were born! all extraordinary and of the marvellous kind! but let us attend to the proof of these things.

The first argument is taken from its being an inconteftable fact, that the infants of believers were received with their parents into covenant with God, in the former difpenfations or ages of the church; which is a great privilege, a privilege still fubfifting, and never revoked; wherefore the infants of believers, having still a right to the fame privilege, in confequence have a right to baptim, which is now the only appointed token of God's covenant, and the only rite of admiffion into it. To which I reply, that it is not an incontestable fact, but a fact contested, that the infants of believers were with their parents taken into covenant with God, in the former difpenfations and ages of the church; by which must be meant, the ages preceding the Abrahamic covenant; fince that is made, to furnish out a fecond and diftinct argument from this; and fo the fcriptures produced are quite impertinent, Gen. xvii. 7, 10-12. Deut. xxix. 10-12. Ezek. xvi. 20, 21. feeing they refer to the Abrahamic and Mofaic difpenfations, of which hereafter. The first covenant made with man, was the covenant of works, with Adam before the fall, which indeed included all his pofterity, but had no peculiar regard to the infants of believers; he standing as a federal head to all his feed, which no man fince has ever done and in him they all finned, were condemned, and died. This covenant, I presume, this Gentleman can have no view unto: after the fall of Adam, the covenant of grace was revealed, and the way of life and falvation by the Meffiah; but then this revelation was only made to Adam and Eve perfonally, as interested in these things, and not to their natural feed and pofterity as fuch, as being interested in the fame covenant of grace with them; for then all mankind must be taken into the covenant of grace; and if that gives and if that gives a right to baptifm, they have all an equal right to unto it; and fo there is nothing peculiar to the infants of believers; and of whom, there is not the leaft fyllable mentioned throughout the whole age or difpenfation of the church, reaching from Adam to Noab; a length of time almost equal to what has run out from the birth of Chrift, to the prefent age. The next covenant we read of, is the covenant made with Noab after the flood, which was not made with him, and his immediate offspring only; nor were they taken into covenant with him as the infants of a believer; nor had they any facrament or rite given them as a token of Jehovah being their God, and they his children, and as standing in a peculiar relation to him; will any one dare to say this of Ham, one of the immediate fons of Noah? The covenant was made with Noab and all mankind, to the end of the world, and even with every living creature, and all the beafts of the earth, promifing them fecurity from an uni

X X 2

i Baptifm of Infants a reasonable Service, &c. p. 14, 15.

verfal

verfal deluge, as long as the world stands; and had nothing in it peculiar to the infants of believers: and these are all the covenants the fcripture makes mention of, till that made with Abraham, of which in the next argument.

This being the cafe, there is no room nor reason to talk of the greatness of this privilege, and of the continuance of it, and of afking when it was repealed, fince it does not appear to have been a fact; nor during these ages and difpenfations of the church, was there ever any facrament, rite, or ceremony, appointed for the admiffion of persons adult, or infants, into covenant with God; nor was there ever any fuch rite in any age of the world, nor is there now: the covenant with Adam, either of works or grace, had no ceremony of this kind; there was a token, and still is, of Noah's covenant, the rainbow, but not a token or rite of admiffion of perfons into it, but a token of the continuance and perpetuity of it in all generations: nor was circumcifion a rite of admiffion of Abraham's feed into his covenant, as will quickly appear; nor is baptism now an initiatory rite, by which perfons are admitted into the covenant. Let this Gentleman, if he can, point out to us where it is fo described; perfons ought to appear to be in the covenant of grace, and partakers of the bleffings of it, the Spirit of God, faith in Christ, and repentance towards God, before they are admitted to baptifin. This Gentleman will find more work to fupport his first argument, than perhaps he was aware of; the premises being bad, the conclufion must be wrong. I proceed

to,

The fecond argument, taken from the Abrahamic covenant, which stands thus: The covenant God made with Abraham and his feed, Genefis xvii. into which bis infants were taken together with himself, by the rite of circumcifion, is the very fame we are now under, the fame with that in Gal. iii. 16, 17. still in force, and not to be difannulled, in which we believing Gentiles are included, Romans iv. 9-16, 17. and fo being Abraham's feed, have a right to all the grants and privileges of it, and fo to the admiffion of our infants to it, by the fign and token of it, which is changed from circumcifion to baptifm*. But, 1. though Abraham's feed were taken into covenant with him, which defigns his adult pofterity in all generations, on whom it was enjoined to circumcife their infants, it does not follow that his infants were; but fo it is, that wherever the words feed, children, &c. are used, it immediately runs in the heads of fome men, that infants must be meant, though they are not neceffarily included; but be it fo, that Abraham's infants were admitted with him, (though at the time of making this covenant, he had no infant with him, Ishmael was then thirteen years of age) yet not as the infants of a believer; there were believers and their infants then living, who were left out of the covenant; and those that were taken in in fucceffive

Baptifin of Infants a reasonable Service, &c. p. 16-19

ceffive generations, were not the infants of believers only, but of unbelievers alfo; even all the natural feed of the Jews, whether believers or unbelievers.2. Those that were admitted into this covenant, were not admitted by the rite of circumcifion; Abraham's female feed were taken into covenant with him, as well as his male feed, but not by any visible rite or ceremony; nor were his male feed admitted by any fuch rite, no not by circumcifion; for they were not to be circumcifed until the eighth day; to have circumcifed them fooner would have been criminal; and that they were in covenant from their birth, this gentleman, I prefume, will not deny.-3. The covenant of circumcifion, as it is called Ats vii. 8. cannot be the fame covenant we are now under, fince that is abolished, Gal. v. 1-3. and it is a new covenant, or a new adminiftration of the covenant of grace, that we are now under; the old covenant under the Mofaic dispensation is waxen old, and vanished away, Heb. viii. 8, 13. nor is the covenant with Abraham, Gen. xvii. the fame with that mentioned in Gal. iii. 17. which is ftill in force, and not to be difannulled; the diftance of time between them does not agree, but falls fhort of the apostle's date, four and twenty years; for from the making of this covenant to the birth of Ifaac, was one year, Gen. xvii. 1. and xxi. 5. from thence to the birth of Jacob, fixty years, Gen. xxv. 26. from thence to his going down to Egypt, one hundred and thirty years, Gen. xlvii. 9. where the Ifraelites continued two hundred and fifteen '; and quickly after they came out of Egypt, was the law given, which was but four hundred and fix years after this covenant. The reason this gentleman gives, why they must be the fame, will not hold good, namely, "this is the only covenant in which "God ever made and confirmed promifes to Abraham, and to his feed;" fince God made a covenant with Abraham before this, and confirmed it to his feed, and that by various rites, and ufages, and wonderful appearances, Gen. xv. 8-18. which covenant, and the confirmation of it, the apostle manifeftly refers to in Gal. iii. 17. and with which his date exactly agrees, as the years are computed by Paraus thus; from the confirmation of the covenant, and taking Hagar to wife, to the birth of Ifaac, fifteen years; from thence to the birth of Jacob, fixty, Gen. xxv. 26. from thence to his going down to Egypt, one hundred and thirty, Gen. xlvii. 9. from thence to his death, seventeen, Gen. xlvii. 28. from thence to the death of Jofeph, fifty three, Gen. 1. 26. from thence to the birth of Mofes, feventy-five; from thence to the going out of Ifrael from Egypt, and the giving of the law, eighty years; in all four hundred and thirty years.—4. It is allowed, that the covenant made with Abraham, Gen. xvii. is of a mixed kind, confifting partly of temporal, and partly of fpiritual bleffings; and that there is a twofold feed of Abraham, to which they feverally belong; the temporal bleffings, to his natural feed the Jews, and the fpiritual bleffings,

m

1 See Pool's Annotation on Gal. iii. 17.

In ibid.

to

to his fpiritual feed, even all true bellevers that walk in the fteps of his faith, Jews or Gentiles, Rom iv. 11, 12, 16. believing Gentiles are Abraham's spiritual feed, but then they have a right only to the fpiritual bleffings of the covenant, not to all the grants and privileges of it; for inftance, not to the land of Canaan; and as for their natural feed, these have no right, as fuch, to any of the blessings of this covenant, temporal or fpiritual: for either they are the natural, or the fpiritual feed of Abraham; not his natural feed, no one will fay that; not his fpiritual feed, for only believers are fuch; they which are of faith (believers) the fame are the children of Abraham; and if ye be Christ's, (that is, believers) then are ye Abraham's feed, and heirs according to the promife; and it is time enough to claim the promife, and the grants and privileges of it, be they what they will, when they appear to be believers; and as for the natural feed of believing Gentiles, there is not the leaft mention made of them in Abraham's covenant. -5. Since Abraham's feed were not admitted into covenant with him, by any vifible rite or token, no not by circumcifion, which was not a rite of admiffion into the covenant, but a token of the continuance of it to his natural feed, and of their diftinction from other nations, until the Meffiah came; and fince therefore baptifm cannot fucceed it as fuch, nor are the one or the other feals of the covenant of grace, as I have elsewhere proved, and shall not now repeat it ; upon the whole, this fecond argument can be of no force in favour of infantbaptifm and here, if any where, is the proper time and place for this gentleman to ask for the repeal of this ancient privilege, as he calls it ", of infants being taken into covenant with their parents, or to fhew when it was repealed; to which I answer, that the covenant made with Abraham, into which his natural feed were taken with him, fo far as it concerned them as fuch, or was a national covenant, it was abolished and difannulled when the people of the Jews were cut off as a nation, and as a church; when the Mofaic difpenfation was put an end unto, by the coming, fufferings, and death of Chrift, and by the deftruction of that people on their rejection of him; when God wrote a Loammi upon them, and said, Ye are not my people, and I will not be your God, Hosea i. 9. when he took his staff, beauty, and cut it asunder, that he might break his covenant he had made with this people, Zech. xi. 10. when the old covenant and old ordinances were removed, and the old church-ftate utterly destroyed, and a new church-ftate was fet up, and new ordinances appointed; and for which new rules were given; and to which none are to be admitted, without the observance of them; which leads me to

The third argument, taken from the commiffion of Chrift for baptifm, Matt. xxviii. 19. and from the natural and neceffary fenfe in which the apostles would understand

• The divine rightof Infant-baptifm difproved, p. 56-61.

P Reasonable service, &c. p. 16.

BAPTISM. understand it; though this gentleman owns that it is delivered in fuch general terms, as not certainly to determine whether adult believers only, or the infants alfo of fuch are to be baptized; and if fo, then furely no argument can be drawn from it for admitting infants to baptifm. And,

2. The

1. The rendering of the words, difciple or profelyte all nations, baptizing them, will not help the caufe of infant-baptifm; for one cannot be a profelyte to any religion, unless he is taught it, and embraces and profeffes it; though had our Lord used a word which conveyed such an idea, the evangelist Matthew was not at a loss for a proper word or phrafe to exprefs it by; and doubtless would have made use of another clear and exprefs, as he does in chap. xxiii. 15. fuppofitions this writer makes, that if, instead of baptizing them, it had been faid circumcifing them, the apostles without any farther warrant would have naturally and justly thought, that upon profelyting the Gentile parent, and circumcifing him, his infants alfo were to be circumcifed or if the twelve patriarchs of old had had a divine command given them, to go into Egypt, Arabia, &c. and teach them the God of Abraham, circumcifing them, they would have underflood it as authorizing them to perform this ceremony, not upon the parent only, but also upon the infants of fuch as believed on the God of Abraham. As thefe fuppofitions are without foundation, fo I greatly question whether they would have been fo understood, without fome inftructions and explanations; and befides. the cafes put are not parallel to this before us, fince the circumcifion of infants was enjoined and practifed before fuch a fuppofed commiffion and command; whereas the baptifm of infants was neither commanded nor practised before this commiffion of Chrift; and therefore could not lead them to any fuch thought as this, whatever the other might do.-3. The characters and circumstances of the apostles, to whom the commiffion was given, will not at all conclude that they apprehended infants to be actually included; fome in which they are reprefented being entirely falfe, and others nothing to the purpose: Jews they were indeed, but men that knew that the covenant of circumcifion was not ftill in force,. but abolished: men, who could never have observed that the infants of believers. with their parents had always been admitted into covenant, and paffed under the fame initiating rite: men, who could not know, that the Gentiles were to be taken into a joint participation of all the privileges of the Jewish church; but must know that both believing Jews and Gentiles were to conftitute a new church, ftate, and to partake of new privileges and ordinances, which the Jewish church. knew nothing of:-men, who were utter strangers to the baptifm of Gentile profelytes, to the Jewish religion, and of their infants; and to any baptifm, but the ceremonial ablutions, before the times of John the Baptift:-men, who were

• Reasonable service, &c. p. 19-22..

not