brought this Yoke. And since this Scripture only declares against their laying that Yoke upon the Neck of the Disciples, it follows, that either the Children, and Infants of Disciples are included in this term [ Disciples] or that the circunctsing of such was not forbidden here; but only the Imposing of Circumcision upon adult persons.  
Neither should it seem strange, that Children, Infants, are called Disciples, being admitted into the School of Christ, and to be Trained up in the Knowledge of Christ. Sometimes we sand our Children to School, before they can Learn of a book, and such are numbered among the Scholars, being designed for Learning, as soon as they are capable. And it is not so strange, that such as are intended for Learning, and entred into a School, should be called Scholars, before they have Learnt any thing; as that none should be accounted Christs Scholars, or Disciples, till they have made so great proficiency( as some would have it) that they can give an account of their Conversion, of the Work of Grace being wrought in them; of the time when, and manner how it was wrought: Scholars are entred into a School, not because they are already Taught, but that they may be Taught. And Timothy was Learning the Holy Scriptures {αβγδ} from his Childhood, 2 Tim. 3.15. That it is certain from Child-little, he was a Desciple of Christ. This which is Recorded of Timothy, should Teach all Christians, that have Children, to begin with them betimes, to teach them to know God, and his Will. The things of God cannot be Learnt too soon, neither are little Children uncapable Subjects of Divine Illumination, and Grace. But that Christian Parents are bound to Instruct their Children in the Doctrine of Christianity, and to Teach them their Duty, as soon as ever they are capable of receiving such Instruction, and that Children ought to attend to such Instruction; Would not this imply that they are Disciples? But indeed they that are against Infants Discipleship and baptism, have been generally against the Instructing and Catechizing of Little ones. If some of them of late go not so far in their Opposition, I am glad of it.  
Yet further, Is it not as strange, that little Children, and Infants, should be called Servants, as that they should be called Disciples? Yet such are called Servants, Lev. 25.41, 42. The Children of the poor Israelite( of what age soever) are there called Gods Servants. So David professeth, Psal. 116.16. O Lord, truly I am thy Servant, I am thy Servant, the Son of thy Hand-maid.( i.e.) born thy Servant in thy House, as Ainsworth says. So Psal. 86.16. David was born a Servant of God.  
3. Suppose we could not prove, Infants included in the Commission, Mat. 28.19.( as hath been proved already) yet that they are not expressly mentioned here as Subjects of baptism, is not enough to exclude them, unless there were no other Scripture-Rule but this, to direct us about it, who are to be baptized. As because this Commission was expressly directed to the Apostles only, to the Eleven, ver. 16. It will not follow that they only were authorised to baptize.  
Now I come to consider that other Text, Mark 16.16. which some I know build most upon. [ He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved.] The Scope whereof is to show, who alone partake of the saving benefit of baptism,( and other Gospel-Ordinances) being adult. 
Whiston of Infant Baptism. p. 295.  Or( as one says) Here Christ informs them what the Issue of the Execution of their Commission should be.— Those that should believe, and be baptized, should be saved; but those that believed not,( however they might be baptized, yet) they should be damned. But that there is no colour for making this Text the Rule of baptizing; or for any to suppose, that it determineth who are the only lawful Subjects of baptism; is evident( I think) from these following particulars.  
1, That it is not said, [ He that believeth only, shall be baptized.] But, [ He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved.] He that believeth, and is baptized, is the Subject in this Proposition, of whom this is predicated, that [ He shall be saved.] Hence it is manifest, that these words hold forth the subject of Salvation, not the subject of baptism. Yet we must not say, they determine the only subject of Salvation, unless we will hold baptism of absolute necessity to Salvation, and hold that no Infant( that does not actually believe) can be saved.  
2. That in the Opposite Member, it is not said,[ He that believeth not, shall not be baptized.] but,[ He that believeth not, shall be damned.]  
3. If this Text should be taken to determine the only lawful Subjects of baptism, then it would follow, that the Apostles, and their assistants, were guilty of maladministration, and Erred in baptizing many,( such as Annanias, Saphira, Simon Magus, &c.) who were not believers, in the sense of this Text: Either such had a right to the outward Ordinance, or not. If they had no right to it, then it was amiss for any( were they Apostles themselves) to admit them to baptism, who had no right to it. If they had a right to the outward Ordinance, then[ He that believeth, and is baptized, &c.] Doth not determine the only lawful Subject of baptism; divers having been rightfully baptized, who were not true believers, such as this Text speaks of.  
4. If believers baptism, be the only lawful baptism( in the sense that believing is here used) then how is it possible for any Minister to dispose this Ordinance in Faith? He cannot baptize others but doubtingly, of whose unfeigned Faith, he is not assured. And he cannot be assured, that anothers Faith is true and saving, without Special Revelation. And thus without Special Revelation he should not know who may lawfully be baptized.  
5. If this Text concludes against Infants baptism, it concludes as well against the Salvation of Infants. If you say, They believe not, and therefore are not to be baptized; it followeth more directly from the next words, They believe not, therefore they shall be Damned. If now to avoid so horrid a consequence, as that all Infants are Damned, you will have the Text Restrained to the adult, as needs it must be; you take away the force of the Argument hence against the Baptizing of Infants. As more is required of adult persons, than of Infants, in order to Salvation; So that may be required in order to the baptizing of the adult, which is not required of Infants. And yet I must mind you, that this Scripture does not determine, who only of the adult ought to be baptized; but who only of the adult enjoy the saving benefit of that, as of other Gospel-Ordinances. Other things I pass by for brevity-sake.  
( 2.) They bring divers Examples as they conceive, against Infant-baptism. As the Example of the Three Thousands, Acts 2.38, 41. And of the Samaritans Act. 8.12. And of the Eunuch there, ver. 36, 37, 38. And of Cornelius, and those that were with him, Act. 10.47, 48.  
Answ. 1. Note here, that the Socinians, who would have baptism a Temporary Rite, do in like manner argue from these Instances, that we only red of the baptizing of such as were Converted to the Christian Faith; not of such as were born in it, and had all along professed it.  
2. Our reading, that such and such were baptized upon the profession of Faith and Repentance, and the like, will not prove, that such only were baptized.  
The profession of Faith and Repentance might well be required of adult persons in order to baptism, and yet the Children of such as made a profession, be baptized without it. As God required Abraham to walk before him in sincerity, [ Walk before me, and be thou perfect. And I will make my Covenant between me and thee,] Gen. 17.1, 2. Yet this did not hinder the Covenant being made with his Seed, when they could not so walk before God.  
3. If those words, Act. 2.38. [ Repent, and be baptized.— For the Remission of sins.] Must be so taken, as excluding Infants from Baptism, they must then be understood also to deny to Infants the Remission of sin.  
4. If we may argue from Act. 8.37. Exclusively, that none but such as believe with the heart, are to be baptized; this Text would make against our Opposites as well: those that Object it against us, will they say, they baptize none, but such as believe with all their heart?  
5. So if Act. 10.47. must be so taken, as if none were to be baptized, but such as had received the Holy Ghost, as those had done; they themselves should be Excluded from Baptism, till it appears, that the Gift of the Holy Ghost is poured on them, that they speak with Tongues, as these did, ver. 45, 46. Indeed as the Gift of the Holy Ghost was an Evidence of their being taken within the Gospel-Covenant,( see Mark 16.17.) and so a ground for the baptizing of them: It will follow, that whosoever can be proved to be within the Covenant, have a right to baptism. And this will also pled for the admission of the Children of believers to baptism, we having seen it proved, that they are within the Covenant.  
6. Sometimes we find, upon the Personal profession of the Head of a Family, the whole household to have been straightway baptized. And therefore they that tell you, the Apostles baptized none but such as made a Personal profession of Faith, and Repentance, speak quiter beside the Book, say more than they can prove. Turn to Act. 16, 14, 15. There you will find Lydia, and her household baptized; where no mention is made of any one in the Family being wrought upon, but only Lydia her self, Methinks it is observable what one hath Noted: 
Whiston of Infant Bapt. p. 281, 282.  How the Holy Ghost doth vary his manner of Expression here, when he speaks of the baptism of Housholds; he tells us, the Housholds were baptized together with their Parents; not giving the least Intimation of the Faith of any besides, in, or of those Houses, as the ground of their Baptism, but when he speaks of more General Assemblies, or Concourses of People; he speaks more Distinguishingly: [ As many as gladly received the Word, were baptized, Acts 2.41.] And why the Holy Ghost should speak so distinguishingly in one place, and not in the other, is hard to say; unless it should be, because in respect of such more General Assemblies, and Concourses of People, consisting of Grown Persons; the personal Faith of each was necessary to their Baptism, but not so in respect of the Houses of believing Parents.  
Further, Some urge the Example of Christ, who was not Baptized till he was Thirty Years Old.  
Answ. 1. What? Would they have had him baptized, before John was sent, or had authority to baptize?  
2. How well do they follow Christs Example, who are for baptizing persons at half Thirty Years Age?  
3. And the reason of Christs not being Baptized till he was about Thirty Years old, could not be to Teach that none are to be admitted to baptism, till they can make a personal profession. Certainly, Christ had for a long time before, made a Personal profession. He being a Child was filled with Wisdom, and the Grace of God was upon him, Luke 2.40. And when he was but Twelve Years Old, he was able to Dispute with the most Learned Doctors, to the astonishing of all that heard him, ver. 42, 46, 47.  
4. This Example, that Christ went to John to be Baptized of him, rather makes against their Sebaptists. And the first of their way, baptize themselves. Surely, they cannot pled Christs Example for this practise.  
So, some urge the Example of the Romans, Rom. 6.3. Of the Galatians, Gal. 3.27. Of the Colossians, Col. 2.12.  
Answ. It is certain, all the baptized Romans, Galatians, Colossians, had not Savingly and Really put on Christ, neither were Really butted with Christ; but only Sacramentally many of them. And thus in infant-baptism there is a putting on Christ, and a being butted with Christ; some being really engrafted into him, and really partaking of the Fruits of his Death; and all being under an Obligation, as they shall grow up, to put on Christ, and to comform themselves to the Death, and Burial of Christ.  
Object. 3. Another great Objection against Infant-baptism, is that it Frustrates the ends of Baptism, is Unprofitable and Vain; Infants being Uncapable of Understanding, or Improving it.  
Answ. 1. Here that is a sure Rule, 
Instit. l. 4. c. 16. sect, 20.  which Calvin lays down: Quaecunque ad qualifaciendam Circumcisionem argumenta inclinant, vim nullam habent in oppugnando Baptismo. Those arguments which would overthrow Infant-Circumcision,( which was an undoubted Ordinance of God) cannot be Valid against Infant-baptism. There were Spiritual, and Holy ends of Circumcision, and adult persons were to make that use of their Circumcision, which an Infant could not make of it. Now shall any hereupon deny, that the Circumcision of Infants was an Ordinance of God, or deny the Wisdom of God in appointing it? Since it is Obvious, that what is Objected here against Infant-baptism, may as well be turned against Infant-Circumcision: May we not say, to any such Objector, as the Apostle( in another sense) Nay but, O man, who art thou that disputest against God?  
2. Of all those Seven ends of Baptism, which H. D. lays down: I would fain know which, or how many of them agreed unto Christs own baptism. Was his baptism to witness his Repentance, who had no sin to repent of? Or was it to evidence his present Regeneration, who was Gods holy One from the birth, and from the Conception? &c.  
3. Did all those Ends agree to the baptism of Simon Magus, &c. Did the baptism of Simon Magus witness his Repentance, and Evidence his present Regeneration? Or declare his being bur●● with Christ? &c.  
4. Since baptism is acknowledged a Sign of Gods Covenant, and of entrance into the Church, and the Infant-Children of believers are within the Covenant, and of the Church( as hath been sufficiently proved) in these respects baptism doth belong to such Infants, as well as it would to others adult, upon their embracing the Christian Faith, and making a profession. Where the same thing hath several respects, it may agree to one in one respect, and to others in other respects.  
5. Regeneration, and Remission of sin( which is the Inward Baptism) are things that Infants are not uncapable of, if they be not uncapable of Salvation: Why then should they be thought uncapable of the Outward baptism, the Sign thereof?  
6. The Fruit, and benefit of this Ordinance of baptism, is not restrained to the very Time of the Administration of it; but may come in afterwards. Yea, that baptism received in Infancy, is of use through ones whole course.  
7. Yea, in some respects it hath its special uses and advantages, even above that in adult Estate. To name a few particulars here.  
1. As the Child baptized is a declared Member of the Visible Church of Christ, and so especially Interested 
I mean, above others who are yet without the Church.  in the Churches Prayers, even before it can pray for itself. Certainly, to have a share in the Prayers of all Gods People, is no mean privilege. When Abraham prayed for Ishmael, though he was not the Son of the Promise; yet, As for Ishmael, I have heard thee,( says God, Gen. 17.20.) Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him Fruitful. That he fared some way better for Abrahams prayer. Though the Church of God out of common Charity, preys for all men; yet more especially for her Members, for whom she can pled Gods Covenant. And thus Infants by their baptism being declared Members of the Church, and within the Covenant, are in a greater probability of reaping benefit by the Prayers of Gods People, than if they are supposed to be without the Covenant.  
So likewise upon our Principles, Christian Parents have stronger Pleas to urge with God in Prayer, on the behalf of their Children, than they of contrary Principles can have. They can pray for their Children, only as they may pray for Heathens, while they suppose them out of the Covenant. Now see the difference of these two States, Isa. 63.19. We are thine,— they are not called by thy Name. So we can pray for our Children upon better grounds, Lord, bless them, own them, they are thine. When our Opposites deny themselves this Plea, and instead of it must pray God to pity them, though they are not called by his Name.  
2. Infant-baptism lays a stronger Obligation upon Parents to bring up their Children in the Knowledge, Nurture, and Admonition of the Lord. And how many have cause to bless God for the privilege of good Education? And how strong a Motive is this, to Excite and Quicken Godly Parents to their Duty, in the Religious Education of their Children, to consider Gods special Interest in them, their solemn devoting of them to his Service, and solemn promise to Train them up for him?  
Yea, many from the mere workings of Natural Conscience, hereupon have shown some Care, that their Children might be Instructed in the Principles of Religion, whereby the Knowledge of Christ and Christianity, is further spread.  
3. Infant-baptism also lays a special Obligation upon Children, to acquaint themselves with the Terms, and tenor of that Covenant, their Parents have engaged them in. And so it is a special means to continue the Covenant-Relation betwixt God, and his Peoples Seed. Parents being hereby obliged to catechize, Instruct Children, and Teach them their Duty, and to bring them to the Means, the Word and Ordinances of Christ; and Children being obliged to receive such Instructions, and to attend upon the Word, and Ordinances, and apply themselves to the Service of Christ, whereunto they have been Devoted. And herein Gods preventing Love and Mercy towards our Children is seen, that he would not have them left to their own choice, whom they would serve, any more than the Seed of his People of Old; and that as they could never have chosen better for themselves, so the sense of their baptismal Covenant might prevail with them, as soon as they come to any understanding, and will of their own, to serve the God of their Fathers; to set forward in the good and right Way, wherein they should go, betimes before they are sinfully Habituated in any other Course.  
4. Infant-baptism carrieth in it the clearest Evidence of our miserable, sinful, and corrupt Estate by Nature, and of the need there is( in respect of Original corruption) both of the Blood of Christ, to take off the Guilt, and of the Spirit of Grace, to free our souls from the power of Corruption. And thus it hath a direct tendency towards a deep Humiliation, and sound Conversion, as soon as Children are of Capacity to reflect upon it. If baptism was only administered to persons of adult age, though it denotes thus much, that they are sinful, unclean Creatures( considered in themselves) such as have need of washing; yet it would not point at Original Corruption, as Infant-baptism doth; for they might be accounted sinners by practise, without being acknowledged sinful by Nature. As we know, many who have been against Infant-baptism, have denied Original sin.  
5. Infant-baptism is a more visible Character, and Expression of Gods Free-grace, the subject being purely passive. It may seem strange, that God should this way hold forth his Free-Grace under the Old Testament, providing an Ordinance of which Infants were capable, and make no such provision under the Gospel.  
6. Infant-baptism engageth us against sin, as a vowed Enemy for ever.  
As Israel was to have War with Amalek for ever: So are we ever to resolve, and strive against sin, and seek the utter Extirpation of it. That we were false to Christ, and lived in the Violation of our Baptismal Covenant, all that while we served sin: The remembrance and consideration thereof, is a means to further the Humiliation of many gracious hearts for sins past, as a means to quicken them to greater watchfulness and resolvedness against sin for the time to come.  
Here methinks it is worth noticing, what one says, 
Ep. Ded. to Mr. Fords practical use of Infant-Baptism. p. 5.  Though it may in some cases be granted, that an Ordinance administered with some considerable circumstantial Irregularities, may sanctify; yet that those Irregularities themselves should be the Channels of Sanctifying Grace, it is not easily imaginable. Now this is the case of Infant-baptism. Many holy men of many Ages, have found their hearts Warmed, and quickened in the Exercise of Faith, Repentance, Love, Thankfulness, restrained from sin, excited to duty, by the consideration( not only of Baptism, and the Personal Covenant therein Sealed, but also) of Infant-Baptism under that Circumstance, and the Covenant of Ancestors, the Foundation of that Administration.  
7. Infant-baptism affords much Comfort and Encouragement to believing Parents, in reference to their seed. It may well rejoice the heart of a Christian-Parent, to see his Childes baptism a token of Gods good Will towards it, Sealing his Covenant with it. And take away the grounds of Infant-baptism, and what ground hath a Believer to hope of the salvation of his Child dying in Infancy, more than to hope of the salvation of the Child of any Heathen or Infidel? Infants are not saved upon account of Native Innocency,( though they are innocent in respect of Actual Transgression, yet are they Guilty in respect of Natural inherent Corruption) but Infants that are saved, are saved upon the account of Christ: And if saved by Christ, then Interested in him: And if Interested in him, by what Covenant? I know no other but that, where God promiseth to be the God of a Believer, and of his seed, that can give us hopes of the salvation of our Children, dying in Infancy. No other Covenant, that I can find in Scripture, to make over Christ and his saving Benefits to Infants.  
But now God promising to be a God to the seed of believers, and sealing this in their Baptism, such of them as die Infants, and so no ways revoke or violate the Covenant by any Act or dead of theirs, we have good ground to conclude that they are saved: as Christ said, Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven. These being in Covenant, and not breaking Covenant with God, it is not to be thought, that God will break Covenant with them.  
Again, hence godly Parents may be encouraged, in reference to their living Issue. Since God hath taken them into Covenant, there is more hope, that God may have special Covenant-blessings in store for them, than there is of such as are out of Covenant. And if Parents and Children were Diligent, and Faithful in doing their part, we might see then, it should not stick at Him, the Lord would not fail to do His part. See Gen. 18.19.  
8. Infant-baptism( engaging the seed of professed Christians to the embracing and professing of Christianity) hath been one great means to enlarge the Visible Church, and Kingdom of Christ. A means to preserve the Christian Religion, and propagate it to many, that otherwise were likely never to have come so far, as to an outward owning and profession of it. It is not so easy to draw persons to a renouncing of Christ and Christianity, who have been engaged to a Profession of it from their very Infancy; as it would have been to have kept many such from owning it at all, had they been left to themselves, till they were grown up, then to choose for themselves. I hope, there are none of us, so senseless, as not to aclowledge it a privilege, to live in a Land, where Christ is generally owned by an open, outward profession; rather than to Live among Jews, Turks, or Pagans, that are Enemies to the very Name of Christ.  
You may see more of this Nature in Mr. Fords, practical Use of Infant-baptism.  
Object. 4. They Object, that Infant-baptism is followed with Mischiefs, attended with very evil Consequences; bringing in false Matter into the Church, and Deforming her with so many Rotten Members, Ignorant, and Scandalous Persons, as many of those prove, who were Baptized in Infancy.  
Answ. 1. They might with as good Reason bring in the like Charge against Infant-Circumcision. Now would not that be to charge God foolishly? And shall a man be more pure than his Maker?  
2. Were there no Rotten Members among all those whom John Baptized? Mat. 3. No Rotten Members among them of Samaria, Baptized by Phillip? Acts 8. No Rotten Members in the Church of Corinth, Galatia, and other Churches, we red of planted by the Apostles themselves?  
3. Are there no Rotten Members that they take in? No Hypocrites? None of corrupt Principles?  
4. Infant-Baptism is neither a cause of Ignorance, nor of Profaneness, but an Engagement upon all that have been partakers of it, to Learn the Doctrine of Christ, and live according to his Laws. And however Infants may prove afterwards, yet when they are admitted to Baptism, they are free from all culpable Ignorance, not guilty of hypocrisy, nor to be charged with any Actual sin.  
5. The true cause of these Mischiefs is Parents neglect of their Duty, of Instructing and Training up Children as they ought; or want of the due Exercise of Church-Discipline, and Censures. And so they might be prevented, or removed by other ways and means, than denying Infant-baptism.  
And if any that are Parents think they have done enough, in having brought their Children to be Baptized; or any Person thinks, he is a good Christian, because he is baptized, they have not Learnt so of us.  
More I would have said to this, because it is taking with some well-meaning Souls; but I had rather refer you to what Mr. Baxter hath written of Infant-baptism, pag. 117. &c.  
Object. 5. They Object, that Baptism being administered to one in Infancy, he hath no way to be certain, that he was Baptized, but must take it upon trust from others. And in this respect there is more to be said for Infant-Circumcision, because that left a Mark and Character, whereby it might be known, such were Circumcised.  
Answ. 1. Circumcision was used amongst others, besides the Jews; some that were Idolaters, and Heathens, took up this Rite; though to them it was not the Ordinance of Circumcision, or a Sign of Gods Covenant. And it was possible for the Jews to be sometimes taken Captive by these, and their Children to be Circumcised with their Mock-Circumcision. Now look how the Jews might be satisfied, that they had the true Circumcision, and in the like way our Children may be certified of their Baptism.  
2. How was Paul certified, that he was Circumcised the eighth day, Phil. 3.5. Surely, he could not remember it? Only it was so te tified by others, And the same way may our Children be certified of their Baptism in Infancy.  
3. What assurance can they that are Rebaptized have, that their later baptism was right? I suppose the words [ I baptize thee in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,] are pronounced as they are Plunging into the Water; at which time it is not possible they should hear, and attend to them. How do they know in whose Name they were baptized? Must not they also take it upon trust, that they were Baptized in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; which the By-standers sometimes could not hear distinctly.  
4. Why may we not as well be certified of our Baptism in Infancy by a Register, as of our Birth? They that will question what is so Recorded, may as well question their Christian Names, and so feat to claim any Earthly Inheritances, Portions, or Legacies under those Names.  
Further, some of them will pled Antiquity: but how vainly and groundlessly, some of ours have shown.  
I cannot but wonder H. D. should make such a Flourish with the Citations he meets with in The plain and well grounded Treatise concerning Baptism,( falsely so called) without taking any notice of Mr. Colbet's answer thereunto.  
The Pelagians( though bold enough, yet) had not so great a stock of Confidence, 
De peccat. Mer.& Remiss. l. 1. c. 26. ( as Augustine observes) who never durst deny the baptism of Infants, because they saw, they must too openly have Clashed with the whole Church. Certainly, if those ancient heretics could have found any fair pretence from Antiquity to have opposed Infant-baptism, since it would have made so much for their purpose, they would have thought their Labour here well bestowed.  
Object. Last, One Objection more, that must not be passed by, is, That we have changed the ancient Rite and Ceremony of Dipping. This some make so Essential and Necessary to true Baptism, that they hold our Baptism no more Baptism, than it would have been Circumcision; if instead of Cutting off the Foreskin, they had only pared their Nails.  
Now, 1. They argue for the Necessity of Dipping, from the Notation of the words, {αβγδ}, and {αβγδ}, which they will have only to signify Dipping, or Plunging into Water.  
Answ. But if it could be proved that the word [ Baptize] primarily signifieth to Dip, Plunge, or Cover all over; yet the Scripture-use of the word is against them. This is plain from Many Texts which are ordinarily produced, Mark 7.4. Except they wash {αβγδ}, They Eat not. I hope they do not Imagine, that the Pharisees dipped themselves every time they went to Meat. So the word is used to signify any way of Washing, and not only that of Dipping. And whereas they use to oppose [ Baptizing] to Rantizing, or Sprinkling; yet the Scripture useth them promiscuously: In the Language of the Holy Ghost, Sprinkling is sometimes called Baptism, Heb. 9.10. We red of divers Washings, in the Greek it is baptisms. Where some of those Washings spoken of, were by way of Sprinkling, ver. 13, 19, 21. Numb. 8.7. and 19.17, 18. And whether is more proper to the place, divers kinds of Dipping, or divers kinds of Washing and Purifying?  
So we red of the Israelites being Baptized in the Cloud, and in the Sea, 1 Cor. 10.2. Were they Dipped in the Cloud? No, but Be-dewed, or lightly Washed, as men are in a shower of Rain. Were they Dipped in the Sea? No certainly, not the Israelites, but the Egyptians were Dipped, Plunged in the Sea, Exod. 15.10. {αβγδ}: Demersi fuerunt ceu plumbum in aquâ, So {αβγδ}, 
Vid. Bez. in Mat. 3.11.  differt à verbo, {αβγδ}. it is of a milder signification, that there is no reason they should put so great an Emphasis in it.  
Again, Rev. 19.13. We red of Christ that he was clothed in a Vesture {αβγδ} dipped in blood, says our Translation. But it hath reference to Isa. 63.1, 2, 3. where it is[ Garments sprinkled with blood.] As that must be the meaning. As the Expression is taken from great warriors, returning from the Slaughter of their Enemies, who do not use to Dip their Garments in the blood of the Slain; though they have oft their Garments besprinkled with blood.  
By this time I hope you may see, their Dipping is grounded on such a Criticism, as will not hold water.  
2. They argue from Primitive practise, the manner of baptizing used, when the Ordinance of baptism was first set up.  
Answ. 1. But first the Texts of Scripture they bring to prove it, if well looked into, are no cogent Proofs of it. The phrase of baptizing {αβγδ}, Mark 3.11. will not necessary infer Dipping. The preposition {αβγδ}, signifying [ with] as well as [ in,] Mat. 5.13. {αβγδ} With what shall it be salted. So we have {αβγδ}, Mat. 3.11. Whether is more consonant to Scripture-phrase, to say, he shall Dip you in the Spirit; or to say, he shall Pour the Spirit on you? So that phrase seemeth to be more against Dipping, than for it. Another Text they urge, is Mat. 13.16. Jesus when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: but in the Greek it is only {αβγδ}, he went up [ from] not [ out of] the water. Another Text which they think very considerable for their purpose, is John 3.23. John baptized in Aenon, {αβγδ}, because many waters were there. The Text proves not the waters of such depth, as was convenient for Dipping; though here was a conveniency, when great Multitudes came to John's baptism, that he and his Disciples might be employed together. The word Aenon signifies no more than Fonticulus, a little Spring, or Rivulet. And they tell us, it was a small Brook indeed, which one might almost stride over; though of no small account in that hot country, where water was so scarce. Another Text they stand much upon, is Acts 8.38. which if it will prove, that Phillip Dipped the Eunuch, it will prove also that he Dipped himself: For it is said, {αβγδ}; they both went down unto the water. The proposition {αβγδ} and {αβγδ} there, may as well be rendered [ to] and [ from] as by [ into] and [ out of:] No wonder, Philip is said to go down to, and come up from the water,( ver. 39.) The water Running in the Valleys, and that being a Land of Hills and Valleys, Deut. 11.11.  
2. They have little to say, to those Instances, which some of ours produce of Persons baptized, and no probability of their being dipped. As we red of Three Thousand baptized in a day, Acts 2.41. Yea, in part of a day.( Compare ver. 15. with 41.) When so few hands were to be employed, it would seem passing strange, that they should Dip so many as Three Thousand, taking them one by one, in part of a day,( as one part of the day was spent before the Company met, and a further part of it was spent in Peters Sermon, by which they were Converted.) Now had they been baptized in their way, it would scarce have been the work of a day or two. Again, if they were dipped, they were either dipped Naked, or in their clothes. If Naked, then they might all have seemed full of new Wine indeed. If Davids servants were ashamed, when Hanun cut off their Garments to the Middle,( 2 Sam. 10.4.) What matter of shane had it been, if all these had been stripped Naked? And what reproach would this have brought upon the way of Christianity? If in their clothes, such Dipping would have been a Washing of their clothes, rather than of themselves. So the clothes had been baptized immediately, and primarily, and the Body only consequently, and secondarily. Thus indeed their Bodies might be wet, but not properly washed. So likewise some parts of the body might have been untouched, And then how would such Dipping hold forth a being Sanctified throughout.  
Again, when Paul was weak after three dayes Fasting, Ananias comes to him in the House of Judas, and baptized him. And afterwards receiving Meat he was strengthened, Acts 9.9, 18, 19. What Evidence or Probability can they show, that Paul in that weak condition he was in, was taken out to a River, or Plunged into could water, which might in an ordinary way have destroyed him? The old Rule [ I will have Mercy and not Sacrifice,] approved by Christ himself, Mat. 12.7. may satisfy us, that either it was not Pauls duty ( pro hic& nunc) to be baptized, or that Plunging the body into water was not then held indispensably necessary, and essential to Baptism.  
Again, we red, the Jailor and his household were baptized in the Night. Had the Jailor a Pond, or River in his House? Or if he was so well stored with water laid in, as might suffice to Dip or Plung them into; yet would it be pure enough for those that came last, when others had been washed in it before? We know sometimes they Argue from that Expression of [ Bodies washed with pure water,] Heb. 10.22.  
( 3.) Had it been never so clear and manifest, that in those Hotter Countreys, Baptism was administered in the way of Dipping; there is more to be pleaded for it, than for this practise in such a could Climate as ours, where it would be to across other Scripture-Rules. As Mr. Baxter conceives, that The practise sprung up in the Hotter Countreys, where custom had Taught them to go almost half Naked, in comparison of us, and therefore it was there more Civil, or less Immodest, and less Dangerous to their Lives. But what he hath written of this practise in our Circumstances, pag. 134. to 138. deserves to be well weighed. So far as I am able to judge, he there clearly proves, that our Dippers break the Commandment of God, to follow their Tradition.  
3. They argue from the Nature of Baptism, and the Analogy and Resemblance betwixt Dipping, and Christs Burial, or our burial with Christ, held forth in baptism, Rom. 6.4. And on this, the wisest of them lay the greatest stress: To overthrow this, is to overthrow their greatest strength.  
Answ. 1. Whereas one of them makes Dipping the very Form of Baptism: If it were so, then( for as much as Forma dat esse rei) whensoever persons are dipped,( as some are for Punishment) or Dip and Douse themselves,( as some do for Pleasure) this should be the Ordinance of Baptism, here being the true Form of baptism.  
2. It is not the Measure and Quantity, but the Quality, or Use of water, that is Representative, and Significative( by Christs Institution) in Baptism.  
For my part, I should not dare to make the Action of Dipping, or Sprinkling, or( which we generally use) Pouring on of water a Sacramental, without clearer Evidence of Scripture, than I could ever yet see produced. As in the Lords Supper, Christ hath appointed Bread and Wine, without determining how much of these each Communicant should take: So in Baptism, he hath appointed water to be used( to signify the Cleansing virtue and Efficacy of his Blood and Spirit) without determining the quantity of water, or the manner how it should be applied, whether by Immersion, Aspersion, or Superfusion.  
3. If because Dipping best Representeth the Burial of Christ, &c. therefore we must be for Dipping upon any Terms, and account that no Baptism, which is not this way administered; I doubt this way of Arguing hath a Reach, quiter beyond the Intention of them that use, and urge it.  
They that are so Zealous for Dipping, to hold forth their being butted with Christ, by a parity of Reason should as well be for Crossing, to hold forth their being Crucified with Christ. Whereas they Insist so much on Rom. 6.4. We are butted with him by Baptism: In the two next verses, the Apostle speaks of being Planted together in the likeness of his Death; and of the Old Man being Crucified with him,( ver. 5, 6.) Now might they not from hence Argue as well for Crossing all that were Baptized, as holding forth the likeness of Christs Death more clearly, than Dipping only doth? Only they should be for Crossing first. and Dipping after that; as the Crucifixion and Death of Christ preceded his Burial, and as men use not to be butted before they are dead. So might not others pled as well for the White Garment, as holding forth that Purity and Holiness Christians are called, and obliged unto? So might they not in like manner Argue for the Ministers Breaking and Giving to every Communicant a whole Loaf, more clearly to hold forth such an ones duty to take whole Christ, and the privilege of very worthy Receiver, that he is Interested in whole Christ? And might they not as well contend for every ones taking their full of Bread and Wine, in the Lords Supper, to hold forth in a plain and Lively manner, that plentiful Provision which is made for Souls in Christ; and that one Christ is enough to fill us all: According to the Invitation, Eat, O Friends, Drink, yea, Drink abundantly, O Beloved. By this way of Arguing, might not men soon bring into that part of Gods solemn Worship, as great Disorders as ever were in the Church of Corinth?  
So likewise should they not as well pled for the use of Musical Instruments in singing of psalms, as from the proper signification of the word {αβγδ}: So from the Nature of the thing, it fitly setting forth the Melody we should make in our hearts to the Lord,( Ephes. 5.19)  
But further, may not others as well Argue for Sprinkling, because Baptism is to signify the Souls being cleansed by the Blood of Christ, which is called the Blood of Sprinkling, Heb. 12.24. 1 Pet. 1.2. And the Inward Washing, which the Outward Baptism representeth, is set forth under the Term of Sprinkling, or( as they call it) Rantizing, Heb. 10.22. As the same thing was shadowed out under the Law by Sprinkling.  
Or may one not say( as Mr. Cotton) that Sprinkling, or Pouring on water, where water is applied to the Body, sets forth in a more lively manner, the Grace of Christ in washing away our sins, than Dipping, where the Body is applied to the water? That being done rather by applying Christs Blood to Us, than by applying ourselves to Christs Blood.  
And may we not as well Argue for Baptizing, by Pouring on water( which we generally Practise) as best setting forth the Communication of the Spirit, promised to be Poured on us, Joel 2.28, 29. Certainly they are all one, to be Baptized with the Holy Ghost, and to have the Spirit poured on us.  
Thus it is plain, that their Arguing for Dipping from Allusion and Analogy, hath no strength, or Cogency at all. The same Argument may be urged against them. As they decry Baptizing by Sprinkling( which I think few or none amongst us use) or Pouring on water, as not holding forth the Burial of Christ, &c. Others have the like Plea against Dipping, as not holding forth the Sprinkling of the Blood of Christ, and Pouring forth of his Spirit, which Baptism is as well to signify. Let them answer here for themselves, and they will answer for us too.  
Here I shall only add this Note, That whatsoever Rite be used in Baptism, whether theirs, or that which we hold best and safest in our Circumstances, being Baptized unto Christ; it must needs follow, that we are Baptized unto his Death, and obliged to Conformity to him; and to improve Christ, to our dying more and more unto sin, and rising again to Newness of Life. And thus we are butted with Christ by Baptism, Baptism serving for this Use and End, to hold forth our Duty and privilege( if Faithful in our Baptismal Covenant) of being made Conformable to his Death.  
As for the Objections against Dipping, as they hold it necessary for all Times, and Places, they are not so weak as H. D. would make them: Who says thus, 
Treatise of Baptism. p. 252.  As for the Cavils of Unseemliness, and hazarding of Health to the weak, they are the Fruits of Carnal Wisdom, Unbelief, and Shunning of the across, &c.  
But, 
Pag. 133. in margin.  1. To Baptize Naked, he grants to be Abominable, and consequently is it not unseemly, to Baptize persons in so light and loose an Habit, as is next to Nakedness. They are for Washing all and every part, as the whole man is unclean. 
Pag. 250.  Now must it not be a very loose Attire, wherein the whole body, and every part may be washed with one sudden Plunge, at first Dash? If there be no Unseemliness in their way, Why do they ordinarily choose the Night for it? Baptism being solemnly to declare ones Admission into the Visible Church, the more publicly and openly it is administered, ( Caeteris paribus) it is the more solemn.  
2. It cannot be denied, but some are so tender, that they can scarce look into the could Air without hazard and Prejudice: And can it be thought, that there is no Danger in casting such into the Water? 
Of Infant Baptism. p. 136.  As Mr. Baxter hath Noted: God hath not appointed Ordinances in his Church which will destroy them, except they be preserved by a Miracle; for then it were a Tying himself to a constant working of Miracles, which he hath not done, except the Doctrine of Transubstantiation be true.  
3. Add this, as Dipping is hazardous in could Countreys, so it is scarce Practicable in some Hot Countreys. How many Miles may one-Travel in some places, ere they come to a River of sufficient Depth for this purpose? Whereas the positive Institutions of the Gospel are usually Commended. and preferred to the Legal Services, for their Easiness; their way would make Circumcision less Painful, troublesone, and Dangerous than Baptism.  
Some may think, I have Expatiated too far here: But is there not a cause? How many that Unchurch us in their rash Censures, and will have no Communion with us in other the undoubted Ordinances of Jesus Christ, because we maintain our Childrens Interest in the Covenant, and Right to Baptism, the Initiating Sign and Seal of it? What a sad Snare is the way of Anabaptism to many well-meaning, but mistaken Souls? If so deep Censuring of their Brethren, and Separating from all the Churches of Christ, that are not of their way, as the strictest, and the most of them do, be the way of Christ; Then Christ would seem to be against Himself, and then how should his Kingdom stand? Whether their way be not Injurious to the Churches Peace, to the Comfort of Christian Parents, and Prejudicial to Christs Interest in the World; let the Soberminded judge. Whether the Engaging of a Christians Children from their Infancy, to the Entertainment and Profession of Christianity, and engaging Christian Parents to Train up their Children in such a way; or leaving both Parent and Child Free, and Uningaged here, which of these ways hath the more direct unsteady to bring in Ignorance, and Irreligion; Let any, but such as are strangely prepossessed, and prejudiced judge.  
Now you that are satisfied in the point of Infant-baptism, account it not enough to own it, or that you may be able to pled for it; but see that your practise be such as may bring Credit and Commendation to it. It is a woeful Solecism, yet too Common, for men to be Zealous for Infant-baptism, and to Glory in it, that they were thus Devoted to Christ and his Service, in their Infancy; and yet really to Disown it again, and Disgrace it in their Lives. How should we fear laying such an Ordinance of Christs under Reproach and Contempt? Shall we scarce have patience to hear others Deny, or Question Infant-baptism, and yet by our unworthy and unsuitable walking, make it stink among prejudiced Minds? Not to give up yourselves to the Service of God, to whom ye were Devoted in Baptism, is a kind of sacrilege. As Calvin says, Nec specie Sacriligii career, 
In Rom. 12.1.  si ad immunditiem relabimur: Quoniam id nihil aliud est quàm rem Sanctificatam profanare.  
Again, Have we given up our Children to God, and Christ in Baptism? Let us Train them up for him. We should be often minding them of what we have done for them; and that as they come to have a Will of their own, God expects they Confirm what we have done. We should Instruct, and warn them, Charge and Command them to keep the Way of the Lord; go before them in an holy Example, and do all we can to help them forward, that so God may establish his Covenant with us, and ours.   
Rom. 3.28, 29. 
He is not a Jew, which is one( only) outwardly. But he is a Jew which is one( also) inwardly, &c.  
Sect. 18.  
PROP. XVIII. They who are also Internally in Covenant, are privileged far above those, who are only Externally in Covenant.  
THey that are Internally in Covenant, have an Actual right to the greatest Benefits and Blessings of the Covenant, whereas the other have a Right only Conditionally, viz. If they perform what on their part they are Engaged unto.  
Surely there is a great difference, between a Pardon offered, and a Pardon accepted, and obtained; betwixt Salvation offered upon Condition, and an Actual right in Salvation, as having the Condition, to which it is promised. To all that are Outwardly in Covenant, Remission and Salvation are promised Conditionally; that is, if they Believe, if they Repent. But where the Condition is not performed, the Promise cannot be pleaded, but now such as are Internally in Covenant, having the Condition, have an Immediate actual Right to the Blessings promised.  
What those Covenant-blessings are, you heard something before under the Thirteenth Proposition.   
Jer. 32.40. 
I will make an everlasting Covenant with them, I will put my fear in their Hearts, that they shall not depart from me.  
Sect. 19.  
PROP. XIX. One Special privilege of those who are Internally in Covenant with God, is, that they shall never totally depart from God, or fall from Grace, or be cast out of Covenant.  
WHere Special Grace hath wrought the Candition, it will maintain the work. Where Special Grace beginneth, it will finish the work in due time. Thus the Faithful, as they have an Immediate right, so on Indefeasable right to the great Benefits contained in the Covenant.  
The Remonstrants hold Grace to be Vincible, both in Conversion, and after Conversion. Si Deus fidem vi irresistibili quae impediri non potest, non efficit, neque sustentat: As they. And we know their meaning, when they deny Vim Gratiae irresistibilem; that when God had done all that belongs to Him to do, yet mans will may Frustrate his Grace, and render all ineffectual and to no purpose.  
If the Saints perseverance be not certain. Then,  
( 1.) What becomes of Gods Decree? Here they will say, that God Electeth men upon fore-sight of Faith, and Perseverance, not unto Faith and Perseverance. But( methinks) the Scripture teacheth otherwise, Ephes. 1.4. Elected, to be Holy: Not upon Gods Fore-sight that such would be holy. Jam. 2.5. God hath chosen the Poor of this world Rich in Faith, and Heirs of the Kingdom. Chosen, not because Rich in Faith; but to be Rich in Faith: As they were Chosen, not because Heirs of the Kingdom; but to be Heirs of the Kingdom. 2 Thes. 2.13. Chosen to Salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the Truth. He could not foresee Sanctification in any, but as the work of his own Spirit: He could not foresee Faith in any, but as his own Gift.( Phil. 1.29. Tit. 1.1.) Acts 13.48. As many as were Ordained to Eternal Life, believed. Some indeed would have it taken thus: As many as were fitted, or disposed unto Eternal Life, believed. But what Disposition, or Aptitude unto Eternal Life is there found in any, before Faith, before they do believe? Besides, the word is ( Plusquam perfecti temporis) {αβγδ}, ordinati fuerant: As many as had been ordained to Eternal Life. Importing a previous Ordination rather than a present disposition to Faith.  
To the like purpose consult what our Saviour saith, John 6.37, 39. All that the Father giveth me, shall come to me. And this is the Fathers will, that of all which he hath given me, I should loose nothing; but should raise it up again at the last day. Raise it up, that is, to everlasting Life, as it is ver. 40. Hence it is plain, that in regard of Gods Will and Purpose, all the Elect shall certainly come to Christ, and be kept by him to everlasting Life.  
And so much is implied in that speech of his, Mat. 24.24. Insomuch that( if it were possible) they would deceive the very Elect. It is impossible that false Christs should deceive the Elect. Though in themselves they are liable to Deception, as well as others; yet being Elect, God hath a special care of them, and they are the special charge of Christ, and the holy Spirit of Truth; for which cause it is not possible they should be finally deceived, and drawn away from Christ, and Fundamental Truth.  
And may we not gather as much from Rom. 8.28. All things work together for good, to them who are the called according to his purpose. How will this hold true, and yet they may fall into the greatest of Evils, both Sinful, and Penal, apostasy, and Perdition. And ver. 30. Whom he did predestinate, them he also called: And whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. They that can prove their Election by their effectual Vocation, may thence conclude their present Justification, and their future Glorification. Though the former of these Texts should make nothing against those, who grant the certain Perseverance of the Elect as such, but not of all the Justified, or Sanctified;( supposing there are some such, who are not Elect) yet this last Scripture clearly Determines that all that are called, that is, effectually called( and so Sanctified) and Justified, are or shall be Glorified, and consequently must needs Persevere.  
( 2.) What becomes of Divine Promises, that look this way, if the Faithful do not certainly Persevere? Is not Gods Promise good Security? Jer. 32.40. I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me. Here we see Persevering-Grace is a Gift, which God hath promised. And they in whose hearts God putteth his Fear, they shall fear him for ever,( ver. 39.) they shall not depart from him. It is Evident, and Undeniable, that this is here promised. Now it is promised either Absolutely, or Conditionally. If absolutely, then it inevitably follows, that they must continue in his Fear, and never depart from Him; Or else where were his Truth and Faithfulness? If Conditionally, Then what is the Condition? Can we understand it thus, I will put my fear into their hearts, that they shall not depart from me: If there will be to continue to fear me, if their will be not to depart? But hold: The same thing cannot be the thing promised, and the condition unto which it is promised. Otiosa est haec conditio, facit enim perseverantiam conditionem perseverantiae: Non enim deesse gratiae sufficienti est perseverare,( Suffrag. britain. de 5. Art. p. 225.) I hope, they with whom we have to do here, would not make God, as one that Mocketh. And then how can this be the sense, I will give them to fear me, that they shall not depart from me: Provided their will be to fear me still, and their care not to depart from me. I will give them to continue and persevere in my fear, if their will be to continue in my fear; that is, If they do continue in my fear; Certainly, they that do persevere, must persevere, whether God promised it, or no. No need for God to promise that, the contrary whereof would imply a Contradiction. We neither consult the Honour of his Wisdom, nor of his Grace, if we would have no more meant than so.  
And further, If the Lord promised no more here, than Grace to persevere, if we will; then there should be no more promised to Believers under the Covenant of Grace, then Adam might have concluded on under the Covenant of Works. Adamo fuit datum, ut posset, si velvet in bono perseverare, said non fuit datum, ut velvet: Nobis vero, qui verè Christo insiti sumus, talis data est gratia, ut non solum possimus, si velimus, said etiam ut velimus in Christo perseverare,( Aug. de Correp.& grat. in c. 11.& 12. Ut Suffr. britain. ib.)  
Yea, the condition of Believers would be so much worse than Innocent Adams, by how much they have less strength, than he had. Innocent Adam had the fear of God in his heart,( otherwise he had not been Innocent) and that fear preserved in his heart; must needs have prevented his departing from God. So he had that which might have kept him close to God, without any contrary principles to turn him aside. Whereas the best of Saints upon Earth are not so perfect in Faith, or Fear, or any Grace, but that there is something of a contrary corrupt principle still remaining in them, as a Back-byas drawing them another way.  
Again, The Lord hath promised, Mat. 16.18. The Gates of Hell shall not prevail against his Church.  
Now if the Faithful should not persevere, it is plain in this case, the Gates of Hell would prevail. Therefore the perseverance of the Faithful is certain; Or else how should this word of promise hold certainly true? If the perseverance of the Faithful be not certain, but purely contingent, that this Believer may fall away, and that Believer, and so another, and another; and if there be no one in particular, to whom it may not happen, that he may fall away, then that any should hold out to the end, and be saved, it must be purely contingent and uncertain. And if it be purely Contingent, whether any one Believer in the world will persevere, what is not certain, cannot be certainly known; what is not certainly Future, cannot be certainly Fore-known. 
Qualis est res, talis est rei sci entia, &c. Camero. Resp. ad Ep. viri docti. p. 162. in fol. 757.  When Christ says, The Gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Faithful,( who are built on him, the Rock) it is certain, the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against them, otherwise he might be mistaken, and his word not hold true.  
If any suppose this to be the sense, That the powers of Hell shall not prevail against Believers, without their will, and consent; if this were all, then Christ should promise here, as much as comes to nothing. There was no fear of the Devils forcing away any soul from Christ, quiter against its will. Besides, what is promised to Believers, would hold as true of Unbelievers: So the Gates of Hell should not prevail against Them neither. For none will say, that Unbelievers are kept off from Christ by force, but that their wills are to keep off from him.  
Another Promise you have, 1 Cor. 10.13. God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be Tempted above that ye are able; but will with the Temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.  
Another, John 10.28. I give unto them Eternal Life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand.  
If we must understand these Promises, as depending on such a Condition as this, that they yield not of themselves to Temptation, nor cast themselves out of Christs hands: But not as securing them at all, that they shall not Totally and Finally yield up to Temptation, and cast themselves out of his Hand; then it will follow, that they speak not at all to a Believers fears: but to what he has no fear of. Believers have no fear at all of being plucked away from Christ by strong hand, and against their wills; but all the fear is, whether they shall not at one time or other, be Tempted away from Christ, and their hearts prove Treacherous to Him.  
To these Promises, agreeth that of the Apostle Paul, Phil. 1.6. Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good Work in you, will perform( {αβγδ} Finish) it until the day of Jesus Christ. Where observe, his confidence was not in them, but in him that had begun the Work.  
Likewise that of the Apostle Peter, 1 Pet. 1.5. Kept by the power of God through Faith, unto Salvation. Where we see the Lord hath them in his keeping. And, Qui custodit nos per fidem, custodit in nobis fidem: He that keepeth us through Faith unto Salvation, keepeth Faith in us to Salvation. How are they kept by his power, who are suffered to apostatise, that they are lost Creatures?( John 17.12.) Surely, such are deserted and cast off, not kept.  
( 3.) What becomes of Christs Prayer, and prevalent Intercession, if Believers shall not persevere? There is therefore no Condemnation to them, because Christ is at the Right-hand of God, making Intercession for them, Rom. 8.34. What is it that Christ Sueth and Pleadeth for, on the behalf of his People? That their Faith may not fail, as he Prayed for Peter, Luke 22.32. That God would keep them through his own Name, keep them from the evil. If they are not kept from the evil of Total and Final apostasy, How is Christs Prayer for them heard? See John 17.11, 15, 20. If there be any power in the Intercession of Christ( whom the Father heareth always) Believers shall be kept by Gods power. The Father should not have his will, if they be not kept unto Salvation, John 6.39. Neither should the Son have his will, John 17.24.  
And to say, that Christ meaneth no more, but that they might be kept, upon condition that they be not wanting to themselves; is as if he should only Pray that they might be kept, while indeed they shall keep themselves. So to deny the certain perseverance of the Faithful, is to make Christs Intercession on that behalf, either Needless, or Fruitless, and Successless.  
( 4.) What becomes of the Saints prayers for Perseverance? And what ground have any of us to Pray, that the Lord would Unite our hearts to fear his Name, that he would give us an heart to fear him for ever; or that we may be kept by his power, and so guarded with his Grace, that no Temptation may prevail, to draw us away from him? If the Faithful may fall away, and if God doth not promise their Perseverance, but conditionally, then the meaning of such Petitions can be no more than this: Lord, keep me, so long as I have a care to keep myself. Lord, uphold me by thy Grace, so long as I have a care not to fall. Preserve me in thy fear, while I have an heart to fear thee. Give me to persevere, if I will.  
( 5.) If the Faithful do not certainly persevere, what becomes of Gods everlasting Love to them? That Love which the Apostle doth so greatly glory in, Rom. 8.38, 39. Should he suffer them to draw back, his Soul could then take no more pleasure in them, Heb. 10.38. Then he should not remember them with everlasting kindness, as Isa. 54.8, 10. Or Love them with an everlasting Love, as Jer. 31.3.  
If any Believer fall away, and perish, certainly it is not for want of Power in God. He that could quicken them, when dead in Trespasses and Sins, could settle them when Staggering; could Raise them when Fallen. I say, it is not for want of Power in God to keep them, if they be not kept: He is of power to Establish them, Rom. 16.25. He is able to keep them from falling, judas ver. 24. He is able to build them up, and to give them an Inheritance among all them that are Sanctified, Acts 20.32. And otherwise the Apostle Peter would not have prayed, as 1 Pet. 5.10. That the God of all Grace would make them Perfect, Establish, Strengthen, Settle them. Nor would Christ have Prayed for Peter, that his Faith might not fail; if it had not been in his Fathers hands, to prevent the failing of Peters faith. And if it be not for want of Power, it cannot be, that they are not kept for want of Love, and good will in God towards them. The Love of God being such, as brought them to the Participation of his Grace, and Reconciled them to Himself, who before were Enemies; how strange were it, if he should not continue to Love them, whom he hath Reconciled. See how the Apostle argueth, Rom. 5.9, 10, 17.  
( 6.) What ground for that joy of Faith the Scripture speaks of, if the perseverance of the Faithful be not certain? Take away the Doctrine of perseverance, and what becomes of Assurance? What ground for that Assurance, which many of the Faithful( of whom we red in Scripture) had, and all are called on, to give Diligence to obtain, 2 Pet. 1.10. Heb. 6.11. When we red of the the full assurance of Hope, as attainable, as in the Texts last Cited?  
And methinks, they which from that Caution, 1 Cor. 10.12. [ Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall.] Infer, that he that standeth may fall; they should not deny, but from this council, and Exhortation, 2 Pet. 1.10. Give diligence to make your Calling and Election sure.] This may be Inferred, that by giving Diligence, we may make our Calling and Election sure. And consequently our Salvation. As that Golden Chain, Rom. 8.30. can never be broken, but one Link will Certainly, and Infallibly draw on another.  
And so when we red of the Peace of God, which passeth all understanding, keeping the heart and mind, Phil. 4.7. When we red of the God of Hope, filling souls with joy and peace in Believing, Rom. 15.13. And giving them everlasting Consolation, and good Hope through Grace, 2 Thes. 2.16. When we red of Believers rejoicing with joy unspeakable, and full of Glory, 1 Pet. 1.8. Methinks, these things do strongly Imply the Safety and Security of the Faithful. Otherwise though we do suppose their Estate at present to be never so happy, yet if their happiness be no way secured; but in the event they may be more miserable, for having once been so happy, the thought of this must needs be a great alloy, 
Acriores sunt morsus libertatis amissae. Cic.  and sad check to their Joy and Peace. If the state of Believers be so Lubrick and Uncertain, as some would have it; then what ground can they have for such an Hope, and such Peace, and such Joy, as the Scripture speaks of? Rather it would be but like Jonah's Gourd, that sprung up in a Night, and perished in a Night: Would this afford strong Consolation, and everlasting Consolation, to believe that they are Elect persons to day, but may be Reprobates to Morrow? That they are Saints to day, but may be wretched Apostates to morrow? Would this yield Joy unspeakable, and such Peace, as passeth understanding, to apprehended their Adoption to day, but to live in fear of their Abdication to Morrow?  
Indeed if the Saints Perseverance and Salvation depend on their mutable, Inconstant will, not on Gods Purpose and Grace; Then how little hope is there of their Perseverance, and Eternal Happiness? While Innocent Adam being Tempted, was overcome; How much rather may the best of us conclude, that we shall fall by the hand of the Tempter? Who of us all is fit to Encounter, and go out against this goliath?  
How little hope of the Perseverance of any of the Faithful, if God hath no more promised to secure them from Total and Final apostasy, than from common Slips, and Falls? When there is scarce any probability, that we should at all times do our Duty, but much to the contrary; that partly through the Remainders of Inbred Corruption, and partly through the Impetuousness of Temptation, we should at one time or other grow Negligent; if, as we are letting go our Hold with God, and Jesus Christ, the Lord should let go his Hold of us; What is like to become of us at last?  
But should we suppose the Scales to be even here, and that it is every way as likely, a Believer will never carry himself so, as might provoke the Lord to withdraw, and to leave him to himself, as that he will; yet it is plain, that to deny the certain Perseverance of the Faithful, must needs Lessen a Believers Comfort. So his joy could not be full, no, not though he knew himself to be a true Believer. But admitting the certain perseverance of the Faithful, a Believer that had but a probable persuasion,( and much more being assured of the Truth and Soundness of his Faith) might have more comfort for that. As Mr. Baxter hath well Noted: If I have no persuasion either of my own sincerity, or perseverance, or yet of my perseverance as certain, if I were certainly sincere, then I should have two difficulties in the way of my comfort; which is more than one alone, and therefore must put me further off from comfort. But if I were sure that all true Believers shall persevere, if I had withall but a strong hope, or probability that I am a true Believer, I should freely receive the comfort of that probability, without the Impediment of farther doubts concerning perseverance. When otherwise I should be thinking, what if I be Justified, yet how can I tell but I may lose it by Back-sliding?  
But against the certain perseverance of the Faithful, many things are Objected.  
Object. 1. We red, Ezek. 18.24, 26. When the Righteous turneth away from his Righteousness, &c.  
Answ. It is true, that when a Righteous man doth turn away, or if he turneth away from his Righteousness, he shall Die: But it is Propositio conditionalis, quae nihil ponit in esse. An Hypothetical proposition doth only hold forth the Connexion as true. Not that the Antecedent shall, or may be: but if it should be, then such a thing would be consequent upon it, John 16.7. If I go not away, the Comforter will not come. This will not prove, that it might have so fallen out, that Christ might not have departed. His going away was a thing certain, and Determined, notwithstanding his putting this Supposition. So Gal. 1.8. If we, or an Angel from Heaven Preach any other Gospel, let him be accursed. This will not prove, that an Angel from Heaven ever shall, or may Preach another Gospel.  
Object. 2. Do we not red of some that believe for a while, but in time of Temptation fall away? Mat. 13.20, 21. Luke 8.13.  
Answ. A Temporary Faith is not a true Faith. It is there said of a Temporary believer, that he hath no root: But of the true believer we red, that he is born of Incorruptible seed, 1 Pet. 1.23. And that his Seed remaineth in him, 1 John. 3.9. And it is Noted as the property of the good Ground, that it bringeth forth Fruit with patience, or perseverance, Luke 8.15. That never was good Ground that only maketh a flourish for a time, but doth not bring forth Fruit to perfection.  
Object. 3. Do not Heb. 6.4, 5, 6. and Chap. 10.26, 27, 28, 29. Speak of a Total and Final apostasy?  
Answ. 1. To that[ If we sin wilfully after, &c.] We answer as before to Ezek. 18.24.  
2. These Texts speak of that sin unto Death, which the Regenerate shall never fall into, 1 John 3.9. and 5.18.  
3. That having Tasted of the Heavenly Gift, is a Diminutive Expression, denoting a Slighty, and Superficial, not a sound Perception; signifying something short of that Drinking, John 4.14. Whosoever drinketh of the Water that I shall give him, shall never Thirst: But the Water that I shall give him, shall be in him a Well of Water springing up into everlasting Life. Something short of that Eating and Drinking, which is by a true and lively Faith, John 6.35, 54. Whoso eateth my Flesh, and drinketh my Blood, shall never Hunger, nor Thirst, but hath Eternal Life, and I will raise him up at the last day.  
4. It would seem that the Apostle does not speak of true Believers, Heb. 6.4, 5, 6. But when he speaks of such, he useth another Dialect, ver. 9, 10. But beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany Salvation. For God is not Unrighteous to forget your Worth, and Labour of Love.  
5. That Text, Heb. 6. as they urge it, crosseth another Principle of the Objectors. There it is said, It is Impossible if such fall away, to renew them again unto Repentance. But they hold a Believer may fall away Totally, and yet be raised again by Repentance. 
See Mr. Hickmans Animadver. Dr. Heylins Quinq. Hist. p. 396.  As Thompson would say: I am a Child of the Devil to day; but I have Free-will, and to Morrow I will make myself a Child of God.  
Object. 4. Instances are brought of some that have fallen, and fallen off: As David, Solomon, Hymeneus, Philetus, &c.  
Answ. It is granted, some of these were in a state of Grace, and yet fell foully; but not Totally, and Finally. They were worsted in praelio, lost this and that battle, and yet were on the Conquering side in bello. As we red of Dan, A Troop shall overcome him; but he shall overcome at last. So however they were Foiled for some time, yet they overcame at last. Sometimes God suffereth his own Children to Fall, to make them more Humble, Cautelous, and circumspectly ever after: That they stand more surely, and walk more steadily afterwards.  
Again, Some of those mentioned, did fall quiter away; but it cannot be proved, that ever they were true believers. The contrary is Intimated, when the Apostle subjoineth that word of Encouragement to the Faithful, 2 Tim. 2.19. Nevertheless, the Foundation of God standeth sure, having this Seal, the Lord knoweth them that are his. Implying, that the other who had apostatised were none of his, and never had a good Foundation; otherwise they had stood sure. As the Apostle John hath the like, 1 John 2.19, 20, 27. They went out from us, but they were not of us: For if they had been of us, they would( no doubt) have continued with us. But ye have an Unction from the Holy One,( yea, by way of contradistinction to those that went out, and fell off.) And ver. 27. The anointing which ye have received of him, abideth in you: And even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in it. So that according to the Apostles Doctrine, if those Apostates and Impostures, had ever received that Anointing, which true Believers have, they should then have abode in the Truth, and not have proved such wretched Apostates.  
Object, 5. If the perseverance of the Faithful be so certainly Determined, then all Exhortations and Promises to Perseverance, and all threatenings in case of apostasy, are needless, if not absurd. Who would make a business of it, to persuade the Sun to keep its course, that can do no other?  
Answ. 
Est duplex genus perseverantiae, unum Physicum, quo modo coelum perseverat,& Terra,— Profecto hoc genus persever antiae non admittit admonitiones. said est aliud genus perseverantiae quod est ab animi proposito, id vero admittit,& poscit ultro admonitiones; Nam propositum animi est à judicio& ratione, &c. Camero praelect. p. 227. c. 2.  Some things Naturally hold on their Course, without any understanding of it, or Natural inclination to do otherwise; as the Sun shines, and the Fire burns, whether they are bid to do so, or no. And here it's true, it were Irrational to use Exhortations to that which their very Forms and Natures put them forth unto. Again, others are so confirmed in their state, and course, that there is no more danger of their being Diverted, or turned aside. So are blessed Angels, and the Spirits of just men made perfect in Heaven. And therefore being fully confirmed, and no more in any danger of falling from that state of Perfection; whereunto they are arrived, Ordinances, Exhortations, and the like means of Establishment are needless to them. But the perseverance of the Saints on Earth, determined by God, is promoted, and affencted in a Rational way, with Understanding, and Deliberation( wherein it differeth from the Course of Natural Agents) joined not only with a Natural power of doing otherwise; but also with great danger of their not persevering in respect of themselves, and of the manifold Temptations, which here they are surrounded, and assaulted with. In which last Respect, the state of the Saints on Earth, is different from the state of the Saints in Heaven. And what is not needful to those blessed souls, who are absolutely freed from sin, and set so much above the Power, and reach of Temptation; yet may be needful for the preservation of the Faithful here, who are amnoyed both with remainders of Corruption within, and with Temptations from without.  
As the Faithful are kept, and held on in their Course by a close application of Spiritual Objects to their Faculties, all means of strengthening their Apprehension of the goodness of their way and state; are very useful, and proper for their Preservation.  
2. And now methinks the Absurdity rather falleth on their way, who would separate the means from the end. Gods Intending and Determining the end, does not Exclude, or Overthrow, but rather Takes in, and Establisheth the means conducing to the Saints Establishment and Perseverance. Though they could not do the work of themselves, yet by Divine appointment they are subordinate to that power of God, which does preserve the Faithful. The Spirit of God making use of them, and concurring with them. As Gods determining whom he will effectually Call, and Convert, does not make the Ministry of the Word needless; So neither does his Determining that these shall presevere, render the means needless. Grace is nourished and maintained by the like means, whereby it was at first wrought.  
Again, when God determineth that the Faithful shall be kept unto Salvation; the meaning is not, that they shall be kept without their having any care of themselves: But that he will keep up in them a care not to cast away, and ruin themselves. Which care is promoted by Exhortations, Promises, threatenings: So likewise they are kept through Faith. Now Faith submits to Divine Precepts and Admonitions, closeth with Divine Promises, trembles at Divine threatenings. Thus Faith takes in the whole Word.  
3. Take one plain Instance, Christ assureth Peter of his standing in Grace, [ I have prayed for thee, that thy Faith fail not.] I hope, it was certain that Peters Faith should not fail, when Christ ●●●●ed that it might not fail: Yet Christ called 〈…〉 as well as on the rest, to Watch.  
Object. 6. The Doctrine of the certain perseverance of the Faithful is Securitatis pulvinar, the Bolster of Security, the Pillow of sloth.  
Answ. 1. Then Christ Preached a Doctrine of Security to Peter, when he  told him [ I have prayed that thy Faith fail not.]  
2. It is possible, that some may abuse this Doctrine of the Saints perseverance, to sloth and security; but that is the fault of men, not of the Doctrine. So many did, and do abuse the Doctrine of Free-grace, and Justification by Christs Righteousness, without the works of the Law, Rom. 6.1. which must not therefore be rejected, as false and dangerous Doctrine.  
3. But the Doctrine of the Saints perseverance is so far from Teaching, or encouraging to Security, that we cannot hold it, but we must hold ourselves condemned by it, if we give up ourselves to Security. Indeed it tends to beget in the Saints an holy Confidence, not a sinful Security. If I hold, that a Regenerate man does never fall Totally from Grace, then I must needs conclude, I cannot fall totally into Security; or fall into any sin, so as to be wholly under the power of it, and yet be a Regenerate man. These two are purely Inconsistent. To fall totally under the power of Security, or of any other Reigning sin, is to fall totally from God, and from Grace. So again, If I believe that all sound Converts shall continue in Gods fear, how can I hope, that I was ever a sound Convert, if I cast off his fear? Or if I have a certain persuasion, that I shall be saved, then I as little doubt of my continuing in the way to Heaven even to the end, as of my enjoying Heaven at last: And every man that hath this hope in him, purifieth himself, even as he is pure, 1 John 3.3.  
4. The Apostles Doctrine and practise, both cuts off this Objection. As for his Doctrine, he telleth us, Rom. 11.29. The Gifts and Calling of God,( understand such as flow from Election, spoken of ver. 28.) are without Repentance. Yet in the same Chapter, ver. 20. gives this Caution and Counsel: Thou standest by Faith. Be not high minded, but fear. Indeed the Doctrine of Perseverance doth not befriend Carnal security; nor the duty of an holy fear, across and Thwart the Doctrine of Perseverance: [ Be not high minded, but fear.] Not that the Apostle commendeth doubting, or distrust in Christians: he only opposeth Security, and Self-confidence. Christians may have an humble sense of their own Weakness, and Insufficiency, and withal an holy confidence in Gods Power, and Faithfulness.  
Again, where the Apostle encourageth the Faithful from the very Faithfulness of God to expect a good Issue, whatever Temptations they are put to encounter; yet at the same time he warneth them [ Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall.] 1 Cor. 10.12, 13.  
And as to his own practise, though none will deny, but he was fully persuaded of his own perseverance, yet this had no such effect as to make him Remiss and Careless. See the contrary, 1 Cor. 9.27.  
5. There is an Anxious fear, and there is a Cautious fear. 1. There is an Anxious fear, including doubtfulness concerning the event. And so far as any one is certain of his perseverance, so far he is freed from this fear. 2. A Cautious fear, including such an apprehension of the evil of apostasy, as puts the soul upon an holy care to shun it: And this is a means of preserving the Faithful. Now this is contrary to security. Therefore the Doctrine of the certain Perseverance of the Faithful is not a Doctrine of Security. We( with the Scripture, Jer. 32.40.) Teach it is promoted by such means, as are very opposite to security. And further, Mr. Baxter will grant them: That it is not( at least by any ordinary means) to be expected in this life, that the knowledge of our Sincerity, Justification, and Perseverance should be so perfect as to have no degree of Doubting, Habitual or Actual, at one time or other. Seeing therefore we are all Imperfect in our certainty of our Sincerity and Perseverance; it's meet and requisite that we be called on to( and so that we keep up) a Rational working, preventing fear, according to the measure of our uncertainty.  
6. They that make this Objection, sometimes grant, that the Apostles might have a Special promise of Perseverance, and Donum indefectibilis perseverantiae: And further cannot deny, but supposing they were certain of their perseverance, yet they might be put upon the use of means from a principle of Faith and Love. 
Res est soliciti plera timoris Amor.  Now will it not hence follow, even from their own Concessions, that the Certainty of the Saints Perseverance will not necessary infer, or produce Security and Negligence?  
Object. 7. What need have the Faithful to pray for Grace or Perseverance, if their Perseverance be Certain and Determined?  
Answ. 1. Prayer is a necessary part of that Worship, and Homage due to God, an acknowledgement of our dependence on him; and that he is the Author of all that good, we either have, or hope for.  
2. That the Perseverance of the Faithful is promised, this can be no Bar to their praying for it. But the Promise is an Encouragement to Prayer, and Prayer a means to obtain the Promise, Ezek. 36.36, 37. I the Lord have spoken it, and I will do it. Yet for this I will be inquired of by the House of Israel, to do it for them. The Lord would have his People to sue his Promise, to put his Bond in svit. As David did, 2 Sam. 17.27. And Daniel prayed with a Courage, when he understood the Number of the Years, whereof the Word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the Prophet, that he would accomplish Seventy Years in the Desolations of Jerusalem. Promissiones Dei non huc tendunt ut Homines torpeant,& ind captent occasionem ignaviae& socordiae, quia certo persuasi sunt Deum facturum esse quicquid promisit, 
Vid. in M. Pool. Synops. in Dan. p. 3.  said ut eos solicitet stimuletque ad preces. As a good Expositor notes.  
3. They that hold Perseverance a Benefit offered to all alike upon this condition, Nempe si gratiae sufficienti non defuerint: That is to say, If they shall not be wanting to that sufficient Grace, and Help afforded to them; these rather take away the use of Prayer here. For so one cannot pray with understanding any other way than thus; Lord, give me to improve that sufficient Grace which of course thou offerest to me, as to all others, if I have a mind to improve it. Let me peresevere, if I will.  
Object. 8. How should God ever seriously try the Faith of his People, if he hath determined, that their Faith shall never fail?  
Answ. 1. Gods trying of his People, is not for his own sake, he knows their minds, and thoughts afar off, Psal. 139.2. That which we red, 2 Chr. 32.31. God left Hezekiah, to try him, that he might know all that was in his heart. Is spoken per {αβγδ}, after the manner of men. The same is to be said to Gods trying of Abraham, Gen. 22.1, 12. Exploratio obedientiae Abrahae non est ignotae deprehensio, said notae jam illustrior patefactio& solennis approbatio.( Alting.) So it is not for his own sake, but it is for their sakes, and others sakes, that God trieth them, That they might be more known to themselves, and others. 2. Was not Christs Obedience tried, Heb. 5.8. when yet there was no doubt to be made of his Obedience?  
3. Thus one might Argue as well against the Divine prescience, and deny that God foresees who shall persevere in the Faith, and consequently deny that any are Elected so much as ex fide praevisâ,( which yet they maintain) because God could not seriously try and prove their Faith, if it was certainly known to him before.  
Indeed a new Writer hath started that strange Notion, 
Middle Way of Elect. and Redemp. p. 14.  that some things are Inscibilia, as well as other things are Impossibilia in themselves. Their nature's such, as God cannot foresee them, because he would have them Contingent; now though I hope, his Design is good, to represent God more Lovely, and more Adorable,( as he says.) Yet the Assertion seemeth to be a very bold one, and very unworthy of God. He best knoweth, whether here he Ploweth with Socinus's Heifer, 
Socin. prelect. c. 8. f. 26.  Quaedam sunt, queen Deus scire nullâ ratione dici potest, nec tamen ipsius omniscientiae quicquam derogatur. But when a man killeth another by chance, not Intentionally, we find Gods hand in it, Exod. 21.12. 
Castal. in M. Pool. Synops.  Quae putant Homines casu fieri, providentiâ Dei fiunt. And if Gods hand be in such things, Known unto God are all his Works from the beginning of the World, Acts 15.18. And David could not think a thought, but God knew it afar off, Psal. 139.2. As a man that knows what roots are in his Garden, though there be no appearance of them, yet he can say, when Spring comes, such and such a Flower will come up: So the Lord knows a mans thoughts afar off. It is Doctor Preston's Comparison: So Ezek. 11.5. I know the things that come into your mind, every one of them.  
Again, That God hath foretold future Contingents, it is an Evidence, both that he is the true God, the Disposer and governor of all things, Isa. 41.22, 23. and 46.9, 10. And a proof that he foresees future Contingents. Else how could he fore-tell them? God revealed to Elisha what Hazael would do to Israel, as that he would dash their Children in pieces, and ripp up their Women with Child, 2 Kings 8.12. Now either this Writer must say, that God determined Hazael's will to these things,( which he would not think to be any lovely Representation of God) or else that these things were so Contingent, that God could not foresee them. As he says, There are some things depend on mans will, which God determines; and here he fore-knows mens Wills, because he Knows as well as Does whatsoever he Will: And there are some things depend on mans Will, which we are to conceive that he determines not, but will have Contingent, &c.  
More I would have said to this, but that it would look like a Digression.  
First, From this last Proposition here Confirmed and Cleared, we may infer the happiness of the Faithful; Gods Covenant with them being so well ordered, and so sure. They may say, as Psal. 48.14. This God is our God for ever and ever: He will be our Guide even unto death. None so safe as they, against whom the Gates of Hell shall not prevail. None so Rich as they, who have an Interest in God, in Christ, in the Promises, and in the purchased Possession: And none have their Estates so well settled. Their Estates settled by the Decree of Heaven, and their Names Enrolled in Heaven.  
2. Therefore it is our greatest Interest and Concern, that we come up to the Terms of Gods Covenant, Isa. 55.3. Incline your Ear, and come unto me: Hear, and your Souls shall Live, and I will make an everlasting Covenant with you, even the sure Mercies of David. Of David, the Lord said, 2 Sam. 7.15. My Mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul. O rest not in being only outwardly in Covenant, as Saul was! But see that you come up to Covenant-Terms, as David did. What gross and groundless presumption is it for one to hope he shall be preserved in a State of Grace and Salvation, who never yet was in such a State?  
3. Then what Enemies are Believers to their own Peace, and Comfort, who do not use all Diligence to clear up the Work of Grace, and prove themselves to be in the Faith; whereupon they might have such strong Consolation? If our Title to an outward Estate, as House or Land was questioned, we would do what we could to clear it. And why are we at no more pains to clear our Spiritual estates? 2 Cor. 13.5. Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the Faith. If I have Faith, it is not impossible, but upon a due Examination, and diligent Enquiry I may come to know, I have it. And if once I know, I have true Faith, then I may know, I shall be saved: He that believeth shall be saved.  
4. Then such as can see their special Interest in God, and in the great blessings of his Covenant, have cause indeed to walk on cheerfully, but not to grow secure, or walk carelessly. None can be more certain, that they shall not fall short of Heaven. and Glory hereafter, than that they shall not fall from Grace and Holiness here. This Doctrine may greatly Encourage the Faithful to strive against sin, assuring them of final Victory: But it gives no encouragement to any to yield to sin, and continue in it. And assurance of ones Perseverance and Salvation cannot be maintained without an Holy watchfulness. As one says well: Sin doth as naturally bread Troubles and Fears, as a gross Substance in the Sun-shine causeth a Shadow.   

Sect. 20.  
PROP. XX. The Covenant of Grace is the best Covenant.  
NOt but that the Covenant of Works was perfect in its kind, and most exactly fitted to that State, wherein Man was Created. God therein required nothing but what was mans Duty, as he was His Creature. Required nothing, but what man was able to perform. And promised all that man could desire. As perfect perpetual Obedience was required of Man in the Covenant of Works; so perfect and perpetual Happiness was promised thereupon. Thus the Covenant of works did excellently Comport with the state of Man in Innocency.  
But then the Covenant of Grace only can be to Mans advantage, in his fallen Estate. The Covenant of Grace is the best Covenant for us sinners. It is impossible, that sinners should have Relief, and Benefit by the Covenant of Works. Indeed it may be beneficial unto sinners, Occasionally, Indirectly, that is, showing our Misery by sin, that hereby we are fallen short of Glory and Happiness, laid under the Curse and Condemnation of the Law; and become Obnoxious to Gods Wrath, and subject to Death Temporal, and Eternal. Thus it is true, the Covenant of Works may be an Occasion of Awakening our Consciences, showing what lost Creatures we are, should we stick to that Covenant, and if no other way be found out, but we must stand or fall by the sentence of that Covenant. And thus it may some way prepare sinners to accept of the Covenant of Grace, propounded and held forth. As the Israelites Bondage under the Egyptian Task-Masters should have prepared them to harken to, and welcome Moses and Aaron, who were sent about their Deliverance, Exod. 4.31. But observe, all the benefit sinners can have this way from the Covenant of Works, is only upon supposition of a Covenant of Grace, provided to relieve them from the strict Sentence of that other Covenant.  
That sinners can have no benefit Properly, and Directly from the Covenant of Works,( which makes against them) but only from the Covenant of Grace, framed on purpose for sinners Relief.  
And that the Covenant of Grace is best for us: Appeareth thus,  
( 1.) The Covenant of Works was for the Preservation and Continuation of Mans Happiness: But it speaketh not to his present case, being now sinful and miserable, whereas the Covenant of Grace was provided for his Recovery: Post naufragium tabula, a Plank after shipwreck. The Covenant of Grace holds forth the way of Mans Restitution and Restauration to Happiness.  
( 2.) The Condition of the Covenant of Works, is utterly Impossible to sinners. To be a sinner, and to be perfectly Conformable to the Will and Law of God; to be a sinner, and not to be a sinner; is a plain Contradiction: It is impossible, Quod factum est infectum fieri. But the Condition of the Covenant of Grace is possible, and attainable; yea, easily in itself.  
Object. But do not many Divines say, That it is as possible for a man to keep the Law perfectly, as hearty to accept of Christ upon the Terms of the Gospel?  
Answ. Such Expressions must not be taken strictly, and Rigorously, but with a favourable Construction. For it is simply, and naturally impossible, that a sinner should be perfectly Conformed to Gods Law: But it is not naturally impossible that a sinner should Repent, and should come to Obey from the Heart.  
True,( as I have proved before) none so without Gods Special Grace; yet that any, who are called on to Repent, and Believe, do it not, they can only blame themselves: The hindrance is in their Wills. They might come to Christ if they would. As Mr. Ball says: 
Of the Covenant. p. 343.  The Invitation of God is not so hard, that Man cannot fulfil it, if he would: But such as if Man would, he could not but Execute.  
Sinner, How it it? Art thou unfeignedly willing to leave thy sins, that would ruin thee for ever? Art thou hearty willing to accept of Christ; as to be Redeemed and Saved, so to be Guided, Ruled, and Governed by him? This is the Sum and Substance of the Condition of the Covenant of Grace. If thou art unwilling to this, certainly, thou judgest thyself unworthy of Eternal Life, and shalt be Self-condemned. You see, they are no hard Terms, whereon Life and Happiness is offered and promised in the Covenant of Grace. If you be but willing, truly willing, it is done. And if you be unwilling to abandon your Lusts, that would be your Death, and unwilling to give up yourselves to Jesus Christ, the only Redeemer, and an All-sufficient Saviour; it is evident, your Destruction is of yourselves, that you are left without excuse.  
( 3.) The Covenant of Works requiring and exacting Obedience every way perfect, as the Condition of it, there was no provision of a Mediator, no place for a Mediator, when God made that Covenant with man. The Covenant of Works owned no such thing, as Acceptation through, and for the Righteousness of another. But the Covenant of Grace does admit of, and hold forth a Mediator. According to the Covenant of Grace, we may be Justified and Saved for the Righteousness of another, scil. of Jesus Christ, the Lord our Righteousness; when it was impossible that we should be Justified, and Saved by our own Righteousness. And the Righteousness of Christ( God-man) which is made over to a believing sinner for his Justification, is a more excellent Righteousness, than that of any mere Creature.  
( 4.) The Covenant of Works holds forth no such thing, as Pardon. Absolute perfect Obedience being( as I said) the Condition of it, upon the least sin, that Covenant was Irreparably broken. But the Covenant of Grace accepting of sincere Obedience, and requiring no more as its Condition, granteth out a Pardon to those, whose sins are not Inconsistent with Sincerity. And so this Covenant is capable of Renewing. Wast thou not obliged to forsake sin, and to give up thyself to Christ, and his Service, by thy very Baptism? But alas, Hast thou not broken thy Baptismal Covenant? Yea, Hast thou not lived long in the breach of Covenant? And yet if at last thou wouldst Repent, and come in to Christ, thou shouldst be pardonned, and accepted.  
( 5.) Man might keep the Condition of the Covenant of Works for a time, and yet afterwards fall off, and lose all. God Created Man at first in a state of Integrity, with sufficient ability to Obey perfectly if he would; but did not then think meet to Engage, and Undertake for him, that his will should be ever to Obey. But such as come up to the Terms of the Covenant of Grace, stand safe, are upon surer ground than Adam in Innocency. Their Perseverance is certain; and as their Perseance is certain, so their Salvation, and Happiness. Thus get within the Ark of the Covenant, and you are Lodged safe indeed.  
Now, 1. Here take Notice of the Riches of Divine Grace and Mercy. When man had once broken Covenant with God, one would have thought, the Divine Majesty should have been so Incensed against him for it, as never more to have dealt with man in this way; or if He did make another Covenant with man, it should have been upon harder Terms: Yet behold, and wonder, from mans breach of the Covenant of works, he takes occasion to manifest more of his Grace, in making another Covenant more to his Creatures advantage, when man might rather have concluded, that he would cast off for ever, and would be favourable no more. Is this the manner of man, O Lord God? If a man find his Enemy, will he let him go well away out of his hand? God dealt not so with the Angels that fell, as he hath done with sinful men.  
2. See here the gross Ignorance, Folly, and Madness of Self-justitiaries. Such as adhere to the Covenant of Works, and hope to be saved by their works, slighting and contemning Christ, and Grace offered. They that say to the works of their hands, ye are our Saviours: And say, we are Lords, we will not come to thee. Surely, they are miserable, foolish Creatures, they know not what is good for themselves, that go about to establish their own Righteousness, rejecting Christ, and his Righteousness. These trust to a broken reed: To turn away from Christ, to rely on ones own Righteousness, is to build on the Sand, not on the Rock: Or as if a man learned his hand on a Wall, and a Serpent bit him. Indeed better no hope, than false hope; Better no confidence, than Carnal confidence. It is better to have no peace, than that which is false. A lying refuge will at last prove no Refuge, will be no Protection, but the Confusion of those that put their trust in it. I should have far greater hopes of one that is low in Self-despair, than of one that is highly Confident in himself.   
Heb. 8.6. and Chap. 7.22. 
Mediator of a better Covenant.  
Sect. 21.  
PROP. XXI. The New Covenant of Grace, is the best Dispensation of the Covenant of Grace.  
THe Gospel-Dispensation, this last Edition of the Covenant is the best: And it was meet, that the best Dispensation should come in with Christ, the Mediator of the Covenant. It was fit, he should have the Honour of bringing in the best Form, and Administration of it.  
Now this is the best Dispensation of the Covenant.  
( 1.) In regard of sauciness and Perspicuity. As Mr. Ball observes: 
Of the Covenant. p. 33.  From the first giving forth of the Promise, until the Coming of Christ in the Flesh, the Revelation was more Clear, Distinct, Ample, as the Coming of the Messiah did approach nearer and nearer. So it was Clearest, and Fullest, when Christ Came. And so much it seemeth was expected: As the Samaritan woman could say, John 4.25. I know that messiah cometh, when he is come, he will tell us all things. No wonder that the Church of Christ under the Gospel hath more sight, since the Sun is Risen. Christ was darkly shadowed out under the Old Testament, but is clearly Revealed in the New. Moses was veiled, and an hard thing it was for the Jews to look to the end of that which is Abolished,( 2 Cor. 3.13.) Christians have the Advantage clear of those that Lived before Christ. So that what the Prophets foretold, we may have a clearer understanding of, than they had themselves. As we red, 1 Pet. 1.12. That not unto themselves, but unto us, they did Minister the things that are now reported. We may see those things that many Prophets, and Kings, and Righteous men heretofore could not see,( Mat. 13.17. Luke 10.24.) We may know Christ in his Offices, and special Undertaking, and his saving Benefits, of which they knew very little. Types are best apprehended by the presence, and coming of the Antitype. So Christians may understand the scope and meaning of the Legal sacrifices, and other Types of Christ, better than the Jews themselves did. Yea, it is a wonder, if any of us now should be Ignorant of Christ, and the Way of Salvation by him, 2 Cor. 4.3.4. If our Gospel be hide, it is hide to them that are lost; such whose eyes the God of this World hath blinded.  
What should we think of such as enjoy the Gospel, and yet are Ignorant of Christ, and the way of Salvation by him? Must it not needs be affencted Ignorance? Must it not be wilful Blindness, if not judicial too? Indeed, they that like not to receive the Truth in Love, that they might be saved, may justly be given up to Satan, to be further blinded, and deceived by him. That as the Philistines dealt with samson, so should he deal with them, even put out their eyes, blind their minds, lest the Light of the Glorious Gospel of Christ should shine into them. Do not such forfeit their eyes, who will not see the things that belong unto their peace? As it is Isa. 6.9, 10.( A Text that is Cited no less than six times in the New Testament.) Hear ye in hearing,( hear as much as ye will) but understand not: q. d. In summâ rerum abundantia peribitis famed.( As Oecolump.)  
The New Covenant of Grace holdeth forth Eternal Life and Happiness more clearly than the Old. What was more darkly propounded, and promised in the Old Testament, is brought to Light, and more plainly discovered, and offered in the New. 2 Tim. 1.10. Life and Immortality, is brought to Light, through the Gospel. Thus New Testamentpromises are better Promises: Though not better for the Matter of them, yet better for the manner of propounding them. The Church of God of old, for a long time( even from Adam to Abraham) had but one noted Promise, that we red of, to Live upon; and that very Dark and Mysterious too, [ The Seed of the Woman, shall break the Serpents head.] And the Church of the Jews had Spiritual, and Heavenly things promised more Darkly, shadowed out under Earthly things; as Heaven was shadowed out under Canaan, the Land of Promise. The way unto the Holiest was not so manifest, while as the first Tabernacle was yet standing, Heb. 9.8. But we have Heaven opened in the Gospel, and the veil taken away.  
( 2.) The Gospel-Dispensation of the Covenant is the best Dispeasation, in regard of the Easiness of Services enjoined. Our Gospel-Service is far more easy, than the Legal-services appointed to the Jews.  
Under the Old Testament, God required a multitude of Outward services. Many Carnal Ordinances the Jews had, which stood in Meats and Drinks, and divers Washings, Heb. 9.10. And many of those Services were Costly, as the sacrificing of Sheep, and Oxen, &c. And some of them painful, as Circumcision, and going up from the Remotest parts of the Land, to make their appearance at Jerusalem thrice a Year, Exod. 23.17. The positive Institutions under the Gospel are very few, and those very plain, and easy. Christs Yoke is very easy, compared with Moses yoke.  
( 3.) The Gospel-Dispensation is the best Dispeasation of the Covenant of Grace, in regard of its Extensiveness: Bonum quò Communius, eo melius. The Old Covenant was made with one Nation, the Nation of the Jews, the gentle Nations being strangers to it. Though a scattering of gentle Proselytes were taken in, yet they were Incorporated into the Jewish Church, showing that Ordinarily salvation was not to be had, but among the Jews. It was {αβγδ}, the pre-eminence of the Jew, that unto them were committed the Oracles of God, Rom. 3.1, 2. Before they were the Children of the Covenant. But the Gospel-Covenant is not so Confined to any Nation, excluding orhers, Mark 16. Go, Preach the Gospel to every Creature. He that Believeth shall be saved. Here's good tidings of great Joy to all People.  
( 4.) The Gospel-Dispensation of the Covenant is the best Dispensation, in regard of Power and Efficacy accompanying it, Heb. 8.8, 9, 10, 11. The Spirit was given more sparing to those under the Old Testament, but is poured out more plentifully in the Times of the Gospel. Those appointments which the Apostle is not afraid to call Carnal Ordinances, had less of the Spirit accompanying them than Gospel Ordinances have, 2 Cor. 10.4. The Weapons of our warfare are not Carnal, but Mighty through God.  
The Gospel-Ministration is the Ministration of the Spirit, Signantèr, Emphatically, and Especially, 2 Cor. 3.8. And is not that the best Dispensation, that hath more of God, more of his Grace and Spirit in it? 
Of the Covenant. p. 35.  It is true, as Mr. Ball hath well observed,( which preventeth an Objection some might make here) If we speak of some particular Persons under the First Covenant, they were endowed with greater Gifts of the Spirit, than many under the New: But more Light of Knowledge, and greater Plenty and Abundance of Grace, is bestowed upon the Church in the time of the Gospel, if we respect the Body of the Church, and Faithful in General.  
( 5.) The Gospel-Dispensation is the best in regard of Duration, and Continuance. Indeed as the Old and New Covenant are the same for Substance, so that for substance was an everlasting Covenant, 2 Sam. 23.5. Yet as to the Outward Form, and Seals of it, it is changed: So as the New Covenant is not to be changed. The New Covenant shall never wax Old, but remain every way the same to the End of the World. The Old Covenant was to prepare, and make way for the New, and so to give way to it: But the New Covenant is not to give way to any other. There is no Third Dispensation to be expected here upon Earth. They are Idle Dreamers, that Talk, or Think of such a thing. The Gospel-Ministry, Ordinances, and Seals are to continue, till we all come in the Unity of the Faith, and of the Knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the Stature of the fullness of Christ, Ephes. 4.11, 12, 13. Till the Lord come, 1 Cor. 11.26. Till the end of the World, Mat. 28.19, 20. Till the End, when Christ shall deliver up the Kingdom to God, even the Father, that God may be All in All. As for Saltmarsh, his Conceit, that understandeth[ Till the end of the World, Mat. 28.20.] thus: Till the end of that Age, after which a Third Dispensation of the Spirit should take place, and Ministry, and Ordinances, cease: It is very gross.  
1. How well does this Interpretation agree with the fore-going words,[ Go Teach( or Disciple) all Nations, teaching them to do observe all things, whatsoever I have commanded you.] Were all Nations Discipled, and Taught to observe all things whatsoever Christ commanded in that Age?  
2. Though {αβγδ} sometimes be put for an Age; yet so it is as well used for {αβγδ}, World, as we have it Translated,( Heb. 1.2. and 11.3.) And {αβγδ}, again, and again used for the end of the World, Mat. 13.39. The Harvest is the end of the World, {αβγδ}. And v. 40. So shall it be in the end of this World, {αβγδ}, not in the end of this Age. So again, ver. 49. So let the Evangelist Matthew, Interpret this[ {αβγδ}.] And who may better do it? And we see plainly according to him, it must be [ Until the end of the World,] in a proper sense. See Gerhard. Har. Cap. 160. p. 467. c. 1. As for that Text, Heb. 9.26. But now in the end of the World, {αβγδ}, it favoureth not Saltm. at all. Eadem est hoc loco {αβγδ}, quae est Apostolo alibi plenitudo temporum. Camero. praelect. p. 237. c. 1. In consummatione seculorum. id est, diebus novissimis. Beza.  
3. Saltmarsh, his Conceit is plainly against the Gospel, and therefore( sure) is not Gospel. He opposeth the Gospel-Ministration, to the Ministration of the Spirit; which is directly contrary to the Apostle, who calls the Gospel-Ministration {αβγδ}, the Ministration of the Spirit, 2 Cor. 3.8. We are sure, the Apostle was in the Right, and therefore Saltmarsh must be in a very great Error here.  
Others have the like Pretence for casting off Gospel-Ordinances, as when we urge, 1 Cor. 11.26. to prove, that the Lords Supper, is to continue in the Church:( And if that, why not other second inances Instituted by the same Author?) Till he come. To this some say, He is come to them in the Spirit; and being come in the Spirit, such Ordinances are out of Date. But what Ground or Warrant have they to understand it of his coming in the Spirit? Will it not hence follow, that the Lords Supper was Instituted for none but Unbelievers, Carnal, unregenerate Persons, such as have not the Spirit? If they that have the Spirit, have no more to do with this Ordinance, then we must say, it was never intended, as a Feast for Christ Friends: But for such as are none of his,( as, if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.)  
Again it is manifest, that the Apostles and others, to whom Christ was come in the Spirit, did yet continue to hold Communion in this, and other Ordinances. As we red, Acts 2.42. They continued steadfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship, and in breaking of Bread, and Prayers. The Apostles practise, with other Primitive Christians, who had the Spirit in an Eminent Degree and Measure, and yet kept close to this, and other Gospel-Ordinances, plainly Condemns their Way, and Overthrows their Conceit, who under Pretence of having the Spirit, cast off Ordinances, and think themselves above them.  
Therefore we are to understand another coming of Christ, to be meant in 1 Cor. 11.26. Then his coming in the Spirit, even his Second coming, his coming in Glory, Luke 9.26. His coming at the end of the World, Mat. 24.3. 37, 39. Rev. 22.20. The Gospel-Way being to Continue from His First to His Second coming.  
The Times of the Gospel are oft called the Last dayes, 
As the ends of the World, {αβγδ}, 1 Cor. 10.11. Fines, Idcirco hi dies vocantur novissimi,& aetas Christi adventum consecuta verè dici potest Seculorum perfectio ac complementum. Beza.  Isa. 2.2. Heb. 1.2. God hath in these Last days spoken to us by his Son; the Gospel being to succeed, and put and end to the Old Testament-Dispensation, and so being itself to Continue to the end of the Time. So the ancient Hebrews, called the Kingdom of the Messiah, The World to come; which Expression the Apostle useth, Heb. 2.5. In these Last days of the Gospel, God hath poured out of his Spirit, as we see Acts 2.16, 17. Then judge whether they speak according to Scripture, who would make the Gospel-Dispensation a middle Dispensation, and to give way to a Dispensation of the Spirit. If Gospel-Times be the Last times, and if that pouring out of the Spirit which was promised, was to be in and under the Gospel; then there is no such Dispensation of the Spirit to be expected here on Earth, as Quakers and Enthusiasts talk of.  
Now how does it concern us all to see, that we receive not this Grace in vain? If we are strangers to God, and Grace, who Live under the best Dispensation of the Covenant of Grace, How Inexcusable are we? And how can we think to Escape, if we Neglect Gospel-salvation? This is the Everlasting Gospel. No other Gospel to come after it. 
lord. Tena. in Heb. 1.2. p. 28. b.  Evangelium dicitur Lex nova, non tantum quia successit veteri, said quia post illam non est alia futura. God will never Treat with men upon other Terms, then are set down here. These are the last offers he will ever make, Mark 16. Go, Preach the Gospel to every Creature: He that Believes, shall be Saved: But he that Believes not shall be Damned. If you reject these Terms, God will reject you. You that have not only Moses, and the Prophets, but the Doctrine of Christ, and his Apostles, if you do not Believe, and if you are not this way brought in, your Case is desperate. If any bring any other Gospel than this unto you, let him be accursed, says the Apostle, Gal. 1.9. And that Doctrine which would lay the Publishers under a Curse, is no way likely to bring the Hearers on to true Blessedness.  
And then, that the Lord hath kept the best to the last for us, that we have been brought forth under the last and best Dispensation of the Covenant, it should teach us to aclowledge his Exceeding abundant Grace to Us-ward. It was not because we were better than others that went before, that we have been thus privileged above others. No, we were by Nature the Children of Wrath, even as others: Our Father as an Amorite, our Mother as an Hittite, and We as the Children of the Ethiopian before God. Yet the Mystery which was hide from Ages, and Generations, is made manifest unto us, to whom God would make known the Riches of his glorious Grace. And thus the last come to be first,( to allude to that, Mat. 19.30.) We that Live under the Gospel-Dispensation, are privileged far above those that went before; not only such as were altogether strangers to the Commonwealth of Israel, and to the Covenants of Promise, but even such as were taken into Covenant under the Old Testament-Dispensation, see Mat. 11.11. with Luke 7.28. John's Ministry is preferred to that of the Prophets, as clearer; and the Gospel-Ministry preserred unto Johns, as clearer still. So it is a greater privilege and advantage( if men would Improve it) to enjoy a Gospel-Ministry, than to have sat at Moses feet, or to have heard of any of the Prophets of Old.  
But a word more: As we Live under a better Dispensation, should not we endeavour to be better? As we have greater means, should we not abound more in Grace and Knowledge? As we enjoy more, should we not do more than others? Now let our Conversation be as becometh the Gospel.  
I shall not Enlarge further upon the Doctrine of the Covenants. Though many things are pntermitted, yet I hope I may Conclude, as Cunaeus, Diximus autem neque omnia, neque Nihil. I have not said all( but far short of all indeed) yet I hope what hath been said, it is not as Nothing.   
THE END.   

The Table.  

A.  
Antiquity of the Gospel. page. 303.350.   

B.  
Baptism, Infants right to it proved, p. 398. 403, &c. Objections against it Answered, p. 412, &c. No need of an express Command for it, p. 407.  
Antipaedo-Baptists have no Scripture Rule for deferring their Childrens baptism. p. 417  
The special advantages of Infant-Baptism. p. 430. Dipping not necessary to Baptism. p. 439, &c.   

C.  
Children taken into Covenant together with their Parents, p. 365, &c. How styled holy, p. 378. Disciples. p. 421  
Christs Conception, why Miraculous, p. 90, 91. Against being Christed with Christ. p. 273  
Church. Of an Universal Visible Church. p. 346  
Condition. The Conditions God propounds, man is bound to accept. p. 44, 45. There are Conditions in the Covenant of Grace, p. 134. &c. The Conditions are performed by us, not by God, or Christ for us. p. 145, &c. But by the help of special Grace, p. 148. God not unjust in requiring the Condition, where yet he gives not Special Grace, p. 163. The Condition of the Covenant of Grace, what, p. 225.( 1) What, in reference to the Honour of the Redeemer, and of Free-grace, p. 229,( 2) What, for the Honour of Gods Holiness, and Authority, p. 242, &c.( 3) What, to secure the Interest and Benefit of Souls, p. 252, &c.[ Corruption, vid. Nature.]  
Covenant. The difference between a Promise and a Covenant. p. 44  
Covenant of Works, why so little said of it in Scripture, p. 2. Made with Adam and his Posterity, p. 5. How far it is now abrogated, p. 72, &c. Children might be Involved in it, though they know nothing of it. p. 84, 85  
Covenant of Grace. It is made betwixt God and man, p. 229. It is Conditional, p, 134. One and the same for Substance in all Ages, p. 298, &c. It was made with Adam, p. 298. With Abraham, p. 305, &c. With the Israelites, p. 311, &c. How this was a Subservient Covenant, p. 325. Of a mixed Covenant, p. 326. Of a Covenant of Peculiarity, p. 334. Of a Political Covenant, p. 339, &c, 345. A twofold manner of being in Covenant, scil. Externally, and also Internally, p. 352. The privileges of those, that are Externally in Covenant, p. 362. The Special privileges of those, who are also Internally in Covenant, p. 451. &c. The Covenant of Grace is the best Covenant, p. 478. Its Dispensation twofold, soil. Old, and New, p. 331. The New is the best Dispensation, and why, p. 484  
The Covenant of Redemption.   

D.  
Death. What kind of Death threatened in the Covenant of Works. p. 51, 52  
Dipping. Whether Necessary, and Essential to true Baptism. p. 439, &c.  
Dispensation. The Old and New Dispensation of the Covenant of Grace, p. 331. No third Dispensation to be expected here on Earth. p. 489   

F.  
Faith. Of the Faith of those that Lived before Christ. p. 229, 301, 302  
Fear, twofold, Anxious, and Cautious. p. 471   

G. vid. Interest.  
God. Against being Godded with God. p. 270  
Grace. No Subtraction of it from Man till he sinned. p. 64, 65  
Of Special Grace in the work of Conversion, p. 148. What Duties Special Grace teaceth, p. 174. Special Grace promised to some, p. 179, &c. Saving Grace purchased by Christ for some. p. 199, &c.   

I.  
Image of God in man threefold, p. 7. Wherein it chiefly consists, p. 8. Whether Gods Image in Adam was Natural, or Supernatural, p. 11. Natural two ways. p. 14  
Incogitancy, probably the first step in mans Fall. p. 71  
Infants, if not sinners in themselves, they should not be saved by Christ. p. 95.[ v. Baptism.]  
Interest in God twofold. p. 262  
What happiness Included in the Special Interest. p. 262, &c.   

L.  
Law. Whether the Moral Law bind only as delivered by Christ Redeemer, and not also as the Law of our Creator. p. 17, 23, 49, 50.  
Whether the Moral Law obliges, as given by Moses. p. 20  
The distinction of the Law of Works, of Faith, and of Christ, considered. p. 22  
Whether God ever dispensed with a Natural, or purely Moral Law. p. 32  
Covenant of Grace a Law. p. 120  
How the Law is opposed to the Gospel. p. 339  
Life. What Life was Promised to Adam in Innocency. p. 38, &c.   

M.  
Man holy at first but mutable. p. 63, 64, 65  
Mediator. No Mediator in the Covenant of Works, p. 61. Whether Christ be a Mediator for Confirmation to Angels. p. 62, 63  
Merit. Whether Innocent Adam in a strict sense, could Merit the Reward. p. 42  
How the Saints cannot Merit. p. 205, &c.  
Moral Agents governed in a different way from Natural. p. 25   

N.  
Nature. Corruption of mans Nature following the Fall. p. 86  
It makes all liable to Condemnation. p. 93[ vid. Original.]   

O.  
Obedience. Whether it be in Heaven. p. 67  
Offers of Grace. God mocks not Creatures in them. p. 166  
Original Corruption Propagated. p. 88.[ vid. Nature.]   

P.  
People. What Happiness included in Gods special owning any for his People. p. 292, &c.  
Permission. Why God permitted mans Fall. p. 68  
Perseverance of Saints proved, p. 453. Objections against it answered. p. 464  
Precepts. Of positive Precepts, p. 35. What under the Gospel. p. 36  
Promise. The Promise of Life to Adam, not of strict Justice p. 41. 48  
Of the Promises of the first Special, Inward, Discriminating Grace, p. 189. The use of such Promises, p. 194. Whether the Israelites had only Temporal Promises. p. 317   

R.  
Redeemer. The Faithful had some knowledge of a Redeemer before Christ's coming. p. 229, &c.  
Respecter of Persons, how God is not. p. 170.  
Reward. In our Obedience, we may have an eye to the Reward. p. 26   

S.  
Salvation cannot come by the Covenant of Works. p. 99  
Sin. The greatness of mans Sin in eating the forbidden Fruit. p. 69, 70  
Sinners. We are Sinners, not only by Imitation. p. 91  
Spirit. Whether the Expression of the Spirits personal Indwelling in Believers, be sound. p. 276   

T.  
Testament. The Covenant of Grace a Testament, p. 115. Old Testament of use to Christians. p. 348, 349, 351  
threatenings. A Righteous man awed with them, p. 53. Declare what punishment is due. p. 80, 81   

U.  
Usurpers. Wicked men not Usurpers of what they have by Providence, though no right by Covenant. p. 288   

W.  
Will. freedom of mans Will not everthrown by Special Grace. p. 158    

Texts of Scripture Cleared and Vindicated.  


GEnesis 3.15. page. 298, 299.  
Lev. 18.5. p. 321.  
Deut. 10.12. p. 320.  
Jer. 31.31, &c. p. 179, &c. 334, 335. Chap. 32.40, p. 455.  
Ezek. 16.61, 62. p. 333. Chap. 18.24, 26. p. 464. 36. 26. 27. p. 179, &c.  
Mal. 2.15. p. 392.  
Mat. 16.18. p. 457. 28. 19. p. 403. 418, &c. Ver. 20. p. 489.  
Mar. 16.16. p. 423, 424.  
John 5.22. p. 18.  
Acts 2.38, 39. p. 370, 408. 13. 48. p. 453.  
Rom. 4.11. p. 236, 237. 5. 12. p. 94. Ver. 19. p. 89. Rom. 6.4. p. 444, &c. 9. 6, 7, 8. p. 355. 10.5. p. 323. 11. 15, 16, &c. p. 374.  
1 Cor. 7.14. p. 378.  
Gal. 4.24. p. 339. 5.3. p. 313, 314.  
Tit. 1.2. p 131.  
Heb. 6.4, 5, 6. p. 465. 8. 6, 7. p. 331. Heb. 8.10. p. 179, &c. Ver. 13. p. 338. 9. 20. p. 118.  
Jam. 4.12. p. 19.  
1 Joh. 4.18. p. 56.  
Rev. 3.4. {αβγδ} p. 216. 13. 8. p. 300.