A39697:36
Vindiciæ legis & fœderis
Vindiciæ legis & fœderis: or, A reply to Mr. Philip Cary's Solemn call Wherein he pretends to answer all the arguments of Mr. Allen, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Sydenham, Mr. Sedgwick, Mr. Roberts, and Dr. Burthogge, for the right of believers infants to baptism, by proving the law at Sinai, and the covenant of circumcision with Abraham, were the very same with Adam's covenant of works, and that because the gospel-covenant is absolute. By John Flavel minister of the gospel in Dartmouth
London: printed for M. Wolton, 1690
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
II Position.
That Abraham's Covenant, Gen. 17. is an Adam's Covenant of Works also, because Circumcision was annexed to it, which obliged Men to keep the whole Law.
The Controversy betwixt us in this point, is not whether Circumcision were an Ordinance of God, annexed by him to his Covenant with Abraham? nor (2.) Whether Abraham's ordinary and extraordinary ⟨image 14⟩Seed ought to be, and actually were signed by it? nor (3.) Whether it were a Seal of the righteousness of Faith to any individual Person; for he allows •t to be so to Abraham? nor (4.) Whe•he it pertained to the Ceremonial Law, and so must cease at the death of Christ? But the difference betwixt us is, Whether •1.) it was a Seal of the Covenant to •one but Abraham? and (2.) Whether •n the very nature of the Act, or only from the intention of the Agent it did oblige men to keep the whole Law, as Adam was obliged to keep it in innocency? (3.) Whether it were utterly abolished at the death of Christ, as a condition of the Covenant of works; or being a sign of the same Covenant of Grace we are now under, it be not succeeded by the new Gospel-sign, which is Baptism? Mr. Cary affirms that it was […] it self a condition of the Covenant of Works, and being annexed to Gods Covenant with Abraham,