Page images
PDF
EPUB

to his Faith, not to his Circumcifion: And that his Circumcifion was added as a Seal of that Righteoufnefs to which he was intitled by his Faith, which he had whilft he was yet Uncircumcifed. On this account he may very rightly be taken for the Father of the Faithful, inde pendently on his fleshly Circumcifion: The rather fo, becaufe there is not, even in the Let ter of the Old Teftament, any express appropriation of the external Solemnities of the Divine Worship to the Circumcifed. Mofes firft inftituted their annual Solemnities, and confined their publick Worship to a certain place, and firft required by an exprefs Sanction, that none fhould be admitted to it without the external Circumcifion. Thefe later Inftitutions of Mofes were the Works of the Law oppofed by the Apostle, in his Difputes to Faith, to which Gentiles, however like to Abraham in his Faith, could have no accefs by the Difcipline of the Jews, in that Age of our Saviour and his Apofiles. There were then no other facred Rites or Offices to which the Circumcifion derived from Abraham, could intitle Perfons lineally defcended from that Patriarch. It is therefore yery obfervable, that the Law, whofe Works thofe were, which are oppofed by the Apoftle to the Faith, which in bim is the Characteriftick of the new Peculium, is never afcribed to Abraham, but to Mofes. The Law was given by Mofes, St. Fob. i. 17. Mofes was he in whom they trufted, who were molt averfe to our Sa, viour's Inftructions, St. Joh. v. 45. They profeffed themselves his Difciples, St. Joh. ix. 28. And St. Paul's afferting the Liberties of the new Peculium, was reprefented by his Adverfafies as a defign of teaching all the Jews which were among the Gentiles to forfake Mafes,

A&t.

Act. xxi. 21. Accordingly the Author to the Hebrews afferts the Authority of our Saviour in oppofition to Mofes, Hebr. iii. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6. On the contrary, the Covenant with Abraham is looked on as fo exactly agreeable with that of the Gospel, that it is the fame way oppofed to that of Mofes as that of the Gospel is, and as inconfiftent with it. Accordingly the Apoftle tells us, That the Bleffing of Abraham was to come on the Gentiles through Fefus Chrift, Gal. iii. 14. He makes this Covenant with Abraham uncapable of being difannulled, v. 15. He makes it confirmed by God in Christ four bundred and thirty Years before the Law of MoJes, and confequently uncapable of being dif annulled by that Law, v. 17. He makes the Inheritance (claimable by the Seed of Abraham) not to be of the Law, but by Promife, v. 18. The Covenant that intitles the Gentiles to the Blefings of Abraham, cannot be the fame with that which confined those fame Bleffings to the Jews by Extraction. The Covenant which cannot be difannulled, can be no other than the everlafting Covenant of the Gospel, Heb. xiii. 20. not that which is old, and ready to vanish away, Heb. viii. 13. The Covenant fo inconfiftent with the Law of Mofes, as that it must be difannulled if the Law of Mofes were to take place of it, cannot be that Covenant of Works which differs from that of Faith, fo much infifted on by the firft Preachers of the Chriftian Religion. The Inheritance of Promife, as oppofed to that of the Law, muft needs be that which belongs rather to the Heirs of Abraham's Faith, than of his Circumcifion. So evidently it appears, that the Covenant of Abraham is really the fame, in thefe Reasonings of the Apostle, with that which was advanced by G 4

the

§. XXXII. The Reafon

Gentiles are

of the Seed of Abraham,

the new Revelations of the Gofpel. If therefore ci
this were made with Abraham's Seed, and be to
pleadable by the Gentiles, by the Doctrine of t
the Gospel, it will plainly follow, That fuch I
a Notion as this is of a Holy Seed cannot be
contradictory to the Revelations of the Gospel,
but rather necessary by the Doctrine of thefe
new Revelations.

The Apoftle was fufficiently fenfible, that
the Gentiles to whom he claims the Promifes
ings of the
Apoftle fuppofe made to Abraham, could derive no Pedigree
and prove, that from him. Does he therefore deny, that thofe
the believing Promises were confined to his Seed? This had
been the readieft Exception, if it had been juft.
But he knew no independent Claim would
have been admitted by the Jews, with whom
he managed this Difpute. And he pretends
no new Revelation inconfiftent with their for
mer Opinions in this particular. The way
therefore he takes in this matter, is the fame
that he obferves in others of the like nature.
He reasons on the mystical Interpretations then
received among the Jews themfelves. He ob-
ferves two forts of Sons of Abraham mentioned
in the Scripture, Ishmael and Ifaac: The el
der of the Bond-woman born after the Flesh,
Gal. iv. 23. tho' by the abilities of Nature, both
on Abraham's part and that of Hagar, the
younger by Promife, ver. 23, 28. These plain-
ly prefigured the two Peculia, and implyed
that the elder Peculium was fleshly, and had
no Title to the Peculium, but was to be abdi-
cated like Ishmael, as the Jews were in the time
of the Apostles, ver. 30. He fhews, that the
latter Son was the Child of the Promife, from
those words of the Promife: At this time
will I come, and Sarah fhall have a Son, Gen.
xviii, 10, Rom. ix. 9. But that the Children

of

[ocr errors]

h

C

P

t

t

t

A

f

t

t

of the Promife were the Seed who were intitled to the Promife, Rom. ix. 8. Gal. iv. 28. And this from the exprefs words of Gen. xxi. 12. In Ifaac fhall thy Seed be called, Rom. ix. 7. Heb. xi. 18. This fhewed, in the way of prediting by prophetick Symbols, that the latter Peculium, when the Breach was made, was to have the better Title to the Promifes made to Abraham. Both of these Sons did really defcend from Abraham; and both of them were Circumcifed, though only one of them could pretend to the Promifes made to the Seed of their common Father Abraham. Circumcifion therefore alone, could not determin whether of them was to be intitled to the Bleffing. The Apostle therefore obferves farther, and that from the Old Testament it self, that there were two forts of Circumcifion there mentioned; that of the Flesh, and that of the Heart: And that the Circumcifion of the Heart is that which is there reprefented as principally regarded by God in relation to the Promises. The fleshly circumcifed Ifraelites are notwithstanding upbraided by God with the Uncircumcifion of their Hearts, as that which might leave God at liberty to reckon them among the Uncircumcifed, notwithstanding their other Circumcifion of their Flesh, Jer. ix. 26. But this might poffibly be fo interpreted, as that Circumcifion in the Flesh fhould not intitle to the Promises alone without the Circumcifion of the Heart. But that might imply, that neither of these Circumcifions would fuffice feparately. And that was really the cafe, fo long as the former Difpenfation lafted; and therefore was not to be contradicted by any general express Provifion. That would have encouraged Offenders to break that Law under that Difpenfation,

wherein

wherein the Law-maker himself intended that it fhould oblige. This had been as unfeafor able as an exprefs Law would have been again Divorces, for that very feafon wherein Mof or rather God by Mofes, was pleafed to indulg the Jews in that liberty for the hardness their Hearts; yet that hindred not, but that the ufe of that freedom of Divorce might be repealed under the more perfect Difpenfation of the Gofpel: Nor did it hinder, but that the very Repeal when it was fit to be put in execution, might be known to be agreeable to the original Defign of him who had, for a while, permitted it. So it is, that our Saviour proves God's dislike of that indulged Liberty, by an Appeal to the defign of his original Inftitution of Marriage. The fame way the Apoftle takes, to prove God's approbation of the Circumcifion of the Heart, Separately from that of the Flesh, from the very Example of Abraham, who was, as I faid, the Original of the true Peculium. Concerning him He obferves, that his Faith was imputed to him for Righteoufnefs, even before his flefbly Circumcifion, Rom. iv. 10, 11. This plainly fhewed, that the new Peculium was more agreeable to his Pattern then, than they were who fo much boafted of their carnal Cir cumcifion. To what end all this, but to fhew, that though all pretenfions to the Bleffings of Abraham were to be grounded on juft pretenfions to being defcended from his Seed; yet, even on that Suppofition, the believing Gen tiles had folider grounds to claim their Defcent from Abraham, as to the true defign of the Le giflator, than the unbelieving Circumcifed Jews? This Doctrin therefore concerning the confine ment of the Promifes made to Abraham to a Holy Seed, is undeniable in the Reafonings of the New Testament,

No

« PreviousContinue »